Tewder
Senior Member
Of course Canadians have worked hard for what we have, however, you have to admit that we have benefited from being located next to the largest economy in the world, and one with a free and open border we can use to exchange our resources and goods across.
In many ways this has been both a blessing and a curse.
True the US has not "let" us do anything -- we have a mutually beneficial relationship, for the most part -- but if you look at history, or at much of the modern world, it is a rare occurrence to have a small and militarily weak nation prosper beside a powerful empire. If a nation like Canada had appeared in 1867 beside, say, Russia or China, we would have been assimilated long ago.
In fact, if you look at our history you will find that we were invaded by the USA. In retrospect that invasion was essentially Canada's 'War of Independence', not from Britain but from the USA.
This is the oft-used American argument (particularly after we refused to invade Iraq), as if we ought to be grateful that we are being "protected". Modern reality is very different. The idea that someone is going to invade us and that we need a military to prevent it, or that the US is protecting us is the stuff of bad Hollywood fiction.
I'm not sure what you find so preposterous and unthinkable about this? What is it about the 'modern reality' that precludes international warfare? I would agree that the world has been relatively free from major international conflagration for some time now, but this has been more to do with the long stalemate of the cold war years followed by the ascendancy of American military supremacy than any international trend to pacifism. In other words, haven't we just been enjoying a lull of peace, historically speaking? It would be incredibly short-sighted to view this situation as indefinate. History changes constantly, and with the rise of China and India and other major players to rival the US, with the rise of fundamentalism and other 'isms' throughout the world, and with a growing population putting pressure on dwindling natural resources, including fresh water (flowing freely through Canada, by the way) would it be completely unreasonable to imagine growing conflict? We've already seen growing conflict in the Arctic with the opening of shipping lanes through global warming, and some minor challenges to Canada's sovereign claims here. Is this the tip of the melting iceburg?
It has nothing to do with "white" colonies and far more to do with the spread of mercantilism and the growth of capitalism. Rule of law (particularly related to property) and adherence to basic democratic and individualistic principles also played a very crucial role.
Ultimately the PC Gestapo here will judge, but to be fair I don't think Admiral Beez was putting the emphasis on 'whiteness' in his argument, so much as differentiating between the post-colonial development of ethnically 'white' former British colonies and that of colonies where other cultures/ethnicities dominated.
The Scots, as a group, did not build much of the world's infrastructure and tech, as you have suggested. Infrastructure was (and is) built first by low cost local or imported labour.
If you travel through Southwest Ontario you will find that the Scots as a group did build much of the 19th century infrastructure here.