Last week’s Throne Speech saw the announcement that the Conservative government would be asking Parliament to investigate changing the lyrics of “O Canada.” Specifically, the government intended to change the line “in all thy sons command,” to “thou dost in us command.” The proposed change was apparently intended to make the national anthem more gender-inclusive. Although the proposed change was quickly cancelled due to what appeared to be popular disapproval, the fact that the change was even proposed represents yet another instance of political correctness being taken too far. More so, it exposes an attempt by the government to appear progressive without actually taking any sort of progressive action.
“O Canada” as it now exists, or even if it had been changed, simply does not affect anyone. The argument that the proposed changes would have made things more egalitarian is just plain bogus. While few people would argue that the changing of the laws which prohibited women from voting, or the establishment of more equitable divorce laws, were not necessary and beneficial, the same cannot be said about the proposed amendments to “O Canada.” Changes that make Canada more equal and representative of all its citizens are most often positive, but there is such thing as too much of a good thing. While organizations, and especially governments, need to do their best to avoid using language which is not representative of particular groups, the attempted changing of the national anthem is a step too far, and in no particularly positive direction. “O Canada” may be an imperfect anthem, but changing it is unlikely to have any positive impact for anyone at all.
While changing the national anthem would have been a waste of time, it also represented a very cynical and deceitful move by Prime Minister Stephen Harper. It was an attempt by the Conservatives, one of the least progressive federal governments in recent memory, to appear to be progressive. Instead of declaring that they would attempt to bridge the gap which still exists between the wages of men and women, or attempting to improve pieces of legislation which directly affect women - both legitimate gender equality issues - they proposed what was essentially an empty gesture. This was not a move based on political laziness, but based on political expediency. The government was attempting to mollify progressives and women in general, while at the same time avoiding making any real changes which might upset its conservative base. If the Harper government wants to win over the sort of people that the proposed amendments were attempting to please, it will have to engage in activities that are actually likely to improve the still relatively disadvantaged position of women in Canadian society.
The proposal to change the national anthem was cancelled with good reason. Canadian public opinion was wisely and demonstrably against the change. Not only would the changes have been a complete and utter waste of time, a change to “O Canada” shows an attempt by the Conservative government to appear progressive without actually doing anything progressive. The Throne Speech could have been used to announce a truly innovative and progressive set of policies to make Canada even more egalitarian in terms of gender than it already is. Unfortunately, that chance was wasted, and Canadians should commend themselves for their recognition of that fact.
1 comments
Out of respect to the Women Athletes that held the Podium together, Harper should have given this subject the respect it deserved and left it up to an advisory committee and later public input. Not put it as a machiavellian afterthought, a diversionary tactic in his neanderthal smoking screening budget.Shame on them!