In the recent 2001 Canadian census more people identified themselves "Canadians" than ever before, 39% of respondents, about twelve million out of thirty million.⁽¹⁾ They did so without regard to race, as in white, black, African, Chinese, Asian, or aboriginal. This is a considerable increase from the 1996 census where 31% of respondents identified themselves as Canadian. In the United States the same trend is evident but not as strongly. In the 2000 US census 20% of respondents classified themselves as "US" or "American", or about twenty one million in total.⁽²⁾ This is up 58% from 1990. A growing number of people are identifying their ethnic background as simply "American" or "US," making that category the fourth largest "ancestry" for the first time since the Census Bureau began asking the question in 1980. The three largest ancestral groups -- German, Irish, and English -- saw their numbers decline by about 20 to 25 percent between 1990 and the 2000 census. There is a trend at work here that when the general public is offered the choice of a category for race or ethnicity, they appear to be inclined to choose a category that appears as non-racial and as non-ethnic as possible, American, U.S. or Canadian. Ideas of racial purity, and the "one drop rule" that promoted discrimination, may become ideas dropping dead if allowed to.

This is progress, and many think the idea of race is dated and should be eradicated. If you are a citizen or legal resident of Canada or the United States, why the government is interested in the unscientific classification of your race at all no longer seems relevant in this day and age. If the government is supposed to respond to the demands of the public, then it seems the public is becoming less interested in the issue of race and thus its future use on the census can be questioned.

People in Canada and the United States from many backgrounds now want to become unhyphenated Canadians and Americans, but this was not always the case in the 19th and much of the 20th centuries. Canada is an interesting example. Some of the terms used to describe people in Canada were French Canadian, English Canadian, Irish Canadian, Italian Canadian and Chinese Canadian, pretty much the same as in the United States. Some terms were very respectable such as English Canadian, because being of British background is what you wanted to be. British background meant English, Scottish, Irish, and French as it was a political and racial term of what could be described as the two Founding Nations of Canada -- England and France. French Canadian was also a perfectly acceptable term in its day -- up to about the 1970s. These were the Canadiens of old who settled along the St Lawrence river in the 17th and 18th centuries when Canada was a colony of France. The hockey team in Montreal is named after them. Today, the qualifiers that created hyphenated Canadians have largely gone out of use along with the word British. This is a good thing because unless everyone can use a term, then no one should be able to use it, which is what equality means.

What next? There are other qualifiers out there with an international perspective regarding the word American.

The term North America is used in Canada to mean the countries Canada and the United States; the people in these two countries are from Canada's point of view, North Americans. In the atlas, Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua and Panama and about two dozen other countries are also listed in North America. People in these Spanish speaking countries are not considered to be North Americans to Canadians. What is published in the media and what is understood by Canadians are not the same thing.

There are other inconsistencies, one of which is that most of the people called North Americans by Canadians, that is, Americans in the United States, do not frequently refer to themselves as North Americans. They are Americans almost all the time, and they do not mean Canada when they say American. Canada has a term that includes itself with the United States, but the United States does not have a commonly used term that includes Canada, Mexico or Cuba.

Canada distances itself from Mexico and other Spanish speaking nations in what the atlas describes as North America, and Mexicans, Cubans, Nicaraguans and Haitians do not consider themselves North Americans. Among one of the problems it creates is that Mexico and other countries reside on a continent but does not take the name for that continent. In the international media, in a story from Mexico, Cuba or Costa Rica, one rarely states the story is from a continent named North America. Was the 1994 Chiapas rebellion in Mexico a North American event? Not according to the media. On what continent did it occur? Mexico is part of Latin America, but Latin America is not classified as a continent, nor is Mexico part of South America. Cuba is not referred to in the media as a North American issue or concern. The Caribbean is not classified as a continent either. On what continent are these problems occurring?

The civil wars that occurred in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Honduras over the past several decades occurred in Central America among Central Americans. Central America is not classified as a continent, yet it seems embedded within North America. These civil wars were not North American events, issues or problems that directly relate to the political situation in Canada. These were events in Central America. Most Canadians would probably say that Central America is pretty much like South America, which is quite distant culturally but not necessarily geographically from Canada's North America.

Panama was part of Colombia about one hundred years ago until the United States government decided it was easier to control a small country than a large one. This caused the United States to create the country of Panama out of Colombia by a revolution. Once done, the Panama canal was built a few years later. Would the average person in Vancouver or Seattle consider a Panamanian much different from a Colombian? There are differences between nations, but they would both be considered Latin Americans, like Mexicans, Cubans and Chileans. It is somewhat understood that the real border between North America and Latin America is the Rio Grande river dividing the United States and Mexico. America, like North America and Latin America are not always a specific place, but perhaps states of mind. Yet the border between North America and South America is precisely defined in the atlas between Panama and Colombia.

Ironically, despite the cultural distance from Latin America, Canada shares another distinction with the other qualified Americans who speak Spanish and Portuguese. Canadians do not call the United States, America. To Canadians the colossus to the south is the U.S., the States, or the United States almost all the time. This is not the case for most of the world. For Europe, Asia and Africa, the United States is America almost all the time. The non-use of America in Canada is not an issue; it is little discussed in the media regarding the Canadian identity, for we are not Americans. There is only one kind of unhyphenated and unqualified American in the Canadian lexicon and consciousness. Among a modern and scientific people, the single word America is largely taboo in the country.

What separates Mexico from Canada's North America, is race. Mexicans, like Haitians, Nicaraguans and Hondurans are not considered white, so they are not North Americans. Mexico, Peru, and Brazil have large aboriginal and African populations and thus are not considered white nations as it understood in the Western World like Ireland, Poland, New Zealand, and Germany. Canada like the United States, is seen and understood to be a white country and so are the vast majority of the people living within it. Mexicans may be part of North America in the atlas, participate in trade deals like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), but they are not seen to be North Americans.

Is race enough of a factor to exclude Mexico from North America since race is becoming less relevant within the United States and Canada? No. Does it make sense that all other countries have a North, South, Latin, or Central qualifier before them except the United States? No. What seems to be developing as a truism within Canada and the United States, the reduction in the importance of race, must be applied outside the country to other nations in a more interdependent world.

While race is no longer enough to exclude, there are other factors for a country to be considered part of the Western World. Countries require a democratic government, changes in government that are predictable and stable, respect for human rights, and a modern industrialized economy. When the Soviet Union and communism existed in eastern Europe, the people in Russia and Poland were still Europeans in Europe, but they were not part of the Western World. Most Latin American countries lack these elements also and are excluded from the Western World as a result. So not all Europeans are Westerners, becoming a Western nation has to be earned by peoples and governments.

Mexico and Latin America can be compared with the proposal of Turkey joining the European Union as an offical member. A small portion of Turkey is geographically situated in Europe, and it has a secular government. Turkey's proposed membership in the EU is opposed because of race and religion. It is neither a white nor a Christian nation, being mostly Islamic. The United States government is a strong supporter of Turkey joining the EU as it believes it would bolster its democracy and economic prospects. This is a future that diverges from past historic experiences, promoting multiracial integration among the diverse nations of the world. If Turkey were to join the EU it would create questions in Europe on what is a European like Mexico and Canada do regarding what is an American. America, Europe and the Western World are facing some similar choices here.

The status of some countries and peoples is in geographic and cultural limbo. Very different kinds of American countries are part of the Western Hemisphere, but there are no Hemisphereans, which seems amiss as we live in a world of individuals. Secular humanism puts man at the center of the universe. The Western Hemisphere is a geographic description of the earth that also includes part of Europe and Africa west of the prime meridian that runs through Greenwich, England. Africans and Europeans could be Hemisphereans too if they wished. There are no Hemisphereans, and over 90% of the people situated in North America do not call themselves North Americans or consider themselves North Americans.

A sound bite can easily give us another perspective. "In fourteen hundred and ninety two, Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue." No mention of America here. Did Columbus discover America? It would have been hard for him as he died in 1506, and the first time the word America was published on a map was in 1507. Nevertheless, historically speaking, Columbus discovered America because he made landfall on it. The English language and Western Civilization attributes an expression to him and him alone regarding the fourth continent, or perhaps the fourth part of the world. One thing we know is that Columbus did not discover the United States.

No one has a copyright on the word America, so it can be redefined and reinvented as times change. There are and have been several Americas in history since Columbus, and Canada is definitely part of America and its people are Americans. But just what kind of Americans are Canadians? Further discussion on the topic seems required that must include the other qualified Americans in Mexico, Cuba, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Cuba, Canada, Panama, Jamaica and other countries.

History isn’t just ‘their-story,’
&
English Canada uneasy with Metis, mestizos, half-breeds

---

©2003 all rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part prohibited without
the express written consent of Interracial Voice.