>Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
>
>>Doug:
>>> Because, to paraphrase Sonic Youth, it's hard to understand the exact
>>> dimensions of Canadian hell. There seems to be less poverty, less
>>> insecurity, less inequality, less militarization, less incarceration,
>>> and more political freedom than down here in the imperial heartland.
>>> Ditto the rest of the second-tier imperialist countries.
>>
>>Doug, sometimes you surprise me. The above seems to imply that any
>>country
>>that lifts itself above poverty and inequality does so as a part of a
>>larger
>>imperial project, and by implication, on the backs of "non-imperialist"
>>countries (whatever they are, I presume these are those countries that
>>have
>>neither means nor opportunity to pursue any imperial projects worth
>>attention). By implication, the only "ethical" (i.e. outside the imperial
>>project) way is abject poverty cum foreign occupation.
>
>That's not what I said or meant at all. To listen to Canadian nationalists,
>they're suffering under the yoke of American imperialism, but that
>suffering is very hard to see. There's more material deprivation a half
>mile from my apartment door in Manhattan than I've ever seen in Toronto.
>The poorest urban neighborhood in Canada, Downtown Eastside in Vancouver,
>really doesn't look that terrible compared to, say, much of Newark.
>
>Also, though you frequently hear U.S. leftists say of North-South
>relations, "We're rich because they're poor," I think that that's a harder
>case to make than they think. So I'm not sure what you're arguing with.
>
In a way, Eastside Vancouver is an echo of homegrown imperialism. Many of
its denizens are Aboriginal people who still suffer from marginalization and
racism. My ancestors couldn't have received (practically) free land in
western Canada without the marginalization of Aboriginals.
Mark
_________________________________________________________________ Don't just Search. Find! http://search.sympatico.msn.ca/default.aspx The new MSN Search! Check it out!