George Grant

Why did George Grant describe Canada in 1965 as collapsed, disappeared, unable to be sovereign and impossible, and Canadian nationalism as having been defeated? Does the study of Canadian politics, society, and culture confirm or refute Grant’s thesis?Preparation: Before writing your critical essay, you are required to read the following:Grant, George. 2005. Lament for a Nation: The Defeat of Canadian Nationalism, 40th Anniversary Edition. Montreal & KIngston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Nesbitt-Larking, Paul 2009. “Canadian Political Culture: The Problem of Americanization”.” In Crosscurrents: Contemporary Political Issues, 6th ed. Edited by Mark Charlton and Paul Barker. Toronto, ON: Nelson Thomson.Adams, Michael. 2009. “Canada and the United States—Separated at Birth.” In Contemporary Political Issues. 6th ed. Edited by Mark Charlton and Paul Barker. Toronto, ON: Nelson Thomson.Instructions: At least two things make George Grant’sLament for a Nation a challenging read for today’s student. First, it uses as the touchstone for its meditation on Canada’s identity and destiny the current affairs of more than 40 years ago—specifically, the issues surrounding the fall of the John Diefenbaker Progressive Conservative government of 1958-63 and the electoral victories of the Lester Pearson Liberals in 1963 and 1965.Second, Grant is a philosopher and as such he looks at current affairs from a theoretical distance and from a particular philosophical standpoint, making reference to several other philosophers and social theorists. Since many students are likely to be unfamiliar with both mid-twentieth century Canadian politics and with political theory/philosophy, they will want to read the introductions to the book by Andrew Potter and Peter Emberley, which supply much of the needed historical and intellectual context for contemporary readers. To guide your reading of the preparation materials for this assignment, and to help you develop a sense of the issues at hand, answer the following questions upon completion of the required readings.How do each of these authors view Canada’s relationship with the United States, and the implications of that relationship for Canada’s independence and identity?What are the main differences between the academic philosopher (Grant) and the more empirical social scientists (Nesbitt-Larking and Adams)?What assumptions do the authors make about the nature and importance of either economic institutions (e.g. of the capitalist system) or political institutions (i.e. somewhat different political systems and legal traditions in Canada and the United States), and how do those assumptions affect their arguments and conclusions?