Tories risk sparking ‘ugly’ language wars with military celebrations, watchdog warns

[Goober]

Tories risk sparking ‘ugly’ language wars with military celebrations, watchdog warns

Conscription Crisis of 1944 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Conscription


Tories risk sparking ‘ugly’ language wars with military celebrations, watchdog warns | National Post

OTTAWA — Parliament’s language watchdog is concerned that the Harper government’s plans to celebrate upcoming anniversaries of Confederation and military events from the two world wars may spark some “ugly” linguistic wars.

In his latest annual report to Parliament, Graham Fraser, the commissioner of official languages, said the anniversaries should serve as an opportunity for public education, while recognizing conflicting narratives in Canadian history.

“Events like the First World War stimulate different recollections, with memories of heroic sacrifice coexisting uneasily with stories of conscription, anti-French-Canadian insults and soldiers shooting on anti-conscription rioters in Quebec City,” Fraser wrote in the report, tabled on Thursday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Merchant_Navy
Personal note- My Father tried to enlist in 39 - Rejected for bad eyes- Went into the Merchant Navy - Later received his Conscription Notice- walked into a reciting center- Stated his eyes etc were no good in 39 to enlist -told them to shove it up their a-r-s-e

 

[WLDB]

Strange. Some in Quebec opposed both wars and conscription, some supported all of it. Same with the rest of Canada. They were just a bit louder about it. One of my great grandfathers was born in Germany and came here a few years before WW1 broke out. He changed his name and signed up when the war started. One of my other great grandfathers born and raised in Mattawa didnt volunteer and when conscription started he took off and lived in the woods til it was over. Im kind of glad things went that way. Had he gone over and been killed I wouldnt exist. I cant say I blame either of them for the decisions they made. One of them wanted to prove themselves to his new home and the other didnt want to go off and potentially be wounded or killed for something that had nothing to do with him.

The WW2 conscription crisis was a lot milder than the one in WW1. Even after it went through most who were conscripted were able to avoid actually seeing combat for a number of reasons legitimate or not. Unlike Borden, King was elected on a promise not to use conscription so Im a bit surprised it wasnt a much bigger issue at the time.

It is a bit odd that this argument is even happening at this point in time. WW1 just went out of living memory. WW2 is not far off from that as well. The majority of those involved are dead or very old. The people arguing about it didnt exist at the time. In some cases their parents didnt even exist yet.

 

[damngrumpy]

There were those outside of Quebec the supported and didn't support the war effort either.

 

[taxslave]

Oh dear we must all hide in our houses now before we offend somebody. If they are offended they can:A) Leave the country B) Grow a set and deal with it.

 

[SLM]

“Events like the First World War stimulate different recollections, with memories of heroic sacrifice coexisting uneasily with stories of conscription, anti-French-Canadian insults and soldiers shooting on anti-conscription rioters in Quebec City,” Fraser wrote in the report, tabled on Thursday.

No, they don't "coexist uneasily"...it's simply what happened and the way that it was. Maybe instead of turning everything into a 'photo op' moment, politicians can just leave the history alone and allow it to be viewed for what it actually was, reality of the time. What is this need to sugar coat everything?

 

[skookumchuck]

There were those outside of Quebec the supported and didn't support the war effort either.

What percentage? There are always cowards who manage to hide by claiming they are religious or conscious objectors, an old trick. Then to cover it they wait to question a war until it is so old that there are virtually no survivors to argue with them.
With some it is intentional, with others it is just stupid. Very popular with university losers.

 

[WLDB]

What percentage? There are always cowards who manage to hide by claiming they are religious or conscious objectors, an old trick. Then to cover it they wait to question a war until it is so old that there are virtually no survivors to argue with them.
With some it is intentional, with others it is just stupid. Very popular with university losers.

Given polling wasnt done at the time there is no way to know the percentage one way or another. Their elections were probably more interesting than todays because of the absence of polling.

Taking a stand on conviction is hardly a cowardly thing to do. One can disagree with their position but its a bit low to call them cowards. There were no doubt some cowards among them but that cant be said for all of them. Of all the wars Canada has been involved in WW2 is the only one I might have volunteered for had I been around. The Boer War, the Brits or the South Africans should have handled that themselves. WW1? That war was total BS and wasnt worth a single Canadian life. Korea? Doesnt really make a difference to me if the Korean peninsula was communist or ruled by a different military dictatorship (as it was in the 1950s). The Gulf War, would have been nice if they had taken out Saddam then. But fighting an Iraqi dictator to help a country which executes people for non-violent crimes? Nope. Afghanistan, by the looks of things it will have all been for naught considering the condition the country will be in when the west pulls out.