Canada’s ‘mosaic’ of multi-culturalism is a reality. The diverse nation in which we live has been changing and adding new tiles to the already varied mosaic of peoples who reside here. This has always been the case. From the first French and British settlers to land to the native peoples who already occupied the land, to the Loyalists who emigrated from America. The intermingling of different cultures has been a vital part of our heritage. It cannot be escaped or denied, Canada’s identity as a nation was built upon the proverbial English-French struggle. What we as Canadians need to realize is that it doesn’t stop there. When Canada looks in the mirror it can expect to see many different faces, a sprinkling of lightly applied make-up to conceal, a dash of scars, and a healthy glow generated from the many Canadians, both young and old, proud be a part of this nation.

For Neil Bissoondath to state in Article 1 that Canadianness is only skin deep seems duly appropriate. Although, I tend to disagree with him that this is a negative aspect of our culture. Our country is evolving, and at this point, a lot of Canadians who have immigrated here over the past 50 years are only skin-deep Canadians. It cannot be expected otherwise of a person who grew up in another country for 15 or 20 years to completely renounce their connection to the place they first called home. In our modern culture, entertainers who leave Canada for careers in Hollywood, publicly and proudly announce their Canadianness. Of the ABC newscaster Peter Jennings, I remember my father telling me, "He’s Canadian, you know". Some of these people have left the country and resided in the United States for more than 20 years, and yet we still claim them Canadian. If we, as a nation are claiming as our own individuals who have left our country for such a long period of time, how can it be expected of others who come into our country to do the opposite?

Naomi Klein takes the position that Canada needs to stop whining about the differences circa 1759 of France and Britain. While I agree with the fact that whining is not appropriate, I do believe that there are legitimate issues that may need to be dealt with. Canada’s roots come from French – English clashes, and there is no glossing over that fact. It is rather ironic that Neil Bissoondath then provides the perfect example of centralizing the issue. Quebec is placed prominently up at the front of Bissoondath’s argument for cultural identity. Even Klein states that Jacques Parizeau’s comment, "We know who we are" eliminates the ethnic minorities of Quebec. It should be noted, however, that Bissoondath draws his conclusions of a society multiculturally divided from that example. Is this not part of the issue at hand? It seems Quebec is getting more of the press even in the debate to stop discussing Quebec so fervently. We are not dealing with minority issues so long as we focus on the repetitious age-old franco-anglais dispute. The problem may not be that the issue of French vs. English is not the only cultural issue, it may be that it is no longer the most relevant. Less-known ethnic issues are beginning to be viable evidence of our country’s identity evolution, and they are on the increase. We are, however, a large country; for Canada’s landmass, our population is unequivocally diminutive. The issues that face Canada now, and in the past are all isolated issues which have little or no effect on the rest of the country much less the rest of a province. Canada is wide, vast, and spread-out, both in our land structure and our perspectives of life. We might as well be shouting across Manitoba to hear Alberta’s issues. It is quite possible that this is improving as we seek to better comprehend our country’s diversity, however, it does require a little bit of tolerance. Or better yet, it requires acceptance of each other.

As Canadians we need to be reminded that we’re all in this together. We should not be turning on one another in unwarranted skirmishes. Are we forgetting that we were all immigrants at one time? In her second article, Naomi Klein speaks of multi-culturalism being little more than marketing. I would challenge her to give it time. Not everyone has to get along right away, we all need time to adjust to the new arrangements of living that Canada keeps coming up with. Just as when you are making a good vegetable soup, all of the ingredients must be allowed to simmer together for awhile before it becomes soup. You cannot simply throw a couple of carrots and tomatoes, some random spices and various and sundry other vegetables into a pot of water and expect a delicious soup. The ingredients must be placed over some heat, and allowed to simmer and cook before any of the vegetables will allow their juices out into the mixture. So it is with Canada. We were and are all immigrants to this land, even the Natives who were ‘here first’ moved into land from another one; thrown into a pot of hot water. If we are impatient with the mixture and start cutting up the vegetables in an attempt to speed things up, we will end up with a bowl of mush. We need to be patient with each other, find some acceptance, and attempt to work together.

The individual stories of how we all came here, the tiffs over whose plot of land is whose, and the foundations of Canadian government are what gave this country the building blocks of our heritage. It is quite possible that we as Canadian citizens need to be reminded of the fact that as our country grows, we add more blocks onto the foundations already cemented in our past. While every block is important and should be recognised as such, the foundation is essentially what our country looks back on as our heritage. And that’s not all bad, it’s just not the whole story. Every country tells the story of how their nation began, it is a major part of the country’s history which cannot and should not be overlooked. To begin debating what schools should and should not teach is a battle I’ll leave for Michael Ignatieff & Jack Granatstein to finish. While I’m sure there are minor alterations which could be made to our Canadian History Curriculum, a complete overhaul is not plausible, or necessary. The fact of the matter is, history class cannot tell everyone’s story. Our problem is one that many nations can only dream of: we have too many stories. The diversity of each significant story is incredible. The CBC has been running commercials for quite some time now called "A Part of our Heritage" which depict the widest variety of Canadian stories I have ever seen. They tell the stories of Laura Secord and the struggle for Jewish people’s rights in Canada, as well as informing us of the first women to attend medical school.

Canada is overflowing with stories of an embryonic country, and as a Canadian I consider that to be a positive aspect of our culture. Canadian culture did not cease formation with the curtailed French-English battle; that is where it all began. We, as Canadians are simply building on that. It needs to be understood that our history is evolving everyday as new chapters of the lives of Canadians are added. Canadian identity is not made up of who we as Canadians were, it is who we are. It is shaped by our history, the history we continue to live out each day. As Bissoondath and Klein both stated, knowing our history can bind us together as a nation, and it can help us to understand why we are often so far apart. But I believe that most importantly, history can remind us of where we come from and give us insight into where we might be heading. History is what you make it, and Canada can be whatever we aspire to.