<http://www.w3.org/2009/08/skos-reference/skos.html#note>
"LOYALTY AND COLLABORATIONIST THEORY: AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW TO THE COLLABORATION THEORY' CONCEPTUALIZATION OF LOYALTY by MICHAEL ROBERT MOIR B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1989  A. THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of P o l i t i c a l Science)  We accept t h i s  t h e s i s as conforming  to the r e q u i r e d  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1996 \u00A9Michael Robert Moir&gt; 1996  \u000CIn presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements  for an advanced  degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department  or  by  his or  her  representatives.  It  is  understood  that  copying or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department of  Political  Science  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6 (2/88)  A u g u s t 11.  1996  \u000CABSTRACT  Traditional defined a  theories  of i m p e r i a l i s m  have  tended to be  almost e x c l u s i v e l y i n terms of European motives, as  simple p r o j e c t i o n of European  t h e o r i s t s have c h a l l e n g e d  s t a t e power. C o l l a b o r a t i o n  the E u r o c e n t r i c p e r s p e c t i v e  orthodox view of i m p e r i a l i s m .  According  of the  to Ronald Robinson,  a more comprehensive theory would i n c l u d e an a n a l y s i s of the most  important  non-European groups  as  political  mechanism  world:  suggested the  the \u2022 use  mediators and economic  collaborationist's that  of  between  management  loyal,  local  Europe  system. T h i s  Robinson's  loyalty  European  and \u2022 the  paper w i l l  formalistic  school, of  Canadians  to  examine the  account Great  the  indigenous  approach,  cannot  of  collaborator  c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of l o y a l t y .  nation-building  continued  of  It w i l l  be.  typical  of  for  the  B r i t a i n ' . . By  f o l l o w i n g a f u n c t i o n a l approach, i t can be seen t h a t ' l o y a l t y is  a psychological  this  perspective,  provided  phenomena i t can be  unlimited seen how  i n i t s ' scope.  loyalty  to the  From  Empire  the necessary p s y c h o l o g i c a l u n i t y f o r Canadians as  they assumed g r e a t e r p o l i t i c a l  sovereignty.  ii  \u000CTABLE OF CONTENTS  Abstract ,  ,  i i  Table of Contents  i i i  Acknowledgments  iv  INTRODUCTION Chapter One Chapter Two  1. C o l l a b o r a t i o n Theory and the Question of C o l o n i a l L o y a l t y  10  From 'Colony t o Nation' to 'Limited I d e n t i t i e s '  \u2022  Chapter Three  L o y a l t y as a P s y c h o l o g i c a l Phenomena  Chapter Four  L o y a l t y and the Nation  47 54 \u2022 75  CONCLUSION  89  Bibliography  99  iii  \u000CACKNOWLEDGMENTS  I would l i k e express my g r a t i t u d e to A v i g a i l for  her t i r e l e s s  the  duration  Allan  of  patience, this  support and  project.' I would  Smith f o r h i s h e l p f u l  Eisenberg,  guidance throughout also  like  comments and t i m e l y  to  thank  assistance,  without which t h i s paper could not have been completed. I am e s p e c i a l l y - indebted all  to J i l l \" W h e r r e t ' and C h a n t a l Morton f o r  of t h e i r support and many hours of d i s c u s s i o n - academic  and o t h e r w i s e . F i n a l l y /  I would l i k e to express my  g r a t i t u d e , to Shelagh Gray-Moir.  iv  heartfelt  \u000CINTRODUCTION  Loyalties powerful  of  causal  one  sort  forces  and  collective loyalties  and  multi-national  As  the  essence  conflict  another  have  always .been  i n human h i s t o r y .  It  is individual'  which today help  to  hold  s o c i e t i e s of  of  between  or  politics  groups  the  .in  which  power, the m a n i f e s t a t i o n  to  within  power  the  national  the  try  political  modern world  to of  or  modern  building.\"  \"loyalists\" to o t h e r  capture support  \u2022will  paper w i l l  l o y a l t y has argue  that  \"nation-building\" based  on  the  entities creating  or \u2022 at  maintain  community,  the process of:  try  to  .attract  l e a s t reduce 'the' l o y a l t y ,  school's  view of  that  in  to  the  way  In  development  which  - preserving  share  l o y a l t y , . a view that  order  to  the  large-scale  loyalties  indeed  national  1  the is  strengthen, -the communities  I- propose to. argue t h a t  of  i f not  theorists-  other  destroyed.  i s a useful, and  analyze  been used by . c o l l a b o r a t i o n theorists'. I  loyalties  or  to  . collaboration,  weakened or  preservation  seek  belief,  'nation-state', must be  seekers  the  f o r any. claim-  multi-national  power  t h e i r cause,  or  is  claimants.  This i d e a of  to  All  .together.  state  (the s t r u g g l e over p o l i t i c a l power), i n v o l v e s \"loyalty  national  to  non-national  a necessary loyalty.  the  factor  in  Non-national  \u000Cloyalties be  need not be o f the j e a l o u s  narrow.  loyalty  Thus,  they  to the m u l t i - n a t i o n  loyalties  of  individuals,  the  i n no  to. f e e l  themselves  to, that  might  become  small-scale  sense  non-national  that  nor need  sort  is  .part  community l o y a l t y  or  of  a  sustained all  \"old-stock\"  something  by f i n d i n g the r o o t s genuinely  and  encourage  immigrants  there  they  d e t r a c t , from  s t a t e . Vigorous  whether they be new  citizens,  they  need  nature,  to  attach  o f the community  i t . This  i s the f i r s t  type  and n a t u r a l  of step  toward a n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y o f a meaningful s o r t . According from formal  to the c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e s i s ,  to i n f o r m a l  the movement  empire depended upon the s u c c e s s f u l  c u l t i v a t i o n o f a group o f l o y a l c o l o n i a l c o l l a b o r a t o r s . When colonial they  rulers  either  Opponents later-  had run out o f indigenous ' c o l l a b o r a t o r s ,  chose  to  leave  of- the 'loyal',  succeeded  elements  from  in  or  were  compelled  c o l l a b o r a t i o n i s t group  detaching,  political  formed a u n i t e d f r o n t of n o n - c o l l a b o r a t i o n  against  i t . Hence  the  non-collaboration  collaboration  until  sooner or  eventually  of  regime  indigenous  go.  they  inversion  the c o l o n i a l  the  to  into  l a r g e l y determined the t i m i n g of d e c o l o n i z a t i o n . In order the  loyal,  behavior  to i d e n t i f y  political  leaders  one has to develop a c r i t e r i o n  as l o y a l or d i s l o y a l .  as being  among  for interpreting  This paper w i l l  seek to show  t h a t there was no d i s t i n c t i o n among p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s - i n the  2  \u000CProvince  of  commitment British  Canada to  during  preserve  defined  how  best  and  to  the do  their  the  system w i t h i n  implies  a l l of  the  descendants' that  tie  -  the  .there  were  ought  desire  to  i n t e r e s t s - the  explanation  of. the in  bring  desire  the  emigrants  to  have  to be  the  of . ' d i s l o y a l '  to  disrupt  treats  identity  and  loyalty to  the  to  the  -  as  a r e l a t i v e thing,  but  as  the  Canadian.  But they  Canadian. will  be  i n terms  n a t i o n a l i s t movements  the  arrangements  center  ' for  collaboration  Canadian  national  as - a b s o l u t e s .  c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e s i s . e x h i b i t s the tendency to regard not  and  collaboration- thesis  emerging  imperial  a  retaining  l o y a l t y that  c o l l a b o r a t i o n . I w i l l attempt to show t h a t the thesis  been  of the process of d e c o l o n i z a t i o n  colonies  about  exist, i n t h e i r minds .because  into, question  growing' a b i l i t y  they  collaborators.  'be . B r i t i s h  The - a l t e r n a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of  an  which  British  c o n t r a d i c t i o n i n being both- B r i t i s h and  presented w i l l  the  Being  i m p e r i a l t i e , even i f they d i s a g r e e d  such a dichotomy did. not  as  connection.  i n t h e i r minds between t h e i r l o y a l t y to  imperial  no  concerning  sense that they were committed  i t , virtually  defense of l o c a l  saw  period  imperial  global  In the  immediate  Collaboration conflict  1  Union  the-  to \u2022 them a  found t h e i r i d e n t i t y . to p r e s e r v i n g  the  a Unique form of  The  loyalty devotion,  J.G.A. Pocock, \" H i s t o r y and S o v e r e i g n t y : The Historiographical Response to E u r o p e a n i z a t i d n i n Two B r i t i s h C u l t u r e s , \" J o u r n a l of B r i t i s h S t u d i e s , \" 31 (1992): -382. \u2022 1  \u20223'  '. \u2022 \u2022 \"  \u000Cpotentially  antithetical  regional, religious, The of  or imperial  forms o f l o y a l t y  such as  loyalties.  i n s t i t u t i o n a l approach favoured by many proponents  the  'nation-building'  direction rather  to\u2022other  of  than  treating  relative  school  nationality  other  the  fact  an  the p s y c h o l o g i c a l  are the same as f o r other  i n the  absolute social  from, and p l a c e  forms o f group l o y a l t y , that  as  to' pull  one. I t i n s p i r e s ' the  to i s o l a t e n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y to,  tends  value  scientist  it. i n antithesis  i n s t e a d o f keeping i n view ingredients  of  nationalism  forms o f human i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with  l a r g e groups. Even Province British  the  most . c u r s o r y  o f Canada d u r i n g North  Americans  and that  focus and  each  of l o y a l t y .  of  the Union p e r i o d belonged  churches,' l o c a l communities, -  examination  As Canadian  would show  to a number  as w e l l  of these- groups  l i f e . i n the  a  result  of . t h i s  government or n o n r u l i n g then, still  or now,  could .potentially  society  became more  natural  employing  suggest t h a t a given  state be the  diverse  no  ruling  group i n a democratic s o c i e t y  possibly  enjoy  absolute  a multiplicity  loyalty.  may  potential  This  l o y a l t y was s c a r c e l y an absolute  4  could  Each  among  of means.  -  increased.  diversity,  seek to engender and preserve l o y a l t y  supporters,  o f groups  as the p o l i t i c a l  complex, the m u l t i p l i c i t y o f l o y a l t i e s a l s o As  that  would value.  \u000CMy  analysis  regards  national  inconsistent multiple became  loyalty  with  one  of  national  other  the  as  .so chief  and  the  to  and  British  i s not  British  matter  of  in ebb  another. This basic  to  and  North  an  or  clash  local  and  students  of  within  loyalties.  The  diminish.  The  s h i f t ' from  Canadian  analysis  of.; one  complete  nationalism, It  is  totally  l o y a l t i e s should  more  analysis  conceptualized follow  the  in  of  a  replacing serve as .a  of i n d i v i d u a l s and  the  to which they belong.' My'  The  pre-Confederation  decolonisation.. not  are  l o y a l t i e s which  or  the  absolute  f a c t of m u l t i p l e  element i n the  the  i n terms of degree.  in  complete  flow,  it  Canadian  groups e x i s t  other  treated  inevitable and  of  that  of  prevent  state,  increase  America  the -story of  an  Canada  group e l i c i t s  may  to  prevalence  suggested that  r e l a t i v e , to  imperialism  resulting  in  and  l o y a l t i e s adhering to groups  q u e s t i o n must c o n t i n u a l l y be  period  be  The  of . l o y a l t i e s  of  The  factions  thesis  exclusive,\"  responsibilities  church  i f ever, absolute.  intensity  were  should r e c o g n i z e that  circles,  adjusted  it  fundamental  communities. I t w i l l  concentric  story  if  . collaboration  loyalties.  between  'nation-building'  are  as  from a l l p o l i t i c a l  loyalties,  rarely,  show \u2022 t h a t t h e  l o y a l t i e s was  statesman of  will  groups \"  the  terms  of  way  in  the  which  loyalty  collaboration  l i n e of i n q u i r y suggested by  5  has  thesis  David P o t t e r  been will in his  \u000Cseminal a r t i c l e .on \"Use  \u2022 distinction-./ between the  c r i t i c i z e d the  formalistic  loyalty.\"\"  The  formalistic  regard nationalism nothing  at  as  approach  \"an  approach, absolute  a l l \" ? \u2022 and  formalistic, were  the  juristic  sole  group  regards:  n a t i o n a l i s m 'as  people.  \u2022  at  and  a  loyalty.  as  nations'  scholars'  existing  citizens  which  in. f u l l  are  either  n a t i o n as  individuals  i f , i t were the  each The  individuals of  these  belong  groups  to  .can  d i v e r s i t y , of- groups  sole  belong,  loyalty  : a given l o y a l t y  loyalty  also  of  if 'and the  ' . analysis  will  remind  a number of 'groups, become  increases  the  focus  of  with, the: more  complex s o c i a l o r g a n i z a t i o n of modern times, and \u2022the m u l t i p l i c i t y of  to  standard- specifications';.  approach regards the to  to  a \"unique  \u2022 -  once that  that  i t s tendency  prompts  thing,  P o t t e r suggests that a f u n c t i o n a l us  for  a n t i t h e t i c a l -to. other forms of  \" l o y a l \" -or., \" d i s l o y a l \" , depending on The  group l o y a l t i e s .  as a r e l a t i v e thing,, but  form of d e v o t i o n , p o t e n t i a l l y  Potter'  f o r m a l i s t i c ' ' and. - f u n c t i o n a l  study of n a t i o n a l i s m and  r e g a r d n a t i o n a l i s m not  it  Historians  2  approaches to  or  \"The  of N a t i o n a l i s m and' V i c e V e r s a . \" ; In \u2022 t h i s . c r i t i q u e  drew \" a  He  n a t i o n a l i s m and -loyalty,  as  i t does,  i n c r e a s e s . T h i s means /that  i s . seldom an.absolute v a l u e .  5  Since- P o t t e r ' s '  D a v i d Potter', \"The H i s t o r i a n s Use of N a t i o n a l i s m and: V i c e V e r s a , \" i n - H i s t o r y and American S o c i e t y : Essays of David M. P o t t e r , ed. Don E. Fehrenbacher (New York: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press; \u2022 1973)-, -pp. 61-108,. i b i d . , p. 66, 73. - ibid. p. 66. \" \u2022'\u2022\u2022'' - T h i s i d e a , i s a l s o suggested by Hans Kohn i n The Idea of . \u2022 N a t i o n a l i s m : A Study of i t s O r i g i n s and Background (New York:. .Macmillan, 2  ;  5  \u000Canalysis  will  serve  collaboration \"The  as  thesis,  H i s t o r i a n ' s Use  to be quoted at  the  model  f o r my  the  f o l l o w i n g passage  of N a t i o n a l i s m  commentary of  the  from  Potter's  and V i c e Versa\"  deserves,  length;  H i s t o r i a n s f r e q u e n t l y w r i t e a b o u t n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y as i f i t were e x c l u s i v e , and i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h o t h e r l o y a l t i e s , w h i c h are described as \"competing' or \" d i v i d e d \" and which are v i e w e d as d e t r a c t i n g f r o m t h e p r i m a r y l o y a l t y t o t h e n a t i o n . Yet i t i s s e l f - e v i d e n t t h a t n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y f l o u r i s h e s not b y c h a l l e n g i n g and o v e r p o w e r i n g a l l o t h e r ' l o y a l t i e s , b u t by s u b s u m i n g them a l l i n a m u t u a l l y supportive r e l a t i o n to one another. The strength of the whole i s not enhanced by destroying the p a r t s , but i s made up of the sum of the parts. The o n l y c i t i z e n s who a r e c a p a b l e o f s t r o n g n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y a r e t h o s e who are capable of s t r o n g group l o y a l t y , and such persons are likely to express this capacity in t h e i r d e v o t i o n t o t h e i r r e l i g i o n , t h e i r community, and t h e i r families, as well as in their love of country. The nationalism which will . utilize this capacity most e f f e c t i v e l y , t h e r e f o r e , i s n o t t h e one w h i c h o v e r r i d e s and destroys a l l other objects of l o y a l t y , but t h e one which d r a w s t h e m a l l i n t o one t r a n s c e n d e n t focus. 6  It  should  nationalism and  the  then  the  two  i n the  the  responsibility  recognize  loyalties  are  essay;  to  be  that  adhering premises  first  place,  the  group  to i t are that that  secondly,  the  antithesis  to  recognizing  that  from  other  those  194/4) pp. 10-20 P o t t e r , p. 6  other i t is  forms  loyalties.  The  75  7  Potter's should  be  forms  of n a t i o n b u i l d i n g have  of  associated  These  s i m i l a r to other  tended to t r e a t n a t i o n a l i s m as a m o n o l i t h i c in  from  loyalty  of  isolated,  absolute.  adopt  national  students  students  i s never  never  I will  regarded as a form of group l o y a l t y , of group l o y a l t y ;  of  form of  loyalty, with,  group  and  loyalty,  instead even  elicits  of  derived loyalties  \u000Cwhich are  adjusted  intensity  of  diminish.  loyalties  \u2022  The  story  more  a  which \u2022 i t  of  British  period  is  evokes  North  not  r e s u l t i n g i n an matter  other,  loyalties and  to other  the  loyalties. may  The  i n c r e a s e . or  treated  but  of  many  America  story  from complete B r i t i s h i m p e r i a l i s m  nationalism,  each  relative  i n terms  \u2022  pre-Confederation  is  and  The.question must c o n t i n u a l l y be  of degree.  shift  to  of  in  an  the  absolute  to complete Canadian  inevitable decolonisation.  loyalties  rarely conflicting.  i s a b a s i c element i n the  usually This  It  complementing  fact' of  multiple  a n a l y s i s of i n d i v i d u a l s  the groups to which they belong. C o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e o r i s t s  have d i s p l a y e d  the  .that ' l o y a l t y i s that  can  be  fundamentally  tendency to a  character  developed and. nurtured,  the m u l t i - n a t i o n a l other  unfortunate  s t a t e , but  not  and  by  ignore  the  fact  trait,  a virtue  thereby extended to  attempting to  suppress  paper  show  loyalties. The  basic  objective  of . t h i s  is  to  l o y a l t y , which forms the b a s i s f o r cohesion f o r normal functions state.  I  and  tends to b i n d men's a l l e g i a n c e to the  will  argue  that  the  conceptualization  of  loyalties.  f u r t h e r argue that by  I will  l o y a l t y does  collaboration not  allow  how  life,  national  theorists'  for  multiple  g i v i n g undue weight  to an economic determinism, the c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e o r i s t s have f a i l e d to understand the nature of the c o l o n i s t s ' l o y a l t y to  8  \u000Cthe  Empire.  displayed loyalty,  many  to  of  also the  point  out that  characteristics  Imperial of  so much so that one may argue that  nationalism the  I will  i n B r i t i s h North America  being  British,  mutually  Canadian were  among Canadians  nationality,  not a n t a g o n i s t i c ,  supportive.  9  'national'  the predominant  Union p e r i o d was a ' B r i t i s h n a t i o n a l i s m ' . the emerging  a  loyalty  during  The l o y a l t i e s  and to the sense of but r a t h e r  were  \u000CChapter  One  Collaboration Theory and the Question of Colonial Loyalty  In  this-  l o y a l t y has employed  section  empire\"  during  Whether  or  the  7  has but  will  second  there  was  been  examine  the  background of the  the  existence  half  of  indeed  by  the a  vigorously  t h i s question begin  how  concept  c o l l a b o r a t i o n i s t t h e o r i s t s who  help e x p l a i n  not  imperialism\"  paper. ' I  will  been used by  i t to  historians,  I  of  period  of  debated  a. b r i e f  have  \"informal  nineteenth  century.  \"free  among-  i s beyond -the  giving  the  of  trade  imperial  scope  overview  of  this  of  c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e s i s as a c h a l l e n g e to  orthodox ' h i s t o r i c a l  view that,  with  the. acceptance  of  the the free  trade p o l i c i e s , the B r i t i s h had  l o s t a l l i n t e r e s t i n Empire.  Next,  tenets  I will  outline  thesis., namely that  the  the  main  nationalists place  depended  to d i s l o d g e  the  collaboration  success of empire depended upon  l o y a l c o l l a b o r a t i o n of a l o c a l e l i t e , decolonization  of  upon the  the  and  that the  ability  of  loyal collaborators  timing  the of.  \"disloyal\" from t h e i r  of power.  Among the many a r t i c l e s and-books which have c h a l l e n g e d the' \" f r e e t r a d e i m p e r i a l i s m \" t h e s i s , see E r i c Stokes,, \"Late N i n e t e e n t h - C e n t u r y C o l o n i a l E x p a n s i o n and the A t t a c k on the Theory of Economic I m p e r i a l i s m : A Case o f M i s t a k e n I d e n t i t y \" ? H i s t o r i c a l J o u r n a l , X I I (1969) : 285; S t o k e s , \"Uneconomic I m p e r i a l i s m , \" H i s t o r i c a l ' J o u r n a l , XXVIII. (1.975): 4 09; O l i v e r Macdonagh, \"The ' A n t i - I m p e r i a l i s m o f Free Trade,\" The Economic H i s t o r y ' Review, 2nd'ser., . XIV (1962): 101. 7  10  \u000CBackground Traditional defined a  to  be  almost e x c l u s i v e l y i n terms of European .motives,  as  simple  theories  projection  rivalry  and  Robinson, theory'',  of  of  imperialism  European  resource  one was  of  state  . exploitation  the  two  have  authors  tended  power,  strategic  overseas.'  of  the  Ronald  8  .'collaboration  h i g h l y c r i t i c a l of the t r a d i t i o n a l ,  Eurocentric'  t h e o r i e s of i m p e r i a l i s m .  He b e l i e v e d t h a t i m p e r i a l i s m had  be  against  redefined  imperial, were  in  theory  economic, and  connected  comprehensive important  non-European  world:  In  of  his  opinion,  an  would'; i n c l u d e  mechanism  background  how  of the  groups - whether r u l i n g  European use.  of  elites  a  more  a n a l y s i s of  the  most  management  of  the  loyal, or  local  landlords  collaborator  or merchants  as mediators between Europe and  the indigenous p o l i t i c a l  economic  the  was  system. The  s a i d to have two  notion  large  troops.  areas  of  in  and  c o l l a b o r a t i v e mechanism  the  I t e x p l a i n e d why world  I t a l s o provided  decolonisation  of  -  great advantages over the more orthodox  t h e o r i e s of i m p e r i a l i s m . rule  the  s t r a t e g i c arms of European expansion  overseas.  theory  the  to  .terms  an  so  cheaply  explanation of  Europe was' able  the  and of  the  growing  with  so  process ability  to few of of  For t h e f o l l o w i n g summary o f the c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e o r y , I have. r e l i e d upon Ronald Robinson's \"Non-European F o u n d a t i o n s o f I m p e r i a l i s m : S k e t c h f o r . a Theory o f C o l l a b o r a t i o n , \" i n S t u d i e s i n t h e Theory -of I m p e r i a l i s m , eds., Roger Owen &amp; .Bob. S u t c l i f f e (London: Longman, 1972)., pp. 117-141. 8  11  \u000Cnationalist  movements  in  the  colonies  arrangements f o r c o l l a b o r a t i o n or to use  to  disrupt  the  them f o r t h e i r  own  ends. \u2022 C o l l a b o r a t i o n theory much'  a  function  non-collaboration of  European  not  of be  nationalist  white  - of  their  expansion.  cooperation could  of  the  recognizes  governing  elites,  r e s i s t a n c e , contained.  collaborative  systems  enforced resources  The  theory  was  to  suggests  its  that  decolonisation,  determined by  connecting  or  the  British  indigenous  and  British were  as  o f t e n more a f u n c t i o n of. Canadian p o l i t i c s  than  of  begin  depended on  the  Robinson  posited  Secondly,  to  reconstruct  and  the  the  next  uphold  down. The  transition  was  a  governed  collaborative  imperialism  necessitated  choice  indigenous  from  one  phase  of  by  the  need  to  system  that  was  breakdown of indigenous c o l l a b o r a t i o n i n the deeper i m p e r i a l i n t e r v e n t i o n  that would l e a d to i m p e r i a l takeover, or the  that  absence-or presence of e f f e c t i v e  imperialism  many i n s t a n c e s  economics.  with,  collaborators.  Thirdly,  i t - was  terms of i m p e r i a l i s m  B r i t i s h p o l i t i c s and  breaking  or  economic  imperialism  North American components. The  To  voluntary  as  as or  s t r a t e g i c i n t e r e s t s protected,  working of i m p e r i a l i s m  much and  the  was  collaboration  indigenous p o l i t i c s  at every stage from e x t e r n a l the  settlers'  Without  transferred,  that i m p e r i a l i s m  of  indigenous  \u2022  12  formal  withdrawal.  c o l l a b o r a t o r s , more  than  \u000Canything, e l s e , determined the  organization  colonial  words, \u2022 i t s  'administrative,  land and'economic p o l i c i e s  were l a r g e l y the  rule;  in  constitutional,  other  institutionalization which upheld it'. of  indigenous  of  the  Fourthly,  indigenous,  character  of  political alliances  when- c o l o n i a l  c o l l a b o r a t o r s , they  and  r u l e r s had  e i t h e r chose  to  run  out  leave  or  were compelled to go.. T h e i r n a t i o n a l opponents i n the. modern elite  sooner or l a t e r  political  elements  eventually against  succeeded i n detaching  from  formed  a  i t . Hence  largely  of  John  Gallagher's \"The  and  I t c a l l e d .into question,  Ronald  Imperialism  .of and  r e v o l u t i o n i z e d , the p r e v i o u s l y accepted history.  turned-  mid-Victorian  the  Their  d e f i n i t i o n s of the years  ' manifesto  timing  of  Robinson's  Free  i t s head  9  Trade,\"  f o r - the  most  challenged  was part  the  imperialism.  interpretation by  9  now  framework.of B r i t i s h  nineteenth-century  traditional on  into  Imperialism.  published.  They  collaboration  -.-'\u2022'  article,  conventional  u n t i l . they  -  celebrated  imperial  indigenous  non-collaboration  determined  Free Trade 1953,  regime  front-., of  inversions  decolonisation.'  In  colonial  united  the  non-collaboration  the  the  of  including within  ' the their  John G a l l a g h e r and Ronald Robinson, \"The I m p e r i a l i s m , of- Free Trade\", Economic H i s t o r y Review, 2nd s e r . VI (1953): 1.  13  \u000Csurvey The  what  they  referred  to as the  'informal  empire'.  orthodox a n a l y s i s h e l d t h a t the o l d c o l o n i a l  overthrown and the empire ceased to be of value free  trade.  This, new work, which  11  as  the \" c o n t i n u i t y theory  one  of the more o r i g i n a l  imperialism, According decades  argued  the nineteenth  that  from  that  School  and ideas  the  years  the d o c t r i n e  when  officials,  and  century  were' dominated  of  free  leading  trade,  British  system  bias.  the middle by  It, was d u r i n g  12  Cobden h e l d  economists,  economic  Eurocentric  hypothesis,  13  These  statesmen,  Pressure emancipated  an  this  the Manchester  sway.  voiced  d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n over the Empire. trade \" and an  traditional  accepted  of Richard many  the  a  aversion, or an i n d i f f e r e n c e to empire. period  out t o be  had exaggerated the power of  suffered  t o the p r e v i o u s l y of  turned  imperialism.  of i m p e r i a l i s m and  i n an age of  and c o n t r o v e r s i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o  and Robinson  interpretations  system was  came t o be r e f e r r e d t o  of i m p e r i a l i s m \"  the h i s t o r i o g r a p h y of modern Gallagher  10  were  colonial  their  growing  mounted f o r f r e e r from  government  interference.  For a g e n e r a l background' t o t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t h e ' i n f o r m a l ' Empire, p l e a s e see Robin W. Winks, \"On D e c o l o n i z a t i o n and I n f o r m a l Empire\", American H i s t o r i c a l Review 81 (1976): 540-56. \"\u2022 Wm.. Roger L o u i s ' The Robinson and G a l l a g h e r C o n t r o v e r s y (New York: New V i e w p o i n t s , 1976) c h r o n i c l e s t h e i m p e r i a l i s m / f r e e trade debate. 1 0  11  12'  Lewis Feuer,- I m p e r i a l i s m and the A n t i - I m p e r i a l i s t Mind Prometheus Books, 1986). 13  '  Wendy Hinde, R i c h a r d Cobden Yal'e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1987)  : . a Victorian  14  Outsider  (Buffalo: ' (New Haven:  \u000CThe at  Manchester  the centre  of  School, the f r e e  against a l l imperialism, movement  and Cobden i n p a r t i c u l a r ,  represented  trade  movement.  formal and i n f o r m a l .  a  force  of  associated  with  the a r i s t o c r a c y :  expenditures, b e l l i c o s i t y , colonial  and  stood  The f r e e  trade  society  in  and those p r i n c i p l e s  unnecessary  war as a s o l u t i o n  international  Cobden  Victorian  p e r p e t u a l c o n f l i c t with the a r i s t o c r a c y  were  relations.  governmental  t o problems of  The  free  trade  movement was more than a movement concerned with mere t r a d e : it  espoused moral ' p r i n c i p l e s and the ideas of a s o c i e t y  would r e g u l a t e i t s e l f least  i t was  international movement conflict  of  Britain's  trade  f o r peace,  arbitration  and disarmament. .The f r e e  a  force  in  and  restraints  t o , the need  transformation  supremacy  shipping, were  relations.  less  important  than,  system' was thus . s a i d  t o problems  In  and  light  of  of i t s  monopolistic and \u2022.' o f t e n  expanding world and  in  governmental  and the primacy  of. the o l d c o l o n i a l  of  trade  society  exclusivity  f o r ever  Not  support  Victorian  from needless  international,  manufacturing  and merchant  commercial  including  and i m p e r i a l i s t i c wars as a s o l u t i o n  detrimental The  a movement  with those who p r o f i t e d  colonial  navy  f r e e from government i n t e r f e r e n c e .  represented  spending  that  markets.  mercantilist  t o be completed by the end  of the 1840's. Free trade had made empire o b s o l e t e .  14  B e r n a r d Semmel, The R i s e o f Free Trade I m p e r i a l i s m : C l a s s i c a l P o l i t i c a l Economy, t h e Empire o f Free Trade and I m p e r i a l i s m , 1750-1850 ' 14  15.  \u000CIn  the  British  North  American  context  during  this  p e r i o d , r e v o l u t i o n a r y changes were t a k i n g place-. In l i g h t these  changes,  methods of Over  the  i t became  imperialism  next  thirty  through what was period. .  industrial  Great was  of  were becoming q u i c k l y years,  British  . of  pointed  out  the  North  America  political  remaking  the  and  apparently  the  United  States.  anxious tp reduce i t s American p o l i t i c a l its  troops  which  was  from  railway  and  exploitation out  of  of what now  the a  the  new  school  modern world,  and  Britain,  right,  free  was  a  The  great  empire,  The  system  colonies,  flung  was to  United  military  using the  .and  techniques for  the  suddenly  appeared to have been the p e a c e f u l s e c u r i t y and p o l i t i c a l dependence, had  answer  one  the  world  commitments and  homestead  continent.  from which  conquest of  of m e r c a n t i l i s m to  of and  continent.  r a p i d l y becoming  i n d u s t r i a l power i n i t s own of  passed  nationalism  Great  f a r more i n t e r e s t e d i n the  15  transitional  markets' than i n the r e t e n t i o n of i t s t e r r i t o r i a l  States,  old  c o l o n i e s were s u b j e c t to ominous p r e s s u r e s  Britain  withdraw  the  antiquated.  free-trade  that  c a p i t a l i s m were  the northern  some  undoubtedly i t s most c r i t i c a l  Supporters  decolonization  apparent- t h a t  of  central  question  into  to d i s c o v e r  which  all  an  their  (Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970). Ged M a r t i n , The Durham r e p o r t and B r i t i s h P o l i c y : A C r i t i c a l E s s a y (Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1972). See a l s o P e t e r B u r r o u g h s , \"The Determinants of Self-Government,\" J o u r n a l of Imperial andCommonwealth H i s t o r y -6 (1978): 317-319; John M. Ward, Colonial Self-Government: 'The B r i t i s h E x p e r i e n c e , 1759-1856 (London: M a c m i l l a n , 1976) pp. 248-250. '  16  \u000Cperplexities for  were  a political  t h a t was  compacted.  and  to  be  found  themselves,  fewer  with  the  United  North Americans in  the  still  union  argued  States.  I t -had  substitute  Great  Britain  16  and  Reformers  t i e to the B r i t i s h In  'orthodox'  century and spheres  indifference? existence  1 7  theory  influence The  of an age  two  and of  among  the  closer  association conviction  St. Lawrence must, remain i f not  wholly  less  in  eager  Robinson  to  The to  during  took a  imperialism  language lose  second  i n the  the  look  nineteenth  c o l o n i e s were a c q u i r e d  established  i n an  Cambridge  scholars  showed that there  p o l i c y which the conventional  mechanism,  provinces  the  of a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s m  T h e i r research  According  of  were no  asked.why so.many new of  answer  centre.  summary, Gallagher  this  the  the  and  race,  that  always been the  certainly in allegiance  years.  best  believed  for  British,  new\"  the  economic connection with  of Canadian C o n s e r v a t i v e s that  at  was  under pressure to change?  .Some B r i t i s h was  What  alleged  in. the was  and  age  rejected  of the  mid-Victorian  a continuity  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s had  of  missed.-  C o l l a b o r a t i o n Model  their the  depiction  of  nineteenth  the  collaborative  century  C h e s t e r Martirv, \"The U n i t e d S t a t e s and Canadian Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review, X V I I I , (March, .1937) : 1. ; G a l l a g h e r and Robinson, p. 3. 1 6  17  ;  17  \"British  Nationality,\"  \u000Cgovernments  worked  to  establish  and  paramountcy\u2022by whatever means best of  their  diverse  Robinson's  theory  conditions  to  'collaborating  regions pointed  imperial class'  was  strategy  of  collective  bargains  with  were c r u c i a l .  collaboration, with  the  Robinson  a  the  of  societies,  control.  whether,  the  crisis  of r e s i s t a n c e ,  called  i n t o play,  character theory the  was  since  was  the  were c l e a r l y  circumstance  in  colonial or -the  factor, which  sustained. collaboration  It  also  turned  explained into  the  reason  non-cooperation,  and Robinson, p.12  18  Their  empire,-, i t s breakdown,  r u l e and the manner i n which  d e c o l o n i s a t i o n . '\u2022 They u n d e r l i n e d  Gallagher  they  i t governed much of the t i m i n g and  of i m p e r i a l i n t e r v e n t i o n s and withdrawals.  of c o l o n i a l  of  on formal  collaboration  the n e g l e c t e d  and  hypothesis  concentration  of  at odds  Gallagher  orthodox  embraced . the . idea 'of \u2022 i n f o r m a l  onset  the  of n a t i v e  .the  success  of  the importance  theories.  Local  a  structure  i m p e r i a l i s m r e l i e d upon an excessive .methods  It  of  ruling  scholars  that  local  .loyalty  rule.  and  of  element  the indigenous  Anglo-centric out  The  principle  By r e c o g n i z i n g  pointed  Gallagher  1 8  importance  'indirect'  the Cambridge  older,  interest.\"  to  British  s u i t e d the circumstances  expansion.  political  that  of  maintain  i t was  why,  i t ended  once in  the importance - t o B r i t i s h  \u000Ceconomic i n t e r e s t s  abroad  of the p o l i t i c a l  the l o c a l e l i t e . With  not  issues  t o broaden  bringing into  '  these  attempted  this  play.  of  deploying  first,  contribute  much.  little,,,  metropolitan  First,  power  policy  expected  by  to  1  and, power  q u e s t i o n . of comparatively  risk  were  would  and c o s t . By  . their  colonies  following t h i s -.principle,  be  deployed  . would  to be worthwhile,  calculated  to the  suffice  the -indigenous  on, the cheap'.. The c o s t s  indigenous  imperialized.  resources  a  were  to'  p o l i t i c s of  empire  of any  and b e n e f i t s of  on- input-output  ratios.  empires had t o be founded, t o a g r e a t e r or l e s s e r on  attracted  was  at the l e a s t  but not to a b o l i s h ,  kind ,had t o be  extent,  the i m p e r i a l i s t s  \u2022 resources,  they  countries.' Secondly,  Thirdly,  factor  in. European terms, to p l a c e s where they  a  imperial  extra-European  Imperialism  in. maximum .returns  manipulate,  notions  that  of  model  of p r e v i o u s  of e x p o r t i n g .surplus wealth  Britain.  investing-  other  neglected  quantities  insignificant result  the p e r s p e c t i v e  I t assumed,  Great  ' \u2022  i n mind,' ' the c o l l a b o r a t i v e  previously  i n the business  out  c o l l a b o r a t i o n of  Finally,  enough  or c o n s c r i p t e d and  resources  into  of t h e i r  in  the  countries  leaders  had t o be  transferring  a l l e g i a n c e s , , i f such  feats  the  necessary  were  t o . be  accomplished  p r o f i t a b l y . Unless a s i g n i f i c a n t element of the  local  could  elite  be  cajoled  to cooperate, 19  \"'.  or a t  least  \u000Cacquiesce, trade could be  upheld  cheaply.  or  Imperial  ineffective,  cost-benefits  who and  would  without f o r e i g n  A f r i c a and imperial  official's  .their  position  system and  of  rule  subjects.  in  the  inside  Victorians, as  their  depended Imperial  of  local  without on  the  being  nature  of  to undergo change  a  1 9  Robinson- and  set  of  Gallagher  bargains  between  t h e i r indigenous a l l i e s  own  societies.  upon understandings rule  had  drawn  The  improve colonial  between  i t s force  and  rulers  more  from  of i t s s u b j e c t s than from exported power. successive  indigenous  indeed l a r g e l y determined the  factors  parameters  intervention.  colonial  power  i t s rule  from  collaborators  finding  t r a d i t i o n a l view made popular by  ;  basis  contained  were p r i m a r i l y concerned to defend or  o u t s i d e E u r o p e had  The  be  Elites  g e n e r a t i o n s of Whig h i s t o r i a n s , l o c a l and  of i m p e r i a l  on  turn,  its ability  m e t r o p o l i s and  \u2022the c o l l a b o r a t i o n C o n t r a r y to the  not  pliable  Collaborating  expansion  i n the  opponents, who  could  not  control.  Loyal  defined  be  and  empire c o u l d  depended  t h i s , depended,  s o c i a l organization  In  be promoted, the  n a t i o n a l i s t 'sentiments  intermediaries  their  not  and  sustained time  taking  to  itself  time,  another.  by  shifting  dropping The  choice  one of  set  the of  local  19  John G a l l a g h e r .and Ronald. Robinson, A f r i c a and the V i c t o r i a n s : O f f i c i a l Mind of I m p e r i a l i s m ; (New York: S t . M a r t i n ' s P r e s s , 1961) . '20  The.  \u000Ccollaborators character speed  determined  of' c o l o n i a l  and  direction  the  rule. of  organization,  depth  . Collaborators,  economic  growth  and  governed in  the-  ways  that  complemented the needs of the B r i t i s h f i n a n c i a l markets,, influenced  their  collaborators  with London.  Robinson local  and  highlighted  mediators  of,  Robinson wrote that  of  i t s victims'  their  indigenous  e x p a n s i o n . \" ' The 20  been  used  European  to  explain  powers were  geographically expense and suggests ability for  that of  20  2 1  an  rule  frequent use part  of  the of  as much a  of  European  question  of  how  s u c c e s s f u l l y 'over incurring  of m i l i t a r y f o r c e . imperial  rule  s t r i k e \"various which  was  has the their  great It the  arrangements the  external  i n t e r n a l non-European components cooperated imperial  imperialism \"  In  non-collaboration  empires ' without-  integral  was  i t . was  c o l l a b o r a t i o n , . through  point that  \"imperialism  obvious  able \u2022 to  of.  metropolitan  c o l l a b o r a t i v e mechanism  European powers to  European and  belief  of the  importance  collaborative thesis in  p o l i t i c s , ' as  dispersed  political  and 'economic system.,  . c o l l a b o r a t i o n or  the  without the  mutual  the  notion  the  between, the  l a t e r a r t i c l e which o u t l i n e d the  function  of  ...  the. indigenous p o l i t i c a l  more d e t a i l ,  at  as  i n . favour  \u2022  Gallagher  collaborators  c e n t r e and the  domestic\u2022politics  and  impart.\"  relied  21  '  It  challenged  s o l e l y upon \"the '  '  Ronald Robinson, \"Non-European F o u n d a t i o n s , \" p. i b i d . , p.118  21  118.  the  e x e r t i o n .of  \u000Cpower' and  the t r a n s f e r  Robinson's c o n t e n t i o n  of economic  resources.\"  It  22  is  that,  No' s o c i e t y , however dominant, c a n man-handle . a r c a n e , densely-peopled c i v i l i z a t i o n s o r white colonies in other \u2022' continents s i m p l y by p r o j e c t i n g i t s own main f o r c e upon, them. . Domination i s o n l y p r a c t i c a b l e i n so f a r as a l i e n power i s t r a n s l a t e d i n t o terms o f i n d i g e n o u s p o l i t i c a l ' economy. . . 23  Therefore, employed  by  the  relationships their  the.  collaborating  up  of  expansion and  o f the governing  political e l i t e s was  r u l e . The' l o y a l t y \u2022 of a  was the l i n c h p i n o f the  informal  empire  B r i t i s h North America. Intrinsic  that out a  \"made  of e x t e r n a l  success of i m p e r i a l  elite  was  successfully  i n . non-European  . The c o o p e r a t i o n  24  mechanism\"  powers.  'collaborators'  e s s e n t i a l , to the  in  European  between the agents  internal  economics.\"  \"controlling  each  to. the  concept, as  l o c a l society  of . i t s .own c u l t u r e , mediating  elite  Robinson noted  that  would create thus the  within  i n a pejorative  used, i n  such  the  23 24  specific  sense,  even  i b i d . , p.119 i b i d . , p. 119 i b i d . , p. 120  though politics From the  power imported  which  be e x p l o i t e d \u2022  22  '  class  r i s e of setting.  was i n no way  the i m p e r i a l could'  the  colonial  \"collaboration\"  'corrupted' p o l i t i c i a n s .  \u2022wealth' and power  a collaboration  need t o e x p l a i n  a way i n contemporary  collaborators,  22  .a.  the term  employed  criticizing  a whole was the n o t i o n  i t was o f t e n i n terms o f s t a n d p o i n t of a source o f i n order t o  \u000Cpreserve wifhin  or improve  their  'bargains'  the standing  own p o l i t i c a l  of the indigenous  order.  of c o l l a b o r a t i o n could  elites  But by d e f i n i t i o n t h e not be too one-sided, or  they would cease t o be e f f e c t i v e . Collaborators behalf were  of t h e i r perceived  had to mediate with  local  constituents,  t o be  overly  b a s i s of t h e i r a u t h o r i t y . they if  had to recognize  sufficient  waned, c r i s i s between  scrapping  would  on  which  undermine the  Even i f the bargains were unequal  mutual  i n t e r e s t s and interdependence  political  followed,  and concessions'  drastic  the bargains were t o be kept.  without  the m e t r o p o l i s  When mediators were  resources,  their  left  authority  and the i m p e r i a l power had t o choose  i t s i n t e r e s t s or i n t e r v e n i n g  t o promote  them d i r e c t l y ' . To  sum up, R o b i n s o n . ' i d e n t i f i e d  \"two  inter-connecting  sets of l i n k a g e s \" which made up the c o l l a b o r a t i v e mechanism: \"one  c o n s i s t i n g of arrangements between agents of i n d u s t r i a l  society with  .and the indigenous  them;  and the other  rigidities'-  of  Collaborators external  interests  yet be able  society.  2 6  drawn  connecting  had t o perform  sector  indigenous  local  elites  into  these and  cooperation  elites  institutions.\"  one s e t of f u n c t i o n s to have  The turnover  i b i d . , p.122 i b i d . , p.122  23  them  t o the  accepted  of - a l l i e s  in a  2 5  i n the by the crisis  \u000Ccould  often  pointed more  be  swift  t o the f a c t  importance  mediatory  provocative.  that collaborators  to  role.\"  and  their'  Robinson  2 7  \"naturally  traditional,  than  also  attached to  their  2 8  The B r i t i s h N o r t h American C o l o n i s t : The I d e a l Collaborator  Prefabricated  While a l l systems of i n f l u e n c e which, c a l l e d f o r h o l d i n g territory  depended  colonial  populations  development  i n \u2022 the  c o l o n i e s ' t h i s was white  colonist  \"ideal,  upon  and  colony,  political  on in  q u i e s c e n c e . among controlling \u2022  the  British  settlement  i n B r i t i s h : North America.proved  may  collaborator.\"  have p l a y e d  collaboration  a- r o l e ,  stemmed  t o be  Although  2 9  Robinson  largely  argued  dominant  colonial  export-import  politics  collaboration  with  proved  to  easy  in  favour  London. make  sector of  economic  Thus,  and , keep.  and  collaborative when  was  and p r o d u c t i o n .  consequently  commercial  the  that  dependence. For the g r e a t e r p a r t of the c e n t u r y B r i t a i n  The  the  cultural  from  the main source of c a p i t a l , .export markets,  the  political  e s p e c i a l l y so. A c c o r d i n g t o Robinson,  prefabricated  affiliation  political  these  shaped political bargains  commercial  F r a n c i s H i n k s , one of the b o l d e s t , p r o v o c a t e u r s d u r i n g t h e b a t t l e s over the c o n t r o l of p o l i t i c a l , patronage d u r i n g the 1840's,.came t o be a rewarded w i t h p o s t i n g s i n f o r e i g n o u t p o s t s of the Empire. Robinson, \"Non-European F o u n d a t i o n s . . . \" , p.122 i b i d . , p. 124. 27  28  2 9  24  \u000Cpartnerships  were  mutually  profitable  p e r m i t t e d t o manage t h e i r own Robinson's belief  internal  colonists  markets  open,  i s ' i n large part  based  rejection  c a p i t a l ' flowing- i n .  a t the p o l l s  collaborative local  suggests  affairs that  essentially  which  bargains  collaboration  upon  to  thus  from  made  British  their  .The, -specter - of  direct . The  continuing  among  export  went a l o n g w i t h b r e a k i n g ' the  unnecessary.  the  the  colonial  supported the arrangements which kept and  were  affairs.  t h a t c o l o n i s t s would g i v e t h e i r b a c k i n g  p o l i t i c i a n s who  over  argument  and  imperial  control  c o l l a b o r a t i o n 'model  economic . North  and  political  '.Americans  growing, and.. m u t u a l l y  stemmed  profitable  b u s i n e s s connections, w i t h the U n i t e d Kingdom. Even i f i t was contemplated, activities  direct of  disadvantage  intervention  British  for  North  i t risked  in  America  provoking  reaction.  the  . was  political a  violent  positive  nationalist  -\u2022  The c o l l a b o r a t i v e mechanism of commercial p a r t n e r s h i p in  white  c o l o n i e s converted  internal,political eventually  these  c o l o n i e s would  decolonisation.  British  settlement  economic  power  into  c o o p e r a t i o n . I t worked c o n s t r u c t i v e l y  gradual  political  e x t e r n a l economic  soon as  communities  collaboration dependence  As  would  go. through  with  the  economies  diversified, Britain  d i m i n i s h . As 25.  peaceful  would the  the  so and  of  the  ties  of  abate,  and  export-import  \u000Csector  shrank  economy, t h e have, t o  importance  collaborating  adjust  their  to  populist  influence concerned capital  in  with  the  produced  political  As  outlined  suggests  that  collaboration essentially business initial Canadian  political  Robinson,  stage  of  colonies  continuing  the  why  wrote  these  democratically have  they  remained  that  \"At  virtually elected loyal  American  investments  of  for  instance,  and  model  political  colonies  mutually  stemmed  profitable  Kingdom.  After  the  under  Imperial  rule,  the  these  under  colonial  anti-imperialist l o y a l l y within sight,  autonomous ministries  to the  was  United  regarded  first,  losing  Settlers  self-government  cooperated  risk  collaboration  and  colonization enjoyed  them .would  collaborators.  economic  growing  with  Robinson  normally  Robinson  the  domestic  Robinson  effects,  by  their  or  large  ' D i s l o y a l ' White  \" n o t a b l y n a t i o n a l i s t i c , and  yet,  which  and  connections  constitutions. as  in  o f the. B r i t i s h N o r t h from  with  movements.  groups of p o t e n t i a l  the  their  foundations  national  manner  t h e emergence o f new  to  e l i t e s associated  certain  'Loyal'  relative  empire.\"  30  governments politically,  the  i t i s not states,'  democratic  empire.\"  easy  to  see  with  their  and' p a r l i a m e n t s ,  should  31  He  discounted  cultural  Ronald Robinson, \" I m p e r i a l Theory and t h e Q u e s t i o n o f I m p e r i a l i s m a f t e r Empire,\" J o u r n a l o f I m p e r i a l and Commonwealth H i s t o r y X I I , 2 (1984):45-46 Ronald R o b i n s o n , . \" C o n c l u s i o n : R a i l w a y s and I n f o r m a l Empire,\" i n R a i l w a y I m p e r i a l i s m ed., Ronald Robinson,(Westport: Greenwood P r e s s , 3 1  26  \u000Cties  between  preferring needing  British  to  see  only  financial  Robinson wrote  North  America  and  Great  \"proto-nationalist  guarantees\u2022 'to  Britain,  politicians\"  .ensure ' t h e i r  loyalty.  that,  Depending almost e n t i r e l y on the U n i t e d .Kingdom f o r t h e i r e x p o r t market and on London f o r t h e i r l o n g - r u n c a p i t a l , t h e y were bound up w i t h empire i n t a c i t a l l i a n c e o f f r e e t r a d e and f r e e i n s t i t u t i o n s . ' I t i s not s u r p r i s i n g t h a t t h e wheat merchants o f Toronto and M o n t r e a l . . ..took t h e i r loyalist p o l i t i c s from the i m p e r i a l e x p o r t - i m p o r t s e c t o r ; what i s s u r p r i s i n g i s t h a t n a t i o n a l i s t i c c o l o n i a l p o l i t i c i a n s and t h e i r p a r o c h i a l - m i n d e d c o n s t i t u e n t s d i d much t h e same. 32  Robinson made much of from a p o s s i b l e description  of  the  threat  annexation to the the  to  colonial  allegiance  United States.  1846-1849 p e r i o d  i s summed up  Robinson's as  follows;  A f t e r B r i t a i n r e p e a l e d i t s Corn Laws i n 184 6 and t h e r e b y \u2022 ended i t s p r e f e r e n t i a l t r e a t m e n t o f g r a i n and f l o u r s h i p p e d t h r o u g h M o n t r e a l v i a S t . Lawrence water r o u t e ; t h e M o n t r e a l m e r c a n t i l e c l a s s became bankrupt - and i t s l o y a l t y became almost u n i v e r s a l l y d i s a f f e c t e d . Something had t o be done t o r e e s t a b l i s h p r o s p e r i t y f o r t h i s group and f o r c o l o n i a l , merchants g e n e r a l l y , not only, because t h e y had s t a r t e d t o clamor f o r a n n e x a t i o n t o the U n i t e d S t a t e s , but a l s o because c o l o n i a l governments were dependent on t h e i r i m p o r t - e x p o r t s e c t o r s f o r revenue. 33  The was  the  annexation movement was Montreal  Tory  protest  a short-lived against  power at' home with the  g r a n t i n g of  184.8,  loss  and  British This  is  movement  from  their  markets  after  confirmed which  by  of  repeal  all  of the  of  r e s p o n s i b l e government  in  the  of  major  fact  1991j p. 175. i b i d . , p. 17 6. 33 Robinson, \".Rail-way,\" p. 133. 2  27  the  that  Corn  dual  as  losses  preferential  the  highlights  their  phenomena,  access  Laws i n  scholarship it  to  was  a  the  184-9. on  the  fleeting  \u000Cdevelopment, and  involved, no major p o l i t i c a l  leaders  time.  after  expressions  34  In  fact,  the  events  l o y a l t y f o r the Empire i n c r e a s e d need  to  dispel  Nevertheless, used  any  1849,  as Montreal T o r i e s  appearance  Robinson, argues  collaborative  of  that  bargains  of  the  to  of  the of.  felt  the  disloyalty.  British  government  strengthen  colonial  a l l e g i a n c e whenever 'annexation threatened', thus b i n d i n g \"the  fraying  imperial  connection.\"  f o r the Grand Trunk r a i l w a y the  l o y a l t y of  from not  the  the  surprising,  l a r g e l y railway According \u2022example  were o f f e r e d  colonies  Annexationists.\"  Financial  36  37  therefore,  against Robinson that  internal  concludes  colonial  confirm  challenge  that  it  politics  is  were  politics. to  of .. how.  Robinson, British  railway capital  imperialism attracted  businessmen and  p o l i t i c i a n s i n t o commercial,  hence- p o l i t i c a l  c o l l a b o r a t i o n with the  interests  uphold  to  up  guarantees  \" c h i e f l y to  the  3 5  the  imperial  was  an  colonial  financial,  expansion of connection.  and  British This  See Cephas D. A l l i n and George M. Jones, A n n e x a t i o n , \u2022 P r e f e r e n t i a l Trade and R e c i p r o c i t y , (London: Mason Book, Co., 1912); J . I . L i t t l e , \"The S h o r t L i f e o f a L o c a l P r o t e s t Movement: The A n n e x a t i o n C r i s i s - of 1849-1850 i n the E a s t e r n Townships,\" J o u r n a l of the Canadian H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , 3 (1992): 45; P e t e r Way, \"The Canadian Tory r e b e l l i o n o f 1849 and the Demise o f S t r e e t P o l i t i c s i n T o r o n t o , \" B r i t i s h J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s 10 (1995) : 10; G e r a l d A. H a l l o w e l l , \"The R e a c t i o n of the Upper Canadian T o r i e s t o the A d v e r s i t y of 184 9: A n n e x a t i o n and the B r i t i s h American League,\"' O n t a r i o H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n Papers ( 1970) : 41. 34  35  A.W. R a s p o r i c h , \" I m p e r i a l Sentiment i n the P r o v i n c e of- Canada d u r i n g the Crimean War, 1854-1856,\" i n The S h i e l d o f A c h i l l e s : A s p e c t s o f Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n Age ed., W.L. -Morton, ( M o n t r e a l : M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart L t d . , 1.968) p. 140. Robinson, \" R a i l w a y s , \" p. 176. i b i d . , p. 178 . . . . 3 6 3 7  28  \u000Crelationship connection easier  \"assumed  between, the  i t would  movements  38  be  dependence  to contain  analysis  on London  t o the s t r e n g t h  return,  London  Office  the c o l o n i e s  that  f o r public  crucial  Railway  a n t i - i m p e r i a l  economic  political  t o comply  bankers  the c o l o n i s t s ' works  showed  attempted,  connection.  and,future  t o which  and succeeded or f a i l e d ,  favour  of  negotiations imperial  the  involved  imperial most  relationship  to  the 39  the C o l o n i a l  t o m o b i l i z e the  connection.  politics  Because  o f the c e n t r a l problems  i n B r i t i s h \u2022 North  In  loans.  power o f the C i t y of London t o i n f l u e n c e c o l o n i a l in  the  financial  on the \" ' l o y a l t y '  the extent  of  and patronage was  necessary s e c u r i t y f o r past  politics  politics  of the i m p e r i a l  insisted  with  .  of the r a i l w a y  him t o conclude  empire\" as.a  the  ( i t a l i c s added).;  Robinson's led  the stronger  c o l o n i e s and the mother country, the  and t o persuade,  i m p e r i a l ' wishes \"  period  that  America  the  i n thein  the  mid-nineteenth'century,'Robinson viewed them as a .standpoint for  studying  perpetuating on  the development  empire.  additional  ways  the i m p e r i a l t i e . Railway p o l i t i c s thus  the g r a n t i n g  consolidate  of  of i m p e r i a l  the l o y a l t y  financial  of B r i t i s h  .  i b i d . ,' p. 22 . i b i d . , p. 22.  guarantees  North  \u2022  .  29  focuses  so as  America  of  to '  to the  \u000CRobinson's the  interpretation  Union p e r i o d  pitted  of Canadian p o l i t i c s \"during  Reform, \" a n n e x a t i o n i s t s  a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s t s \" , a g a i n s t moderate like Gait.  John  A.  Macdonald,  These  4 0  .views,  loyalty  was  open - market,  - Georges  Cartier  provided  and  were  Alexander  in  fact  themselves, but i n l i g h t of Robinson's something, that  and  could  be  Liberal-Conservatives  politicians. The  radical  \"empire- l o y a l i s t s , \" men  empire-loyalists  \"proto-nationalists\"'  and  bought were  '.on the bought  , \u2022 policy  of  colonial 41  42  a i d to  politicians  patronage.\" ' In t h i s p o l i t i c a l agenda.  imperial  way,  with  railway  Robinson wrote  railway \"a  politics  expansion  bonanza dominated  of the  that  Every community wanted t h e b e n e f i t s o f a r a i l w a y c o n n e c t i o n ; and railway patronage and' p o r k - b a r r e l l i n g became i n c r e a s i n g l y important i n c o l o n i a l p o l i t i c s . Each.side a l s o r e a l i z e d t h a t r a i l w a y s would g r e a t l y change t h e economic-and p o l i t i c a l s t r e n g t h o f v a r i o u s i n t e r e s t groups w i t h i n t h e c o l o n i e s . T r a d i t i o n a l p o l i t i c a l bonds o f language, c u l t u r e , and r e l i g i o n became l e s s i m p o r t a n t as new a l l i a n c e s were - ' \u2022 formed i n ' p u r s u i t o f r a i l w a y w e a l t h . 43  Domestic politicians prosperity. politicians\"  politics  adopt  therefore  imperial  Robinson firmly  railway  posited retained  demanded  that  colonial  policies  that  promised  that . \" l o y a l i s t ' c o l o n i a l their  hold  on  office  by  A l e x a n d e r G a i t had i n f a c t been one o f t h e l e a d i n g members, o f t h e B r i t i s h N o r t h America, league, t h e group which f o r a s h o r t time f l o a t e d the a n n e x a t i o n i d e a . See A. A. Den O t t e r , \"Alexander G a i t , t h e 1859 T a r i f f , and Canadian Economic N a t i o n a l i s m , \" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review L X I I I (1982): 160. Robinson, \" R a i l w a y s , \" p. 177. Robinson, \" I m p e r i a l ' T h e o r y , \" p. 46. Robinson, \" R a i l w a y s , \" p. 12. 4 0  4 1  4 2  4 3  30  \u000Cconverting and  the  flow  political  platforms not,  it  contracts farmers,  the  anti-imperial radical  imperial, reason  politics  through support,  though  of  railway  .- As  colonial  way  in  like  ministers  John  Alexander  A. Gait.  greater  could  for  lawyers  and  their  It  was'  'for  became to  to  win  of  their  allure-of  4 6  and  attraction  the  the this  \u2022'railway  bring most  lines popular  lose, i t again/when  the  ..  was. . r e v i v e d ,  Robinson  argues  'radical \u2022 anti-imperialists'  assemblies  Macdonald, Th.ey  to  d r i e d up.  and  and  for  promised  expect  markets  politicians  tended  than  Railway  4 5  \"whatever  .extent  who  prosperity  'annexationists'  that  capitalists.\"  a  capital  fees  -railway  often  succeeded.  s u s c e p t i b l e to  constituencies they  more  politicians,  great  politicians'  most  for  populist  were as  to  The  the  so  as  and  who  railways  time  g e n e r a l \" p u b l i c . The  rhetoric,  connection  politics'.'  the  be  followings  stage,  speculators,  f o r the to  vote-winning  election  loyalists  for land  proved  At  4 4  patronage  travel  into  political  empire  profits  spoil.s  flow  the  offered  convenient  capital  patronage.  became was  of  to  -Georges  moderate Etienne  c o u l d \".be.. r e l i e d  upon  gave  conservatives Cartier, to  keep  .and the  i b i d . , p.14 - '. '\u2022;'\u2022 ' The L i b e r a l - C o n s e r v a t i v e c o a l i t i o n , which, i n h e r i t e d power from t h e pro-development Hinksite Reformers, ' c o n t r o l l e d the provincial l e g i s l a t u r e d u r i n g t h e second -half o f t h e Union p e r i o d f o r a l l but a s h o r t time' i n 1863. See P a u l G. Cornell,' The A l i g n m e n t o f P o l i t i c a l Groups i n Canada, 1841-1867 (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o P r e s s , 1962) . ' \u2022. \u2022 Robinson, \"The E x c e n t r i c I d e a . . . \" p. 275. 44  6  31  \u000Cinflow  of  railway  capital  benefits  coming.  with  Their  appeals  coalitions,  to  religious  combining  and  ethnic  communities, converged on l o y a l i s t Canadian p r i n c i p l e s . The railway  contracts  bargains allowed  of  were c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the c o l l a b o r a t i v e  informal'- i m p e r i a l i s m .  to sink  and  I f the  Grand  Trunk  i t s l i n e s shut down, the  was  responsible  l o y a l i s t p o l i t i c i a n s would c e r t a i n l y s i n k w i t h them. The - e x p o r t - i m p o r t s e c t o r s  and  a growing  reliance  on  r a i l w a y t r a n s p o r t a t i o n tended t o i n f l u e n c e d o m e s t i c p o l i t i c s in  f a v o u r of' p o l i t i c a l  i n p u t s ' were  collaboration with  sufficient  to e s t a b l i s h i m p e r i a l  and so B r i t i s h economic .expansion was cooperation,  from  the  governments  and  elections, which  Economic  affiliations  translated into  local  i n s p i t e of the w i t h d r a w a l of f o r m a l i m p e r i a l  r u l e i n exchange 'came  London.  for - responsible British  so s u p p l i e d  staving  would  private  bring  o f f the about  government. sectors  went  the patronage \"populist  the  demise  The l o a n s which to  which  national of  colonial often  won  movements\"  47  the  collaborative  succeeded  i n detaching  structure. In  time,  when  \"nationalists  enough m e d i a t o r s from c o l o n i a l regimes of  n o n - c o o p e r a t i o n , \" the B r i t i s h  compelled  to  withdraw,  48  47 48  colonial office  unless i t could  replacement of the \" d i s l o y a l \" -  into a united  bring  would about  government o f f i c i a l s ,  Robinson, \"Non-European F o u n d a t i o n s . . . \" p. Robinson, \"The E x c e h t r i c I d e a . . . \" p. 272.  32  -  126.  front be the  and i n  \u000Cthe case of B r i t i s h North America, elected more  collaborative  opponents.  officials,  Robinson  by i t s  i d e n t i f i e s -the  s t r u g g l e between, the John S a n d f i e l d Macdonald Reformers and the  Liberal  Conservatives  as such  Government  \"exerted  improperly  i n Canada's domestic  the  Grand  imperialism rising  Trunk  railway.  is  49  colonial  imperial  a case  when the I m p e r i a l  influence  unofficially  politics\"  Thus,  so as t o p r o t e c t  the c l a s s i c a l  c h a l l e n g e d . b y ; Robinson's nationalism forcing  and,  theory .of-'  .formula  imperial policy  of  a  makers  \u2022 i n t o c o l l a b o r a t i v e bargains i n order to maintain the Empire. Disloyalty  i s here  regard t o c o l o n i a l Peter thesis  by  seen as a r e j e c t i o n  Baskerville examining  government richer,  of of  elaborated the  conflict  on  to  John  5 0  collaboration the  Macdonald  Baskerville' offers  and more t e x t u r e d  49  Imperial  of Canada, \u2022 and the  Sandfield  18 64 .  the  between  f o r the Province  the  1862  sensitive,  with  policies.  government's . agenda aspirations  of \"orthodoxy\"  portrait  Reform a  much  of Canadian  Robinson p l a c e s h i s t h e o r y i n t h e h i s t o r i c a l c o n t e x t o f i m p e r i a l h i s t o r i o g r a p h y i n R. Robinson, \"Oxford i n I m p e r i a l H i s t o r i o g r a p h y , \" i n O x f o r d and t h e Idea o f Commonwealth, eds., F. Madden and D.K. F e i l d h o u s e (London: Croom Helm, 1982) pp. 30-48. P e t e r B a s k e r v i l l e , \" I m p e r i a l Agendas and ' D i s l o y a l ' C o l l a b o r a t o r s : D e c o l o n i z a t i o n and t h e John S a n d f i e l d Macdonald M i n i s t r i e s , 1862-1864,\" in O l d O n t a r i o : Essays i n Honour o f J-.M.S. C a r e l e s s , e d s . D a v i d Keane and C o l i n Read, (Toronto: Dundurn P r e s s , 1990) pp. 234. See a l s o B a s k e r v i l l e , \"The P e t Bank, t h e L o c a l S t a t e and t h e I m p e r i a l C e n t e r , 1850-1864,\" J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s 20 (1985): 22-46, and MichaelP i v a , \" F i n a n c i n g t h e Union:- The Upper Canadian Debt and F i n a n c i a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n t h e Canadas, 1837-45,\" i b i d . , 25 (1990-91): 82-98. 5 0  33  \u000Cpolitics  during t h i s period  than does Robinson,  with his exceptional'scholarship Baskerville state  of  loyalty  Britain's and  the  free  in  was  cultivation  of  Robinson's  the  colonies  trade era.  With the  g r a n t i n g - of  government  action,  adopts  i n other areas:  to  loyalty.\"  private  find  investment  \"maintain imperial  at  the  dawn  r e p e a l of  \"new  I n s t e a d of  5 2  from the  loyalty.\"  By  5 3  the  ensured,  as  long  -development of and  for  John A.  the  which  Macdonald and  Macdonald  direct City  enticing  political  chronicles  political  control  Macdonald  dictates.\" and  action.  his  5 4  even  nationalist  According finance  to  minister  the  used  to  c o l o n y would available  for  infrastructure,  of  the  Sandfield  powers  pursuit  for  of to  stance  local adopt  vis  Baskerville, Luther  like  'loyal'.  greater This  for  collaborators  attempts  grasp  Imperial  local politicians  l e d them \"somewhat n a t u r a l l y ,  independent' or  imperial  to  the  Great  administrative  c a p i t a l was  colonial  the  Corn Laws  would be  transportation  kept  of  mechanisms  Georges E t i e n n e C a r t i e r  ministries  \"independent\"  British  colony's  patronage  Baskerville  more  as  of  the  i n t o . c o l l a b o r a t i v e b a r g a i n s , the l o y a l t y of the be  51  interpretation  R e s p o n s i b l e \"Government,  forced  consistent  a  a vis  Sandfield  Holton  were  Peter B a s k e r v i l l e , \" T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , S o c i a l Change, and State F o r m a t i o n , Upper Canada, 1841-1864,\" i n Colonial Leviathan; State F o r m a t i o n i n the M i d - N i n e t e e n t h - C e n t u r y eds., A l l a n Greer and Ian R a d f o r t h (To.ronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1992), pp. 230-256. B a s k e r v i l l e , \" I m p e r i a l Agendas...,\" p. 236. i b i d . , p. 236. i b i d . , p. 250. 51  52  53  54  34  \u000Cdetermined to disentangle unequal  economic  and  the c o l o n i a l  financial  government from the  relations  British  \"this  fiscal  capitalists.  .Baskerville  notes  disengagement  represented  the  decolonisation.  It logically  preceded  independence.\"  B a s k e r v i l l e sees the p o l i c i e s of the  ministry  as .an  economic  \"early  nationalism.\"  The to  55  that  with  sine  example  of  qua  a l l other  Canadian  the  l o y a l t y - of  could  by  the  not' be  government  reform and  colonial  government  any d i s p l a y s of independent  Reformers. tampered  expected  of  according  the  m i n i s t r y . B a s k e r v i l l e b e l i e v e s t h a t the I m p e r i a l  volition  forms  5 6  question  would not countenance  of  fiscal  r e a c t i o n of the I m p e r i a l government was,  B a s k e r v i l l e , to  nbn  the  The  i m p e r i a l - c o l o n i a l agenda  with. . Therefore, Sandfield  \"complete e x i s t i n g p l a n s c o n c e r n i n g and the t a r i f f . A n y t h i n g  political  the  Macdonald  Imperial  government  to  the Grand Trunk,' m i l i t i a  e l s e would be d i s l o y a l . \" . 5 7  The response of the I m p e r i a l government q u i t e n a t u r a l l y conformed existing action Liberal  to  t h e ' c o l l a b o r a t i o n model.  mediators to  replace  \"disloyal\", them  Conservatives.  S a n d f i e l d ' Macdonald  5 5 5 6 57  with  the  the  According  35  Imperial  \"loyal\"  found centre  opposition,  t o B a s k e r v i l l e , the  ministries  i b i d . , p. 248 . i b i d . , p. 248 . i b i d . , p. 241. .  Having  forced  the  the took the \"John  imperial  \u000Cgovernment to  intervene  that p o l i t i c a l Canadian  and  up  the  ante i n order  to- ensure  c o n t r o l would devolve i n t o the hands of  leaders.\"  loyal  58  Synopsis of C o l l a b o r a t i o n Theory i n B r i t i s h North America The  working  America the  is  commercial, expansion  of  politics;  key  Financial levers They  connection...\"  59  was  exploited  and  between 1862 a  'disloyal'  The  imperial  the  British  5 8  59  60  political  in  were  used  in  the  the  attracted  the  support  London  capital  railways  \"served of  1864  to help  bring  and  the  accession  of  Government  one  exercised  'to , s t r e n g t h e n imperial  about the a  loyal  downfall  ministry.\"  of the many d e v i c e s to  1852  influence  Robinson, \" R a i l w a y I m p e r i a l i s m , \" p. 18. i b i d . , p. 18 .  6 0  that  colonial  i b i d . , p. 251.  36  as  colonial  \"between,1849 and-  and  but  to 'the  Intercolonial, railway  f o r t h i s purpose  guarantee was  the  imperial  direction  f o r the  with  investment  .systematically  into  the  through them, to r e i n f o r c e the  The  North  politicians  uphold  attracting  influencing  capital  and  to  to  British  collaboration  intervention  assistance  for  just  businessmen  role  in  British  interests  Government  ' l o y a l ' p a r t i e s , and  of  and  British  a  imperialism  show how  colonial  of  played  powerful  to  financial  connection.  colonies.  railway  intended  loyalty  market  of  \u2022  \u000Cpolitics the  and  p o l i c i e s . . I t was  manipulation  land  grants,  of  imperial  the  The the  and  the  colonies  to  theory  the  motivated by  shipping  ..unofficial  comply  subsidies;,  for  support  defense,  .connection the  the  easier  assumes  between  .the  i t - would be and  imperial the  lands..  defined  movements  for  to  will.  Britain's  Intercolonial  t h e i r d e s i r e to c o n s o l i d a t e  in  a  very  the  railway  l o y a l t y of '.  61  specific  investment  order  to  delay\u2022the  n a t i o n a l i s t subversion  Robinson  theorized  was  empire which that  Office would  the  be  that  [British  material  Canada's  American  colonies  of  had  experience  Americans],  at  imperial  the  goal  manner  departed. with  the  i b i d . , p. 10. 37  than  of  the  American  expense  of  a  in  wrote  rebels,  f o l l y of  the from  way  Robinson  in rule  inevitabledeparture  Government took care to avoid the North  colonies  development  i n e v i t a b l e . . I t was  i n a more o r d e r l y  \" A f t e r . previous  Imperial  for  sense, .. the  received  Imperial  capital  to'  persuade  B r i t i s h North America to the empire Therefore,  .of  relations, relations,with  economic  with  with  influence  Britain  heretofore  mother country,  supply  i n conjunction  the expansion i n t o western  anti-imperial ..political  d e c i s i o n s \u2022 to was  and  stronger  colonies  the  States,  and  dependence.- f o r  collaboration  contain  and  c o n t r o l of i n t e r c o l o n i a l  the United  that  mail  official  governors,'' c o l o n i a l imperial  employed  the  coercing defeated  \u000Creconquest. of  the  The  62  colonies  B r i t i s h regarded i t n e c e s s a r y t h a t be  loyalty  e i t h e r c o e r c e d or bought i n o r d e r  that  the i n e v i t a b l e d e c o l o n i z a t i o n would t a k e p l a c e a c c o r d i n g Colonial theory  Offices  timetable.  Robinson  of i m p e r i a l i s m i n c o r p o r a t e d  s t a t e with a theory  argued, h i s  a theory  the  revised  of the c o l o n i a l  of c o l o n i a l n a t i o n a l i s m , and  so a c c o u n t s  f o r the coming of independence. The that  two  the  main t h r u s t s  motive  economic, and r e s t e d was In  force  of  the the  collaboration thesis  are  imperial  was  connection  t h a t the e n t i r e c a s t of thought upon which i t  completely  locating  of  the  a n t i t h e t i c a l t o Canadian  mainspring  of  imperialism  conditions,  c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e o r i s t s are  argument  originally  established  by  contended  important  factor  behind  interest  financial  capital.  came t o B r i t i s h  I t may  be  argued  economic a line  \u2022 the  John, Hobson who  6 3  in  applying  anti-imperialist,  British  nationalism.  that  English  that in  the  most  empire  was  immigrants  who  N o r t h America were i n s p i r e d s i m p l y  p r o s p e c t of making a b e t t e r l i v i n g Canada. I t may  by  r u l e p a t r i o t s . The  was  the  meeting- and  settlement the  and  development of  s o l v i n g .of m a t e r i a l  growing n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y may  have been due  the  have been  as t r u e then as i t i s today, t h a t b u s i n e s s p e o p l e are not a  of  Canada  problems.  i n large part  i b i d . , p . 175 . John A l l e t t , New L i b e r a l i s m : the P o l i t i c a l Economy of J.A. (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , ' 1 9 8 1 ) . ,  as  The to  52  63  38  Hobson  \u000Cthe  material  advantage - o f the country  and the'  pecuniary  b e n e f i t s of the i n h a b i t a n t s . The the  question  1830's  and  w r i t i n g s \u2022 of . the question for  1840's,  and  e a r l y part  government that so a g i t a t e d which  dominated  of t h i s century,  government was a r u t h l e s s  and s a l a r i e s , and to whom they  there  historical  was not j u s t a  of p o l i t i c a l d e s t i n y . At the bottom of the movement  responsible  jobs  of r e s p o n s i b l e  preoccupation'with  should  go.  No doubt  64  were high-minded Canadians, l i k e Robert Baldwin, whose  income  own  personal  aggrandizement; but possessed too good a p o l i t i c a l  sense not  to  be  precluded  aware  administration other  than  appreciation remembered  any  that . jobs  seamy  through  vital  devoted  his  to  h i s party.  partisans.  of Canadian p o l i t i c s that  business,  came along  were  of  most  people  No  i s possible  could  adequate  unless  not a f f o r d  i t  is  t o be i n  to t h e i r pockets. This made p o l i t i c s  which  i t was, even  before  the  railways  t o make i t even more generous. N e v e r t h e l e s s , by  c o n t r a c t i n g ' the.  imperial  relationship  to  a  simplistic  economic model, Robinson and B a s k e r v i l l e c o n s c i o u s l y the  The  of' the country could not .simply, be c a r r i e d on  p o l i t i c s without regard a  question  non-economic  factors  which  underpinned  neglect  the c o l o n i a l  commitment to the empire. Gordon T. S t e w a r t , The O r i g i n s of'Canadian' P o l i t i c s : A Comparative Approach (Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1986); S t e w a r t , \"John A. Macdonald's G r e a t e s t Triumph,\" .Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review L X I I I , 1 (1982): 3. 64  39  \u000CCollaboration The of  collaboration  national  them t o  the  placing  loyalty.  The  resulted  in  British  North  of  Historical  a  in  of  have c o n s i d e r e d  national  antithesis  between  to  being  that  British,  was  approach,  leading  and  the  as  an  absolute  forms  or . group  renders  a  disloyalty. the  loyalty; to  subject  other  approach  loyalty  the  loyalty  Robinson ' underestimating Americans  Methodology  formalistic  formalistic  contradistinction  idea  from  concept  it  and  theorists  loyalty  treat  value,  Thesis  to  stark  This  .has  importance  to  Britain,  identities  and  of  the  British  North'Americans. The with  formalistic  the  of  loyalty  nature  of  this  scientist  to  deal  a  of  the  was  but  the  one  such  a  regional  matter  approach of  is either  as  may  to  or  other  inspires  standard, loyal  that  to  an  other  national  one  fixed  to  40  national  treat  While loyalty  motivates  unique forms  The  social  entity.  of  form  national  of  loyalty  loyalties.  specifications  or\" d i s l o y a l ) .  the  methodology  it  deals  polarities.  compels  the  consider  Robinson,  absolute  show  antonymous  by  bleak  an  group l o y a l t y ,  potentially  as  citizen  literature  in  approach  loyalty  scientist  formalistic as  with  form of  social  devotion,  utilized  question  categorical  survey  approach,  The  loyalty  (i.e.,  the  \u000CThe  reliance  upon  a .formalistic  approach  tends  reduce the whole a n a l y s i s of l o y a l t y i n a B r i t i s h community  to  a  set  of  polarities  which  Robinson's  collaboration  l o y a l t i e s , of order to  oversimplified  obscure  more  than  thesis  the' pre-Confederation  settlement  antitheses  they  reduces period  to  illuminate. the  to  or  complex  simplicity \u2022 in  to- come up with c o n t r a d i s t i n c t i o n which n e a t l y f i t s  the  dualism  antithesis  of  nationalism  i s i n a very  accurately  singling  and  r e a l ' sense  out  imperialism.  a  in  This  c a r i c a t u r e , perhaps  some ' d i s t i n c t i v e  feature,  but  g r o s s l y d i s t o r t i n g i n the emphasis which Robinson g i v e s i t . The not  main d i f f i c u l t y presented  from  its  differences,  by such a n t i t h e s e s a r i s e s  oversimplification  but  from  its  or  exaggeration  attribution  exclusiveness  to the phenomena of l o y a l t i e s  c o e x i s t e d and  overlapped  in  false  to  homogeneity emerging with  a  assume  i n the Union p e r i o d , and  and  therefore  Canadian loyalty  that  identity  to  a  nationalism to' conclude was  greater  i n the  exist  is that  a  today. matter  loyalty  intrinsically British  mutual  which n a t u r a l l y  which n a t i o n a l and. p r o v i n c i a l l o y a l t i e s  is  of  of  to  way It of an  inconsistent  community.  Once. the  mistaken assumption of.mutual e x c l u s i v e n e s s  i s accepted, the-  false . conclusion  to  nationalism British  may  followsserve  as  that an  loyalty  index  of  Empire.  -'  41  .  a  disloyalty  Canadian to- the  \u000CPart of Robinson's dilemma i n d e a l i n g with multiple  l o y a l t i e s , i s again  tied  to- h i s  t o p i c . Robinson e x h i b i t s the s o c i a l  the i s s u e of  approach  scientist's  t o the  tendency t o  s e a r c h ' f o r coherence i n thought which i s not r e a l l y there, a trait  i n d i c a t i v e of the f o r m a l i s t i c  Quentin  Skinner,  the assumption  approach. According- to  i s too o f t e n made t h a t the  thought of a person, or a group of persons, i s something of a  \"closed  system,. \" .  succumbs fallacy.  t o what  disloyalty  are  Boyd  without  due  disregards  this  has c a l l e d  tendency, and  the \" e i t h e r o r \"  kind  regard  for . conceptualization. His  the f u n c t i o n a l i s t ' s dictum  many gradations  these  Shafer  displays  He seeks to a s c e r t a i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o y a l t y or  6 6  approach  Robinson  6S  and too many values  of d i s t i n c t i o n s  without  that  involved  clearly  there  t o make  defining  one's  terms. The during  pattern  the. Union  antithesis  period  the simple  versus  in British  was more i n t r i c a t e  of n a t i o n a l i s m  h i s t o r i c a l process of  of l o y a l t i e s  and i m p e r i a l i s m  North than  would  America  the s t a r k imply.  The  i s ' f a r too complex t o be handled i n terms  dualisms  of empire  versus,nation,  or\" n a t i o n  region.  Nationalism  and P a t r i o t i s m  Q u e n t i n S k i n n e r , \"Meaning and U n d e r s t a n d i n g i n t h e H i s t o r y o f I d e a s , \" H i s t o r y and Theory, v o l . V I I I , 1 (1969): 3. Boyd C. S h a f e r , \" I f We Only Knew More About N a t i o n a l i s m , \" C a n a d i a n Review o f S t u d i e s i n N a t i o n a l i s m , 7, No. 2 (Autumn, 1980): 201. 65  42  \u000CRobinson conceptual  and  B a s k e r v i l l e ' may  confusion  i f they  have  avoided  had d e s c r i b e d  some  the Reform  government's p o l i c i e s as the r e s u l t o f . a t r a d i t i o n a l - B r i t i s h North  American  c o u l d have  patriotism.  The i s s u e  of c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n  been g r e a t l y aided by a d i s t i n c t i o n between the  conception  o f \"nation\", (and  \"patriotism\") .  With  67  \" n a t i o n a l i s m \" )\u2022 and \" s t a t e \" (and  these  conceptual  distinctions - i n  mind, .what was Robinson a c t u a l l y ' d e s c r i b i n g i n h i s s t o r y o f c o n f l i c t between c o l o n i s t s and the C o l o n i a l O f f i c e ? Robinson's o f f e r e d . c r i t e r i a f o r evidence o f an emerging nationalism  could  better  Patriotism i s a loyalty, to - a  political  circumscribed  by  d e s c r i b e d . as  patriotism.  not t o an aggregate of .people, b u t  state. that  be  and  the  state.  It  geographic  territory  expresses  itself  in  a f f e c t i o n f o r the s t a t e , i t s geography, and a l o y a l t y to' i t s i n s t i t u t i o n s . To the extent it  does  so upon \u2022 p o l i t i c a l  that i t d i v i d e s a people a t a l l , ' and' .geographical  c i t i z e n s h i p ; and d o m i c i l e ,  lines,  not upon'  upon  criteria  of  qualities  such as language, c u l t u r e , and race. K a r l D.eutsch  describes  the d i s t i n c t i o n as f o l l o w s :  '  ethnic  '  S t r i c t l y s p e a k i n g , p a t r i o t i s m i s an e f f o r t o r r e a d i n e s s t o promote the i n t e r e s t s o f a l l those persons born' o r l i v i n g \u2022 w i t h i n the same p a t r i a , i . e . c o u n t r y , whereas n a t i o n a l i s m , aims a t p r o m o t i n g the i n t e r e s t s o f a l l . those o f t h e same natio, i.e.,' l i t e r a l l y a group o f - common' d e s c e n t and upbringing, o r rather, ...culture...' P a t r i o t i s m appeals t o a l l r e s i d e n t s o f a country, regardless o f t h e i r e t h n i c  Walker Connor, \"A N a t i o n i s a N a t i o n , i s a S t a t e , i s an. E t h n i c Group, i s a....\" E t h n i c and R a c i a l S t u d i e s , 1 (19.78): 379-88. 67  43  \u000Cbackground. N a t i o n a l i s m appeals t o a l l members o f an e t h n i c group, r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r c o u n t r y o f r e s i d e n c e . 6 8  Patriotism constitutional  in  this  context  development  culminating  in  independence  the  of  sovereignty.  symbols  or  self-government  creation aim  was  of  an  the  and  as  This  69  be  Their  alike, the  those  \"nationalists\"  nation.'\u2022 p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y  increased acquisition  movement  for  considered  a  the autonomy,  of  most  politicians, were  for  nation.  the  later  for  expansion  - were not  distinct  from  trying the  state.  asking of  status  Canadians  Its  and  i n h e r i t e d , .rhetoric  in  7 0  the  Reformers  simply  their  of  responsible call  differentiated  and  successors -  include  autonomous,'self-governing  ideals  self-government  labeled  the  American  using  liberal 7 1  and  not  an  Conservatives  subjects. of  of  North  self-government, Whig  towards  psychologically  erection  British Liberal  should  would  as of  British  the  who to  British  limits  have create  British  been a  new  nation.  7 2  K.W. Deutsch, N a t i o n a l i s m and S o c i a l Communication (Cambridge:' M.I.T. P r e s s , 1966), pp. 40, 288; f o r s i m i l a r , though not always i d e n t i c a l usages of the c o n c e p t i o n s , see a l s o C a r l t o n J.H. Hayes, E s s a y s oh .' N a t i o n a l i s m (New York: New York, M a c m i l l a n , 1931) ch. 1; E l i e Kedourie, Nationalism (Cambridge: B l a c k w e l l , 1993), e s p e c i a l l y pp. 73-74. 68  69  George Heiman, \"The 19th Century Legacy: Nationalism or P a t r i o t i s m ? , \" i n N a t i o n a l i s m i n Canada, ed. , P e t e r R u s s e l l (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1966), pp. 323-40. D e s p i t e Heiman's p e r s u a s i v e argument t h a t much of the c o n c e p t u a l c o n f u s i o n s u r r o u n d i n g s t a t e l o y a l t y c o u l d be c l e a r e d up by a d o p t i n g the concept of p a t r i o t i s m , the i d e a remains d i s t i n c t l y un-Canadian. \u2022  70  J.M.S. C a r e l e s s , The Union of the Canadas; the Growth of Canadian I n s t i t u t i o n s , 1841-1857 .(Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1967).' P h i l i p Buckner, \"The T r a n s i t i o n t o R e s p o n s i b l e Government; Some R e v i s i o n s i n Need of R e v i s i n g . \" i n C.C. E l d r i g e , ed., From R e b e l l i o n t o P a t r i a t i o n ; Canada and B r i t a i n i n the N i n e t e e n t h and T w e n t i e t h C e n t u r i e s (Wales, S t u d i e s i n Wales Group, 1989,) pp. 1-25. C a r o l W i l t o n , \" B r i t i s h t o the Core; R e s p o n s i b l e Government i n Canada West,\" i n C a r o l W i l t o n , ed., Change and C o n t i n u i t y ; a Reader on 44 71  72  \u000CTheir  appeal  for  increased  \u2022'  autonomy  was  state-circumscribed  call  f o r s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t . . The  Canadian  was  exclusively  statehood  directed  toward  pursuing  i t s own  of  the  sovereignty.  creation  of  a  political  complete  s e l f - i n t e r e s t , and This  was  a Canadian  a  drive  and  legal,  state,  Canadian  possessing  to  the  symbols  patriotism.  Summary To  summarize,  loyalty,  derived  dynamics  of  does  account  not  Americans features  as  the  the p e r s p e c t i v e administration  Province  independent  relationship  factors  empire.  economic  An  that  relationship. depicts 'disloyalty.  a  and  The stark  Canada  interest  cannot  that  was  .integral  formalistic  the  contracting  the  economic  for the  approach  nature  the  the  commitment  greatly  upon  \"sense  of  colonial-imperial  employed between  of  model,  neglected  r e l i e s . too  to  North  attaining  the c o l o n i a l  contradistinction  The ' c a t e g o r i c a l  By  account  of  i n the  of B r i t i s h  consciously  sustained  account  'nation-building',  simplistic  .have  approach  was  of  to . a  which  determinism  belonging\"  o f an  nationhood.  theorists  non-economic  collaborationist's  f o r the ^continued l o y a l t y  the.  collaboration  to  from  imperial  of  \u2022imperial  the  this  by  Robinson  loyalty approach  and leads  p r e - C o n f e d e r a t i o n Canada (Toronto: M c G r a w - H i l l Ryers'on, 199'2) p. 290.  45  \u000CRobinson  to deal  with, l o y a l t y  as  methodology employed motivates him an emerging  Canadian n a t i o n  potentially  antonymous  thereby Americans British,  underestimates that was  loyalty  an  as an unique  the  and  to t h e i r sense- of i d e n t i t y .  4 6  loyalty  form of  of l o y a l t y .  importance  Britain,  entity.  to c o n s i d e r  to other forms  to  absolute  The to  devotion, Robinson  to  British  the  idea  North  of b e i n g  \u000CChapter  From 'Colony to Nation  From the  the beginning  dominant  political  version  B r i t a i n . . Arthur Nation, Whig the  73  and  School heroes  to 'Limited I d e n t i t i e s '  1  of the t w e n t i e t h  of  achievement  Canadian  of  wrote-  a  the t i t l e  became  an  history.  of the country's  century  history  independent  Lower  of Canadian  Two  7 4  past  emphasized  status  book  were  the  sympathetic  the  the Great  Colony  to  aphorism  d e s c r i b i n g the  According  t o the Whigs,  were  t o - the B r i t i s h  nationalists;  from  called  men  who  independence from Empire, while' the, v i l l a i n s remained  onwards,  were those, who  t i e . . The, f i r s t ,  1  others  strove f o r  were  not  -  they  group were  i m p e r i a l i s t s . And there was, without' q u e s t i o n , a d i f f e r e n c e . \u2022 Most  monographs  development  prior  preoccupation  written  to' 1967  focused  Canada's on  the  political particular  w i t h ' t h i s progress 'towards n a t i o n a l autonomy.  The study of past p o l i t i c s uniquely  on  Canadian  form  was i n f u s e d with the s p i r i t of  nation-building,  an  of a  attitude  consonant with Herbert B u t t e r f i e l d ' s d e s c r i p t i o n of the Whig interpretation the  context  of h i s t o r y .  of B r i t i s h  Butterfield  history  d e f i n e d Whiggery i n  as \"...the  tendency  i n many  h i s t o r i a n s t o w r i t e on the s i d e of P r o t e s t a n t s and-Whigs, t o 73  '  A r t h u r Lower, Colony t o N a t i o n (Toronto: Longmans, Green &amp; Co. 1 94 6.) . \" \u2022 T e r r y Copp, \"The Whig Interpretation of Canadian H i s t o r y , \" Canadian Dimension, v o l . 6 ( A p r i l - M a y , 1969): 23.  47  \u000Cpraise  revolutions  provided  they- have  been  successful,  to  emphasize c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e s o f . p r o g r e s s i n the past and to produce  a  story  glorification political  structures  from  present.  -  i f - not the  The h i s t o r y were  of .Canada's  viewed.' through the  as the contemplation of freedom broadening precedent  towards  an . agreeable  76  like  colonialism,  other  basic,  archetypal  was  forces  of n a t i o n a l i t y  the outcome  the  record  Canadians had ascended colonialism  plot.  which  had  emerged  from  theme of i t s development, a Lower's  general  history  of  t h i s p l o t with c l a s s i c s i m p l i c i t y . Canada, i n  short,  was  nations  had,' as the main  Canada, s t a t e s  history  7 5  and i d e n t i t y  precedent . to  Canada,  great,  i s the' r a t i f i c a t i o n  of the p r e s e n t . \"  p r i s m of h i s t o r y down,  which  of an and of  encounter  imperialism; the noble  from the lowly  between and  the  struggle status  the two Canadian by  which  of dependent  t o the serene heights of autonomous nationhood.  Great B r i t a i n , had always been the r e a l opponent of Canadian nationalism. to  wage  British  The only r e a l s e r i o u s  had been  the s t r u g g l e  struggle  which Canada had  t o win autonomy' i n s i d e \u2022 the  Empire.  H e r b e r t B u t t e r f i e l d , The Whig I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f H i s t o r y (New York: W.W. N o r t o n and Co., 1965) P l e a s e see C a r l Berger, Approaches t o Canadian H i s t o r y (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 1967). For a c r i t i q u e o f B e r g e r ' s approach, i n which, the a u t h o r charges B e r g e r w i t h s h a r i n g many o f t h e w h i g g i s h assumption he c r i t i c i z e s , p l e a s e ' see Graham C a r r , \" I m p e r i a l i s m and N a t i o n a l i s m i n R e v i s i o n i s t H i s t o r i o g r a p h y : A C r i t i q u e o f Some Recent T r e n d s , \" . J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s 17, No. 2 (Summer, 1982): 91-99. 7 5  7 6  48  \u000CThe  development  identified  almost  emancipation  of  Canada's \" n a t i o n a l  exclusively  from  British  emancipation i t s e l f  has  autonomy  was  with  the  process  of:  control.  The  process  of  been represented,  a l l too  often,  a continuous s t r u g g l e between l e g i t i m a t e c o l o n i a l demand obscurantist  imperial resistance.  Whig' v e r s i o n the  of  outcome  nationality national  of and  the  Canada, a c c o r d i n g  emergence of  an  the  encounter  British  development  Canadian  between  imperialism.  could  thus  be  and  to  this  nation,  was  forces  of  the The  as  progress  identified  of  simply  and  e x c l u s i v e l y with.emancipation from B r i t i s h c o n t r o l . The in  a  Whig  vast  social  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of  oversimplification  development.  over-emphasis on almost areas.  to 77  the  the  This - i n  It personified  the  of  of  Canadian  large  'struggle'  exclusion  'nation-building'  part  resulted  political was  due  and  to  the  f o r r e s p o n s i b l e ' government, other  strict  vital  and ' i n t r i g u i n g  d u a l i s t i c , nature  of  the  f o r m a l i s t i c approach to h i s t o r i c a l i n q u i r y . When J.M.S. C a r e l e s s in  1969,  grand  he  released  'limited  Canadian academics  interpretations  accentuating  popularised  of  their  past,  from the  thrall  sanctioning  the growing study of such n e g l e c t e d  77  identities' of  . and  themes such  I n her p r e s i d e n t i a l address t o the Canadian H i s t o r i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n i n 1992, G a i l C u t h b e r t Brandt a d d r e s s e d t h e problem o f i n t e g r a t i n g p r e v i o u s l y o m i t t e d s u b j e c t s , such as r a c e , e t h n i c i t y , and e s p e c i a l l y women's' h i s t o r y , i n t o p o l i t i c a l s t u d i e s p r e v i o u s l y dominated by w h i t e males. P l e a s e see \" N a t i o n a l U n i t y and t h e P o l i t i c s of Political H i s t o r y , \" CHA H i s t o r i c a l Papers (1992): 3-11.  \"  \u2022\u2022\u2022  \u2022 49  \u000Cas  region,  shift  class,  symbolized-  attention with  a  to  locality, by  Ramsay  self-congratulatory to the  the  Quiet  Revolution,  and  feminist  and  students forsake and  of  history  proved  scholars.'  devote themselves to the  mammoth  undertaking  \"The  search  a  and  instead  of  not  e x i s t , we  should  i d e n t i t i e s that we  do  of  class  centennial unacceptable called  upon  economics  to  Canadian i d e n t i t y  assumption t h a t to  He  7 9  for  study have.\"  a  bring 196.4  forth  colored the  type  published  suggested  i d e n t i t y was  looking  Canada  to  and  elusive  seemed  working  increasingly  Morton's  Identity.\"  national  that  study of other, more' p a r t i c u l a r  trying  upon i n W.L.  Canadian for  of  attuned  for  impatience  of .the of  politics  Cook questioned the  work touched  history  Cook i n p a r t i c u l a r  history,  call  of an  resurgence  f u t i l e .search f o r an  identities.  on  A  '67  Canadian  the  7 8  the  paradigmatic  Careless's  grew out  1  national  and  Expo  many Canadian  and  The  r a p i d l y changing r e a l i t y  militancy.  celebrations  gender.  Cook  'limited i d e n t i t i e s  ill-fitted  to  and  doomed  that  the  n a t i o n a l ' i d e n t i t y that  \"the  regional,  ethnic  of  lectures  perhaps  from  the  and  the  start, might class  80  G.R. Cook, \" C e n t e n n i a l C e l e b r a t i o n s , \" I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l , 22 (1967): 48 ; J.M.S. C a r e l e s s , \" L i m i t e d I d e n t i t i e s i n Canada,\" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review 50, 1 (March 1969): 1. I n 1946 W.L. Morton a n t i c i p a t e d t h i s growing r e v o l t a g a i n s t a c e n t r a l i s t b i a s i n Canadian s c h o l a r s h i p , but h i s c a l l f o r a g r e a t e r a t t e n t i o n t o a w i d e r scope o f themes went r e l a t i v e l y unheeded. . P l e a s e see W.L. Morton, \" C l i o i n Canada: The I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f Canadian H i s t o r y , \" i n Approaches t o Canadian H i s t o r y , ed. C a r l B e r g e r (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1967). W.L. Morton, The Canadian I d e n t i t y . (Madison: U n i v e r s i t y of W i s c o n s i n P r e s s , 1968) . \u2022 Cook, (1967) p. 663 78  7 9  8 0  50  \u000CThe  pluralistic  ethnicity nation'  endorsement  and  region  outlook  of  priorities.  and  the  the  past  of  attention  attack  on  to  the  l e d to \"a s h i f t  class,  .'colony  i n ' scholarly  In the excitement of t h i s gold rush towards  f i e l d s of research, the o l d p o l i t i c a l t o p i c s  to  new  seemed tiresome  and i r r e l e v a n t . Academics were quick to .cast a s i d e  what had  become  obsessed  the  dominant  with the e v o l u t i o n of a n a t i o n a l  teleological  cast  which  was  of Canadian autonomy and the composition  identity.  \"\u2022  In 1970, a book appeared which s u b s t a n t i a l l y the  traditional  Whig  doctrine  Berger's Sense of Power, was  rightly hailed  This  brilliant  book  as  81  was  examined  - Canadian i m p e r i a l i s t s  the  relationship  Carl  of ...the . f i r s t  in detail  was  antithesis,  i n fact  and  magnitude.\"  a select  82  number of  - and pursued a s p e c i f i c theme;  imperialism  and n a t i o n a l i s m  i n the  h a l f - c e n t u r y a f t e r C o n f e d e r a t i o n . Concluding that  imperialism its  between  nation-building.  a major work of r e v i s i o n ,  \"an event  men  first  of  challenged  one  variant  of  nationalism,  B e r g e r . s e v e r e l y undermined the  this 83  not  \"imperialist  C a r l Berger, The Sense o'f Power: S t u d i e s I n The Ideas o f Canadian I m p e r i a l i s m , 1867-1914, (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 1970). Robert Page, \" C a r l Berger and t h e I n t e l l e c t u a l O r i g i n s o f Canadian I m p e r i a l i s t Thought, 1867 - 1914,\" J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s , ' V (August, 1970) pp. 39-43. Berger, Sense o f Power, p.259. Others who a l s o view I m p e r i a l i s m and Canadian nationalism as ' v i r t u a l l y synonymous include Norman P e n l i n g t o n , Canada and I m p e r i a l i s m (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 1965), p.' 11, 66; Donald C r e i g h t o n , Canada's . F i r s t Century (Toronto: M a c m i l l a n , 1970) pp. . 91-92; A l l a n Smith, \"Metaphor and Nationality i n North America,\" . Canadian Historical Review, L I , (September, 1970): 255-256.. \u2022. 8 3  51  \u000Cversus  nationalist\"  dualism  of  a  generation  or  more  of  Canadian scholarship'. Berger  showed  English-Canadian  that  sense  the  of  self  was  phenomena than previous  generations  He  d o c t r i n e that  challenged  conflict of  the  the  Whig  between n a t i o n a l i s m and meaning  Canadian  of  the  imperialists  \"sense  and  century  a. much  complex  had  more  l e d one  of  to  there' had  imperialism.  revealed  commitment to t r a d i t i o n  nineteenth  power\"  universal  expect.  existed The  pursuit  experienced themes  such  following  Monro Grant, uncovered thought.  of c e r t a i n Canadians i n the h a l f  Confederation,  and  concentrating  upon  many strands i n the f a b r i c of Canadian imperial  idea  was  the  George Berger  imperialist  interwoven  with  p r o v i d e n t i a l sense of\u2022 m i s s i o n , \u2022 h i s t o r i c a l consciousness; Loyalist  legend,  Canadian  national  racialism,  as  century  George P a r k i n and George T a y l o r Denison,  The  by  ideas of n a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r and-  d e s t i n y . Taking as h i s theme the ideas which l a y behind i m p e r i a l enthusiasm  a  and  a maturing  consciousness.  84  Berger  conception ably  Canadian i m p e r i a l i s m had i n common w i t h a l l n a t i o n a l i s t ideologies a definite c o n c e p t i o n o f what t h e n a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r encompassed, and what i t s d e s t i n y would be. A c c o r d i n g t o t h i s . view, Canadians were B r i t i s h i n t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l associations, p o l i t i c a l i d e a l s , t h e i r preference\u2022 f o r law and o r d e r , and t h e i r c a p a c i t y f o r . s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t . ^ 8  52  the  of a  demonstrated  that  i b i d . , p. 258 . i b i d . , p. 152 .  a  \u000CBerger demonstrated t h a t many Canadians had a composite civic  i d e n t i t y . , T h e i r .Canadian  identity  shaded c o m f o r t a b l y  . i n t o a B r i t i s h n e s s t h a t had d e f i n i t e i m p e r i a l c o n n o t a t i o n s . British  Canadians  Empire's' other  were l i n k e d by a common J  \"white  dominions.\"  loyalty  t o the  According t o Alexander  Brady, democracy i n Canada was t h e p r o d u c t o f \" t r a n s p l a n t e d Britons\" ideas\"  and r e f l e c t e d in  a  t h e \"ascendency  congenial  environment.  of B r i t i s h 86  liberal  English-speaking  Canadians c o u l d l o o k t o t h e i r c u l t u r a l l y d i v e r s e s o c i e t y and see a u n i t y , comparable t o t h a t o f Great B r i t a i n  itself.  8 7  Through a l l t h e v a r i o u s s t r a n d s , one u n i f y i n g t h r e a d i s emphasized  a g a i n and a g a i n by B e r g e r : Canadian  imperialists  were n a t i o n a l i s t s , and i m p e r i a l i s m i n Canada was one v a r i e t y of Canadian contrary  nationalism.  to  development, to  abandon  the British  thus  nation-building N o r t h Americans  one l o y a l t y  incompatibility required  Berger's.thesis  between  f o r another  school'  of  because  they  loyalties.  that,  political  d i d not f e e l  their, multiple  i s an a l t e r n a t i v e  demonstrated  t h e need saw : no What i s  conception of l o y a l t y t o  t h a t o f f e r e d by t h e f o r m a l i s t i c approach.  A l e x a n d e r Brady, Democracy i n t h e Dominions: A Comparative Study of. I n s t i t u t i o n s , (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 1952) p. 7. A l l a n Smith, \"Metaphor and N a t i o n a l i t y i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , \" i n Canada - An American N a t i o n ? Essays on C o n t i n e n t a l i s m , I d e n t i t y , and t h e Canadian Frame o f Mind, ( M o n t r e a l : McGill-Queen's U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1994) p. 142. . ' 37  53  \u000CChapter Three  Loyalty as a Psychological Phenomena  In  this  section,  I  will  elaborate  on  the  \" l o y a l t y \" i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l i n order to p r o v i d e framework' f o r a topic  in  the  more  circumscribed  context  of  thesis.  In the f i r s t  brief  of  some  survey  how  a  of  conceptual  i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the  .multiple  collaboration  topic  loyalties  place  theorists  and  I. w i l l  have  the  offer  a  conceptualized  l o y a l t y . I w i l l - then present  a concise account of l o y a l t y as  it  paper,  will  be a p p l i e d  i n this  emphasizing \"how  should be viewed as a p s y c h o l o g i c a l phenomena. T h i s will  endeavor  indeed the  to  establish  that  multiple  loyalty chapter  loyalties  do  e x i s t , and to provide .a more s u i t a b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r  resilience  of these  loyalties.  I see t h i s  theme  as' a  i  significant  feature  i n the d i s c u s s i o n of the c o l l a b o r a t i o n  thesis.  .  Next,  I will  describe  how  loyalty  functions,  showing why i t i s a v i t a l  component of p o l i t i c a l  will  provides  describe  how  loyalty  i n d i v i d u a l s may organize more i n t e l l i g i b l e with  abundance,  i t will and  society. I  through  t h e i r l i v e s , making t h e i r  which  existence  and empowering- people to -make l i f e - c h o i c e s  some r e f e r e n c e  account,  a pattern  thereby  to a known framework. be  emphasized  the impact  that  of m u l t i p l e 54  As part, of t h i s  loyalties loyalties . .  '  exist  in  will  be  \u000Caddressed  as- p a r t  of the s e c t i o n concerning  loyalty  t o the'-  nation. L o y a l t y as a Concept. Each  academic  generates - a  over  years  peculiarvocabulary.  \"nationalism,\" the  tradition  of  practise  \"State,\"  \"sovereignty,\"  \" r i g h t s , \" \" p a t r i o t i s m , \" these are but some of  terms, of s p e c i a l - s i g n i f i c a n c e t o p o l i t i c a l  This'  vocabulary  intellectual  . demarcates  world and helps  the  scientists.  political  .scientists'  d i s t i n g u i s h his-\u2022 d i s c o u r s e  from  t h a t of other w r i t e r s . Where does has  \"loyalty\"  belong  many f a c e s , and here only  that,  despite  religious, centuries,  the important  moral  and  role loyalty  political  attention'  i t deserves.  John  attention  given , to' the  -subject  by  its \"historical  (idealism) extreme the  life have  Ladd  nationalism  of  given  supposed ' i m p l i c a t i o n s  men this  ingredient  morals.\"  Only p h i l o s o p h e r  88  t o p i c the  an o b s o l e t e  the  scant  metaphysics  movements as the  However,\"-Ladd' continued,\"  suggested  i n any c i v i l i z e d  by these  Josiah  disreputable loyalty is,an  and humane system of  Royce&gt;  i n The  John Ladd, \" L o y a l t y , \" 5 E n c y c l o p e d i a o f P h i l o s o p h y  \u2022. \u2022'  the  can be, e x p l a i n e d  a s s o c i a t i o n s are i l l - f o u n d e d . On the c o n t r a r y , essential  i n the  over  explains - that  such odious p o l i t i c a l of Nazism.  I t i s odd  has p l a y e d  of l o y a l t y  a s s o c i a t i o n with  and with  idiom?.Loyalty  some are. d e s c r i b e d .  so f e w ' p h i l o s o p h e r s  v  among t h i s  55  .\" \u2022  Philosophy  (1967): ,97-98.  ' \u2022  \u000Cof . L o y a l t y , , has given  the concept  serious  study. Royce saw i n l o y a l t y \"The heart central  duty  loyalty\"  amongst  a l l duties.\"  He  made  practical He  also  principle according choose  that of  that  as  there  the  of man.\" \"willing  may be l o y a l t y t o an e v i l  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o y a l t i e s 'loyalty  89  and  to  loyalty'  cause,  may c o n f l i c t .  provided  90  The  a' s o l u t i o n ,  to Royce: i n choosing a cause an i n d i v i d u a l should  one that  loyalties  loosely  \"the  and thorogoing devotion of a person t o a c a u s e . \"  recognized  and  loyalty  \" l o y a l t y to  f o r society,  c e n t r a l s p i r i t of the moral and reasonable l i f e defined  sustained  of a l l v i r t u e s , the  h i s c a t e g o r i c a l \u2022 imperative  Royce  and  will  further, , rather  of other men, as w e l l  than  f r u s t r a t e , the  as h i s or her own  multiple  loyalties. In The Concept of Our Changing L o y a l t i e s , ' Herbert pointed into  Bloch  out a d d i t i o n a l f a c t o r s which c a s t Royce's c o n c e p t i o n  a fuller  and more  precise  form  and brought  t o view  other aspects of l o y a l t y : Man i n s o c i e t y f i n d s h i m s e l f t h e f o c a l p o i n t . o f innumerable l o y a l t i e s . . . Each one o f t h e s e represents- some s p e c i a l a s p e c t o f h i s n a t u r e which seeks o u t l e t i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h o t h e r s o f s i m i l a r i n t e r e s t . A l o y a l t y , t h e n , would appear t o be t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f one's own i n t e r e s t w i t h t h a t o f a group. I t i m p l i e s the associated n e c e s s i t y o f f u r t h e r i n g both the l a r g e r purpose which t h e group f o s t e r s and t h e i n t e g r a l u n i t y o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l , h i m s e l f w i t h t h e group and t h e group purpose. \u2022. 91  8  9  '  J O s i a h Royce, The P h i l o s o p h y 1908) p. 108. i b i d . , p.16-17. \u2022 9 0  91  of Loyalty, '  (New York: M a c m i l l a n , '  H e r b e r t Aaron B l o c h , The Concept o f Our Changing L o y a l t i e s (New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1934), p. 36. .. -  56  \u000CBloch interests  highlights  the way  i n which  of both the i n d i v i d u a l as the f o c a l  loyalty  serves the  and the group. He envisaged  the  individual  point  and  p o i n t s out that each l o y a l t y  o f innumerable' l o y a l t i e s  serves a p a r t i c u l a r  aspect  of one's- nature. In -during  the midst  the post .World War I I . era,  t o p i c , of of  of the \"Red Scare\"  loyalty,  i n the U n i t e d  much was w r i t t e n - on the  and much more on \" d i s l o y a l t y . \"  The e f f e c t  a l l of t h i s was probably more negative than p o s i t i v e ,  it  sterilized  stigmatizing \"loyalty from  this  rational  and  philosophical  discussion  i t with i t s connection t o the c o n t r o v e r s y  oaths.\"  Perhaps  period  was  the most  as by  over  perceptive, observation  the. c o n t r i b u t i o n  of  Henry  Commager, who wrote that the new concept of l o y a l t y saw  States  Steele t h a t he  as \"conformity\" was a f a l s e one. Commager wrote that The e f f o r t t o equate l o y a l t y w i t h c o n f o r m i t y i s mis.guided because i t assumes t h a t t h e r e i s a f i x e d c o n t e n t t o l o y a l t y and t h a t t h i s can be determined and d e f i n e d . But l o y a l t y i s a p r i n c i p l e , and e l u d e s d e f i n i t i o n except on i t s own terms. I t i s a d e v o t i o n t o the b e s t i n t e r e s t s ; o f the commonwealth, and may r e q u i r e h o s t i l i t y t o the p a r t i c u l a r p o l i c i e s which t h e government pursues, the p a r t i c u l a r p o l i c i e s which t h e economy u n d e r t a k e s , the p a r t i c u l a r i n s t i t u t i o n s s o c i e t y m a i n t a i n s . . . True l o y a l t y may r e q u i r e , i n f a c t , what appears t o the n a i v e t o be d i s l o y a l t y . 9 2  Continuing  this  general, theme  of. i m p r e c i s i o n ,  perhaps given the environment i n which the d i s c u s s i o n place  i s inevitable,  Milton  Konvitz  all-econmpassing d e f i n i t i o n by s t a t i n g  tries  to  which takes  offer  an  that l o y a l t y i s the  92  Henry S t e e l e Commager, \"Who Magazine 195 (September, 1947): 96  '  I s L o y a l To .' .  57  .  America,\"  Harper's  \u000Cvirtue, state or q u a l i t y of being f a i t h f u l t o one's commitments, d u t i e s , r e l a t i o n s , a s s o c i a t i o n s , o r v a l u e s . I t i s f i d e l i t y t o a p r i n c i p l e , a cause, an i d e a , ah i d e a l , a r e l i g i o n o r an i d e o l o g y , \u2022 a n a t i o n o r government, a p a r t y o r l e a d e r , one's f a m i l y , o r f r i e n d s , a . r e g i o n , one's r a c e anyone o r a n y t h i n g t o which one's h e a r t can be a t t a c h e d o r devoted.... I n modern times t h e term has b e e n ' c h i e f l y used i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h p a t r i o t i s m , i n the. sense o f p o l i t i c a l allegiance and attachments, i n v o l v i n g the obligations, f o r m a l and i n f o r m a l , o f a c i t i z e n t o h i s c o u n t r y , i t s government and i t s i n s t i t u t i o n s . \" 9 3  The such  danger of basing an a n a l y s i s  a definition  relationships runs  the  Konvitz  danger  stretching  as t h i s  it  discussion,  of  beyond  loyalties  politicized  are  communities  and  small  associations  i s that  mentions  large-scale  term  plausibility. that  have  the  further,  i s based . upon  I propose  may  be used  The  first  108.  of  potential to  the one or  this  to  be  large-scale  may  conflict,  s o c i a l d i v i s i o n s , while l o y a l t i e s t o  and f a m i l y  help i l l u m i n a t e  meaning  terms  institutions  relations  the b e l i e f  naturally  when d e s c r i b i n g  that  conflict.  the d i s c u s s i o n  to discuss  do not have  that  theory's understanding of  s e t t i n g , t h i s leads to an i n e v i t a b l e To  In  all  loyalty,  of  Loyalties  political  communities  involving  the  same p o t e n t i a l . The c o l l a b o r a t i o n decolonisation  by d e s c r i b i n g  as  draining  important.  resulting i n disruptive  of any s p e c i f i c i t y on  l o y a l t i e s to  In a  political  colonial  separation.  of \"what i s l o y a l t y \"  two d i s t i n c t approaches an i n d i v i d u a l  as being  that  loyal.  approach i s based upon a d e s c r i p t i o n , of a c e r t a i n  M i l t o n R. K o n v i t z , \" L o y a l t y , \" 3 D i c t i o n a r y o f the H i s t o r y o f Ideas 58  \u000Ccharacter  trait.  The a l t e r n a t i v e  method  is' d e r i v e d  from a  more normative sense of the s u b j e c t , and i s s u b s c r i b e d t o by those  who  favour  collaborationist First,  a  more \u2022 f o r m a l i s t i c  approach,  including  theorists.  there  . i s the  case  where \u2022, an  individual  is  d e s c r i b e d as having a c e r t a i n d i s p o s i t i o n of c h a r a c t e r , much as  we might say that  diligent.  In other, words,  personality traits  he or she i s a l t r u i s t i c ,  or c h a r a c t e r  may  be  propensities  trait.  described  to  individual's  we may  act  behavior,  as\" h a b i t s  we may  or c h a r i t y t o that  individual.  shall  \"loyalty\"? something. person,  his'  First  will  loyalty  threatened. and  94  expresses  evoke 94  d e s c r i b e ,.the of  a l l , .a  The proper  a group  individual  we  object  certainly  of  character  behaviour, ways.  or  I f an exhibits  f o r instance,  altruism  character  l o y a l , person  trait is  called  loyal  i s either  to  another  or an i n s t i t u t i o n . The - l o y a l  come to the a i d of the o b j e c t of  he  perceives  his. i n t e r e s t s .  The l o y a l , i n d i v i d u a l take's p r i d e s o l i d a r i t y with, i t \u2022 through  and r e i n f o r c e  certain  of- time,  of l o y a l t y  or persons,  when  of  sorts  attribute,  a  stated,  over- a long p e r i o d  a .certain p a t t e r n ,  How  be' d e s c r i b i n g  Briefly  in- c e r t a i n  c h a r i t a b l e or  h i s emotional  are  i n h i s object  ritual  acts  which  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with i t .  *  For a d i s c u s s i o n o f l o y a l t y as v i c a r i o u s s a t i s f a c t i o n t h r o u g h i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , see H a r o l d Guetzkow, M u l t i p l e L o y a l t i e s : T h e o r e t i c a l Approach t o a Problem i n international Organization (Princeton: P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1955), pp. 19-22. -  59  \u000CFrequently an  he  focuses  his  feelings  through  anthem, a f l a g or a monarchical In' a second sense an  loyal by  or  the  disloyal  as  obedience  philosophical  or  of  The'  this to  say  that  he  call  to  say  is  legally  of  the  possessed To  of  that an  a  some  of  someone d i s l o y a l  sense' i s p r e c i s e l y L o y a l t y may of  political  individual  to  in  is  thus  what the also  i s to a s s e r t  law  -be  a  i t with  assimilated have  ministries of  sufficient  to  to  interpreted  support  Imperial  way  or  of  regard  saying  for  \u2022reaction  of  imperial the  policies  Imperial  and  and  been this  failure  that has  as  an  government  60  index to  of  signs  an  he  has  failed  to  Collaboration'  of  use  some  Disloyalty  the  railway p o l i c i e s theorists  to  Labeling  vigor.  treachery.  the  'disloyalty'.' Collaboration  support  had  Loyalty, i n  principles.  frequency  heresy  is  defined'by  that' he  mean \"orthodoxy\" with  can  is' loyal  to  says i t i s .  or \u2022 p h i l o s o p h i c a l  disloyal  historians  be. a s c r i b e d  as  d i s s e n t e d from dogma or .perhaps merely that he profess  is  good .standing,  citizenship  or or  status  individual  judged d i s l o y a l by'an a p p r o p r i a t e t r i b u n a l .  set  political  legal  status  citizen  rights  as  being  determination.,  of  is a  judged as  of a l e g a l or quasi-legal'.body.- A c c o r d i n g  interpretation,  fully law.  decision  be  a legal  notion  \" a s c r i p t i v e \" - i n nature. L o y a l t y 'by the  may  contravention  principles.  such  figure.  individual  a. r e s u l t  symbols  as  Reform evidence  evidence, of loyalty. of  The  opposition  \u000Cto Imperial to  railway  question  the  policies  l o y a l t y of  was, the  ministry.  Baskerville believes  would not  countenance any  inclination  on  the  imperial-colonial requirements Imperial  of  part  duly  to  complete  be  Imperial  have now  term \" l o y a l \" ,  approach,  the  pluralistic loyalty  the  not  be  elected  adjusted  Canadian the  existing  the  tariff  plans  the  government.  The  Macdonald  concerning  that had  elite.  The  to meet  Sandfield,  been  Anything  one  other  method  as  a  distinguished  two  the  negotiated else  distinct  of which lends i t s e l f resembles  lends  character  a more  would  itself  trait.  the  Loyalty  certain \u2022 social relationships  settings.  Loyalty  which organize and indispensable  is  to a  conceived  as  being  fostered  and  The  habit  formation and  of is and,  institutional  o r i e n t human r e l a t i o n s h i p s . As elements i n the  one.  interpreted  characteristic  of  functional  interpretation  thus  sustained  by  personality  to  senses  formalistie  a  of  political  Reformers. '  essentially  are  government  regarded as d i s l o y a l . Thus we  the  of  collaborating  Macdonald  of independent  the  Grand Trunk, m i l i t i a and the.previous  Sandfield the  displays  government ; expected  government  with  John that  agenda.could the  a c c o r d i n g to B a s k e r v i l l e ,  patterns such,  they  maintenance  personality. Loyalty  is  an  attitude  group of persons from whom one  of  i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with  some  seeks g r a t i f i c a t i o n s , e i t h e r 61  \u000Cmaterial  or p s y c h o l o g i c a l . L o y a l t y  out  the  of  i n t e r l o c k i n g - ' of  intermediate \"in  a  groups  set  of  Individuals which  as  satisfies  i n d i v i d u a l s come  requirements,  accustomed both  the  is  a  beliefs,  see- themselves  loyal  commitment.\" their  economic  and  being  of  in  terms  loyalties.  .human  their  loyalty spiritual  a  beings  social,  to  \"sense  The  from  life.'  of  qualities  other Any  speak  species society  upon systems of'mutual r i g h t s and  and  \u2022of h i s  rests  duties,  his basic  indispensable  existence.  preconditions  an  the upon  common  reciprocal obligations.  needs and habit  functions.  pattern.  of  Charles what,  Taylor he  because  They are  a  Loyalties'provide  with a p o r t i o n of that-framework through which he his  of  that  are  L o y a l t i e s are, a p a r t of every i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e they serve  95  of L o y a l t i e s .  contradiction  without  differentiate  loyalties;  and'  96  individual  product  primary  up  to  pledging  important  Function It  of  to  their  most  state i s b u i l t  l o y a l t i e s . to  intersecting circles  -become  belonging. \"  to- the  has  designates  him  organizes  described as  part  the  'emancipated  humanism' i n the f o l l o w i n g terms;  95'  '  \u2022  '  '  George P. F l e t c h e r , - L o y a l t y : An ' Essay on t h e M o r a l i t y - o f R e l a t i o n s h i p s (New York: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1993) p. 155. Boyd C. S h a f e r , N a t i o n a l i s m and I n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m ; B e l o n g i n g i n Human E x p e r i e n c e , (New York: H a r c o u r t , Brace, 1984)  62  \u000CFor each man t o d i s c o v e r i n h i m s e l f what h i s humanity c o n s i s t s i n , he needs a h o r i z o n o f meaning, which can o n l y be by some a l l e g i a n c e , group membership, c u l t u r a l ' t r a d i t i o n . He needs i n t h e b r o a d e s t sense a l a n g u a g e ' i n which t o ask and answer the q u e s t i o n o f u l t i m a t e s i g n i f i c a n c e . 9 7  In could  the absence  establish  would be faced  no with  of such  easy,  a  habitual  the endless  task of making f r e s h d e c i s i o n s The  propensity  of  framework,  an  responses.^  of h i s or her being.  events  are determined  frameworks.  This  i n d i v i d u a l . to  i n large  dominant' molding  by  of  Later,  sometimes  individual's Kymlicka has  career,  conflicting, attitudes,  years of l i f e ,  of when  and the f a m i l y i s schools,  roles and  to  range  occupations and s o c i a l c l a s s , a l l take important, parallel,  i n every  pre-disppsing  life's  i s great,  agency.  the  and r e a c t i o n s  measure  \"structuring\"  organize  i s apparent  Perceptions  m a l l e a b i l i t y of i n d i v i d u a l s  the  or she  at each moment Of l i f e .  p o s s i b i l i t i e s begins from the very f i r s t the  He  and h o p e l e s s l y ' c o m p l i c a t e d  s t r u c t u r e - of h i s or her a c t i v i t i e s phase  an \" i n d i v i d u a l  in  churches, sometimes  shaping  personality.  an Will  stated.that,  People are bound, i n an i m p o r t a n t way, t o t h e i r own c u l t u r a l community. We j u s t can't t r a n s p l a n t p e o p l e from one c u l t u r e t o a n o t h e r , even, i f we p r o v i d e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o l e a r n t h e o t h e r language and h i s t o r y . Our u p b r i n g i n g i s n ' t something t h a t can j u s t be e r a s e d - i t i s , and always remains, a c o n s t i t u t i v e p a r t o f who we a r e . C u l t u r a l membership a f f e c t s our v e r y sense o f p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y and c a p a c i t y . 9 8  C h a r l e s T a y l o r , \"Why' Do N a t i o n s Have t o Become S t a t e s ? \" i n Guy L a f o r e s t , ed., R e c o n c i l i n g the S o l i t u d e s : Essays on Canadian F e d e r a l i s m and N a t i o n a l i s m ( M o n t r e a l : McGill-Queen's U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1994), p. 4 6.' \u2022 . '  98  W i l l K y m l i c k a , \" L i b e r a l i s m , I n d i v i d u a l i s m , and M i n o r i t y R i g h t s , \" i n The Law and the Community. .(Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989) p. 193. . .  63  '  \u2022  \u000CThese , groups  that  so c r u c i a l l y  a f f e c t existence  the groups that demand and r e c e i v e l o y a l t y . kaleidoscope relation  it  served  new  land.  does  Loyalty  to the B r i t i s h  a basic  need of p r o v i d i n g  Robinson's  theory  cultural  in  to the f a c t  was  essential  a  derivative  of  this  c u l t u r a l community.. \u2022Loyalties gratification. area  of  are'.' thus . They  the  protect  r e l a t i o n s with confidence  and  source  threatens  notion  which  community  such  community.  to t h e i r  sense of  i d e n t i t y was  larger  pan-British  of  account  great  personal  anxiety.  They  allow  the the.  of i n t e r p e r s o n a l  i n the a c t i o n expected of him. and  h i s actions  the group, can  in a  British  the i n d i v i d u a l , reducing  will  evoke.  group t o which the i n d i v i d u a l i s l o y a l , what  cultural  to move i n e s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n s  response's that  because  ''\u2022-..  h i s .uncertainty  individual  of  that  The emerging Canadian sense of c u l t u r a l  l a r g e '.'part  a  of i m p e r i a l - c o l o n i a l r e l a t i o n s  due c o n s i d e r a t i o n  membership  was  a sense of being  North Americans e x i s t e d w i t h i n a B r i t i s h  being.  nation  of the l i v e s of B r i t i s h North Americans  not give  This  They become the  through which a person views h i s l i f e \u2022 a n d i t s  to s o c i e t y .  major p a r t  are  threatens  nation,  assuming the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e .and p o l i t i c a l nationhood.  6 4  serves  the s e l f .  for loyalty  as the B r i t i s h  he  By s e r v i n g the  to even  a  himself;  It i s this large-scale  as Canada  was  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of  \u000CComplete does not  identification  often exist.  accomplish  this  loyalties,  or by  with  of the  was  those  developing  between  Totalitarian  end  .by  i n the  activities  p e r i o d , the case i s d i f f e r e n t . crisis,  all  of  such  Canada  Except  to  intermediary  of a l l other  In democracies,  Province  group  governments attempt  destroying  f u s i n g the state.  i n d i v i d u a l ' and  groups  as one  during  the  that Union  i n p e r i o d s of extreme  freedom to form and maintain group t i e s i s c h e r i s h e d  and encouraged, and i n d i v i d u a l s preserve', s t r o n g l o y a l t i e s numerous n a t i o n a l and  non-national  are  given  church,  and  to a host of other i n s t i t u t i o n s and.groups.  bring  the  to  family,  individual  s h a r e ' h i s views and and  weakness  of  these  c r i s i s . They may initial  and  security  ethnic  personal  group,  contact  s i t u a t i o n or not. The  with s h i f t s i n l i f e  the  into  groups. \u2022 These  numerous  loyalties  loyalties  class,  region,  They  with  may  others  relative change  who  strength with  age,  s i t u a t i o n s , and when under the' s t r e s s of  change as o l d r e l a t i o n s h i p s no' longer  need  to  or  to the  as  they  no  individual  longer i n the  supplytotal  serve  satisfaction  network of h i s  s o c i a l existence. From  this  misnomer. specific Populations is  view,  a  Loyalties goals,  national loyalty  generalized  are. d i r e c t e d  and . s p e c i f i c  are l o y a l  to  specific  programs  of  and  s u s t a i n these 65  values.  a  groups, actions.  to the n a t i o n only because the  b e l i e v e d to symbolize  is  nation To  say  \u000Cthat  loyalty  i s dependent  upon  satisfaction  means that  satisfaction  i s ' of . c r u c i a l  measure  these  discrepancy, achievements, spread  is a  loyalty  the i n d i v i d u a l ' s  as  between  defined  l a r g e . one,  to' the n a t i o n  now,  by  A  be  life  an  t o o l to,  index  of the and  the i n d i v i d u a l .  life  Where' the  are e x p e r i e n c e d  i s presumably l e s s  hopefully  life  subtle  expectancy  deprivations  e x p e c t a t i o n s are a c t u a l l y By  would  of  own d e f i n i t i o n of  importance'.  satisfactions i f any,  the achievement  strong  and  than where  or approximately achieved. the o u t l i n e s  of  the p r o c e s s  of  l o y a l t y formation, expression, and change has been made more legible.  I have  outlined  phenomena,' and have  two p o s s i b l e  suggested  that  c o n c e p t i o n s ' of the  a  functional,  approach  would favour e x p l o r i n g the t o p i c of the continued l o y a l t y of B r i t i s h North Americans to Great B r i t a i n from a s o c i o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e . r a t h e r the f o r m a l i s t i c collaborationist An  important  describing the  theorists. part  of d e f i n i n g  how i t . a c t u a l l y  the concept  functions,  i t will  form's t r u e meaning. The word i t s e l f  meaning, Loyalty  and the phenomena i s a norm connecting  attitude  bring  are hot  the p r o p e r t i e s  ascribed  upon the f a m i l i a r  formation and change. The r o o t s  to be found iri s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n . \u2022  i s that  66  by  forth  has many shades of  i t signifies  by'Royce and Bloch, arid r e s t i n g of  approach favoured, by the  simple. to i t  processes  of l o y a l t y , are  Expressed b r i e f l y ,  shared  \u000Ca c t i v i t i e s evoke shared sentiments lives  together  debts  of g r a t i t u d e , , mutual  intereststhe  as a s o c i a l  which may bind  simply  of sympathy. As the group  unit,  members experience  likes  and d i s l i k e s ,  them t o g e t h e r .  s t a t e d and profoundly  felt  This  mutual  and  shared  culminates i n  emotion of owing much  to each other, and to the group as a whole. An important  individual's  loyalties  tasks  providing  interpreting communication the  of  experience.  not only  because  a l s o because i n d i v i d u a l s  they  build  the  supremely  self-definition loyalties  among members of a s o c i a l  cement of u n i t y . Once formed,  changed,  and  Shared  perform  group  loyalties  receive up vested  facilitate and p r o v i d e  are,not  social  easily  support but  interests.in  because e s t a b l i s h e d l o y a l t i e s p r e d i s p o s e  those  them,  who h o l d -  them t o p e r c e i v e t h e i r environment s e l e c t i v e l y .  , \".  P o l i t i c a l ' Loyalty \u2022 To  see m u l t i p l e l o y a l t i e s  human e x i s t e n c e political  is a first  loyalty  Political' loyalty ideals  i s a devoted  and i n s t i t u t i o n s  tradition  toward  phenomenon of  the f u l l e r  which, i s the .object attachment  of  this,  view o f essay.'  t o the p o l i t i c a l  e s t a b l i s h e d i n a community. In most  of i t s m a n i f e s t a t i o n s p o l i t i c a l of  \u2022'  as \u2022 a g e n e r a l  step  and  and sentiment,  loyalty  i s a complex  choice and reason.  mixture  Most o f our  l o y a l t i e s are a c q u i r e d i n the course of s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g . 67  \u000CThey _ are  integrated  i n t o ' our  character\" s t r u c t u r e  conscious thought, though some l o y a l t i e s choice,  preferences  which  c a l c u l a t i o n s of i n t e r e s t \" o r  may on  be  may  be  based  emotional  without  products on  rational  considerations.  Since p o l i t i c a l ' l o y a l t y i s a devoted attachment to established - p o l i t i c a l itself  a  written  foremost  institutions  component  of  of  of. a  community,  the  it  community. Andrew C e c i l  is has  that,  L o y a l t y .to the n a t i o n , t o the community where we l i v e , t o our f a m i l y , and f r i e n d s i s an i n t e g r a l p a r t of our d e m o c r a t i c institutions and the f o u n d a t i o n of c i v i l society. It p r o v i d e s the b a s i s f o r the c o n f i d e n c e t h a t s h o u l d s u b s i s t between those who are connected by the bonds of n a t i o n a l i t y , o f common community, of f a m i l y . and of f r i e n d s h i p - t h e dearest relationships of life. A steadfast loyalty c u l t i v a t e d i n our s o c i a l o r d e r e n l i g h t e n s our w o r l d by p r e s e r v i n g the d i g n i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l , by g i v i n g him a sense of s e l f - w o r t h and a s e r e n i t y of s o u l , combined w i t h a r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t h i s d u t i e s are a c o r o l l a r y t o h i s r i g h t s . I t i s the s o l a c e ,of human e x i s t e n c e . . :  99  Through binding  political  on \u2022 the  Therefore,  institutions,  whole  popular  social  attachment  together with agreement upon the of the  essential the  face of  changing c o n d i t i o n s . The  more  concept  community  specific, held  in  order to ideals  are  and  ends  prescribed.  these  the  common  and  preserves  they embody form  integrity  one that  in  p o l i t i c a l community, or  nation-state, by  its  many men..  \"exists It  is  1 0 0  institutions,  elements of group u n i t y . I t i s l o y a l t y  defines  be  policies  the  only  as  the to a  emotional  99  Andrew R. C e c i l , E q u a l i t y , T o l e r a n c e and L o y a l t y : V i r t u e s S e r v i n g the Common Purpose of Democracy, ( D a l l a s : U n i v e r s i t y o f Texas P r e s s , 1990), p. 217. David Easton, The P o l i t i c a l System: An I n q u i r y i n t o the S t a t e of P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e (New York: Knopf, 1953), .p. 125. 1  0  68  \u000Cloyalty that  of men to t h i s always changing concept, the n a t i o n ,  constitutes  loyalty  could  nationalism.  not e x i s t . \"  1 0 1  Without  the  Shared l o y a l t y  concept,  the  t o the p o l i t i c a l  ideas and i n s t i t u t i o n s gives to members of a group f a i t h and confidence  in  their  fellows  which . l u b r i c a t e s ,  social  r e l a t i o n s and makes consensus i n other p r o j e c t s p o s s i b l e . These ideas, \u2022 of ' course, standard  are merely e l a b o r a t i o n s  1 0 2  on \u2022the-,  argument that, \"agreement- upon the fundamentals\", i s  a p r e c o n d i t i o n of s u c c e s s f u l community.. Lord B a l f o u r , i n h i s Introduction this  to Walter Bagehot's E n g l i s h C o n s t i t u t i o n , gave  proposition  a  more  classical, political  rendering.  R e f e r r i n g t o the B r i t i s h system, B a l f o u r wrote: Our a l t e r n a t i n g C a b i n e t s , \u2022 though b e l o n g i n g t o d i f f e r e n t P a r t i e s , have never d i f f e r e d about t h e fundamentals o f society. And i t i s e v i d e n t t h a t our whole, p o l i t i c a l machinery presupposes a p e o p l e so f u n d a m e n t a l l y a t one t h a t t h e y can s a f e l y a f f o r d t o bicker,- and so sure o f t h e i r own m o d e r a t i o n t h a t t h e y a r e not d a n g e r o u s l y d i s t u r b e d by t h e never-ending d i n of p o l i t i c a l c o n f l i c t . . .  . \u2022  1 0 3  The  n a t i o n . i s not  l o y a l t i e s . ' Just l o y a l t y , to compete with nation's processes  the  .a's; l o y a l t y  family,  described  to  occupation  loyalty  advantage  only  before:  point  the n a t i o n and  of r e l i g i o n ,  i s based  focal  not. only t o some  contends  friends,  race  .for- mass  and with  so  with  i t . must  c l a s s . The  on the p s y c h o l o g i c a l degree  those  energies  Max S a v e l l e , \" N a t i o n a l i s m and Other L o y a l t i e s i n The A m e r i c a n R e v o l u t i o n , \" The American H i s t o r i c a l Review 67 ( J u l y , 1962): 902\" A l a n B a r t h , The L o y a l t y o f Free Men (New York: V i k i n g , ' 1951), p.. 6. \u2022 . 1 0 1  1 0 2  103  -  - '  W a l t e r Bagehot,- The E n g l i s h C o n s t i t u t i o n , i n t r o d u c t i o n B a l f o u r . ( L o n d o n : ' O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1928) p.. x x i v . 69  *  by Lord-  \u000Care  also, \" a v a i l a b l e ' to  national, result  rather of  historical organized into  other,  loyalties  units.  flow  of  of  and This  simple  to  strength  of  i s al-sd' p a r t l y  the  very  language,  territory.  some  extent  to  national . loyalty..  be  common  The  world  permits \"a  woven  into  the  and  the  Nations-states to promote and  to  sustain  . . .  1 0 4  In democracies the major impact of s t a t e a c t i v i t i e s an  indirect  one:  strengthening  it  strengthens  direct this  the  and  antagonism  fashion,  Citizens  virtually  Their  groups,  members  reinforcement  possess  ways. . The  of  own  in  turn,  nation.  a l l \u2022 groups' c o n t r i b u t e minimize, or  group  and  efface  the' n a t i o n .  In to any  They  national welfare. \u2022  complement each other  of  Sub-national,  between, t h e i r  i d e n t i f y group and  by  the p o l i t i c s of democratic people i s  directed.  loyalty.  is  groups through which  emotions of group members toward the  circular  national  national, loyalties  the numerous s u b - n a t i o n a l  so much of the l i f e and organized  is  functionally,  organization  emotions  i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h i n them c o n s p i r e this loyalty.  The'-  common  traditions,,. a definable territorially,  sentiment  causes.  objective-, facts:  national  complex  than  .other  multiple  or may  loyalties  object  of  \u2022 loyalties  conflict may. be  one  with  which  each o t h e r .  accomplished  l o y a l t y - may  be  may The  i n a number  dependent  upon  Walker Connor, \"The Nature o f the E.tnnonational Bond, \" E t h n i c and R a c i a l S t u d i e s 16 (July,' 1993) : 3.87. 1 0 4  70  \u000Cthe  survival  loyalty is  to  of  the  clearly  by by  object  the  case  in  where  the  another  new  other  British  being  Canadian  the Americans to the each  of  l a t t e r ' i n v o l v e s support  Confederation, preserve  the  also  nation  South.  is  to  North  British  loyalty, the  large  part  from becoming  in  this  very  fundamental  training  i n l o y a l t y to one  Contrary  in their  to  theorists,  the  reaction  i s generalized  to  other  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n given  l o y a l t y i s not  a  objects by  the  so...that  and  may  collaboration  single entity \u2014  once used  Rather, i t i s an expandable q u a n t i t y  can  in increasing  generated  be  of l o y a l t y .  then exhausted. be  help  loyalties  i n d i v i d u a l s develop l o y a l t y h a b i t p a t t e r n s ,  transferred  to  assimilated  process:  object  This  prior  Reinforcement of  found  that  former.  America  in  so  amounts toward  up,  which  a variety  of  obj e c t s . A-  psychological  encapsulates interests. based on state  It  be  the  emotional  rejects  the  self-interest,  of  being  associations can  both  conceptualization  a  ideology,  and  values, to  notion  material that  to  one's  as w e l l  as  a- cause,' an  commitments, self-interests.  Jane J . Mansbridge, Beyond S e l f - i n t e r e s t Chicago P r e s s , 1990) p . . i x .  \u202271  i s the duties, Loyalty  r e l i g i o n \u2022 or  matters beyond the scope of s e l f - i n t e r e s t  1 0 5  of \u2022  behavior, i s  Loyalty  105  idea,, a  loyalty  aspects  human  narrowly c o n c e i v e d .  faithful  fidelity  and  'of  narrowly  (Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y o f  \". '  an-  \u000Cdefined.  A  f u n c t i o n a l , approach  recognizes  the  view of both i n d i v i d u a l behavior and  social  view . that  altruism  for  a  takes  shared  loyalties who  was  framed  virtue  into  \"sense  account \"duty, of  belonging.\"  recognized  by  the  t h e i r ' Constitution  and  self-interest.  George Washington, s a i d the  around  During  organization,  This  American  and  a  twin  a  concern  combination  Founding  the  the  complex  of  Fathers,  pillars  revolutionary  of war  following:  I do not mean t o e x c l u d e a l t o g e t h e r the Idea o f . P a t r i o t i s m . I know i t e x i s t s , and I know i t has done much i n t h e p r e s e n t C o n t e s t . But I w i l l v e n t u r e t o a s s e r t , t h a t a g r e a t and l a s t i n g War can never be s u p p o r t e d on t h i s p r i n c i p l e a l o n e . I t must be a i d e d by a p r o s p e c t of I n t e r e s t o r some reward. For a t i m e , i t may, of i t s e l f push Men t o A c t i o n ; t o bear much, t o e n c o u n t e r d i f f i c u l t i e s ; but i t ' w i l l not endure u n a s s i s t e d by I n t e r e s t . 1 0 7  James realistic  Madison's  Tenth  Federalist  assumptions regarding  power  of  motivation. tried  to  both  work  the  non-self-interested Loyalty  is  and  tried  s e l f - i n t e r e s t e d and  In d e s i g n i n g  a  the  power  based  human m o t i v a t i o n .  contemporaries, Madison recognized the  was  108  'both  Like  a his  to set to work  non-self-interested  American C o n s t i t u t i o n , of  upon  Madison  self-interested  and  motivation. ,great  community. I t i s e q u a l l y  good  from  the  a good from the  standpoint  standpoint  of  of the  K o n o v i t z , p. 108. 107  \u2022  C i t e d i n John P. D i g g i n s , The L o s t S o u l o f American P o l i t i c s : V i r t u e , S e l f - i n t e r e s t , and the Foundations of L i b e r a l i s m , (New York: B a s i c Books, 1984) p. 23 108  Gordon.Wood, \" I n t e r e s t s and D i s i n t e r e s t e d n e s s i n - t h e Making o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , \" i n R i c h a r d Beeman e t a l . , eds., Beyond C o n f e d e r a t i o n , (Chapel H i l l : ' U n i v e r s i t y of N o r t h C a r o l i n a P r e s s , 1987) p. 92. 72  \u000Cindividual  as i t gives him an ease of. communications of h i s  f e l l o w s and a s e t of goals which help impart purpose t o h i s life.  Through  outside  of  loyalty  and  connection,  larger  life  announces t h i s  one  becomes  than  acquires  theme e a r l y  related  himself.  meaning  to  And,  and  and r e t u r n s  something  through  direction.  this Royce  to i t repeatedly i n  h i s t r e a t i s e on l o y a l t y . L o y a l t y , a g a i n , tends t o u n i f y l i f e , t o g i v e i t c e n t e r , f i x i t y , s t a b i l i t y . Now, a l o y a l man i s one who has found, and who sees some s o c i a l cause so r i c h , so w e l l k n i t , and t o him, so f a s c i n a t i n g , and w i t h a l so k i n d l y i n i t s a p p e a l t o h i s n a t u r a l s e l f - w i l l , t h a t he says t o h i s cause: \"Thy w i l l i s mine and mine i s t h i n e . I n thee I do n o t l o s e b u t f i n d m y s e l f , l i v i n g i n t e n s e l y i n p r o p o s i t i o n as I l i v e f o r t h e e : ' \"Wherever l o y a l t y i s , there i s selfhood, . p e r s o n a l i t y , i n d i v i d u a l purpose embodied i n .a l i f e . 1 0 9  In that  summary, .. l o y a l t y  through  achievement  i s a good  i t he l e a r n s of i d e a l  f o r the i n d i v i d u a l i n  to . o r i e n t  projects.  h i s l i f e ' toward the  And the impulse  to. i d e n t i f y  with, a person, a cause, an i d e a l , possesses n e a r l y at one'or another time, with g r e a t e r or l e s s e r is  through  shell  shared  l o y a l t i e s that  i s o l a t i n g the i n d i v i d u a l  enabling ongoing  the i n d i v i d u a l collective  Britain,'English-speaking of  an o r g a n i c  ancestral bound 1 0 9  social  intensity;. I t  men can break through the  from h i s  t o become  process.  everyone  Through  a  or her compatriots, vital  a  part  common  of the  loyalty  B r i t i s h North Americans were p a r t  entity.  A common  loyalty  to t h e i r  homelands was an e s s e n t i a l p a r t of the cement  the c o l o n i s t s  to  together.  They  Royce, op cit., pp.- 22, 43, 171.  73  shared  a  sense  that of a  \u000Ccommon  history,  sought  to r e p l i c a t e  Kingdom  language,  and c u l t u r e .  ideas,  maintain  and  ways  they  the world they had known i n the U n i t e d  i n the Province of Canada,  political  In many  labels  develop.  and  as can be seen  institutions to  Loyalty  Great  they  i n the  chose  Britain  to  was \u2022 the  .direct r e s u l t of the c o l o n i s t s d e s i r e t o r e l a t e t o something outside they  of and l a r g e r found  collaboration also  the.settler  themselves.  gratification  they  than  from  maintenance  their  theorists  derived  an  the  received  imperial  have  to the p o i n t  Loyalties  Robinson of  the  out, but  ' g r a t i f i c a t i o n . from  B a s k e r v i l l e have underestimated of l o y a l t y .  as  pointed  t i e , which  t r u e essence  material  loyalty,  abundantly  emotional  i n which  both  imperial  the  of  They  community  the and  distorting  adhering t o groups,  be they n a t i o n a l or s u b - n a t i o n a l , are r a r e l y a b s o l u t e . Group, loyalties The  are a d j u s t e d t o and ' r e l a t i v e to other  intensity  story period  of  of l o y a l t i e s  British  North  i s not'the  story  British  imperialism  resulting matter another.  of  i n an ebb  may  to  flow,  complete  Canadian  decolonisation. not  The  i n the p r e - C o n f e d e r a t i o n  an a b s o l u t e s h i f t .from  inevitable and  i n c r e a s e or d i m i n i s h .  America of  loyalties.  of .  74  ,  one  complete  nationalism, I t i s 'more  totally  a  replacing  \u000CChapter Four  Loyalty and the Nation  In  this  section,  I  will  proceed  from  the  examination  of l o y a l t y  i n the preceding, chapter  how l o y a l t y  i s r e l a t e d t o the concept of ' n a t i o n ' .  general  to discuss In order  to come t o g r i p s with the i s s u e of \" n a t i o n a l \" l o y a l t y the  Union p e r i o d ,  proposed large  by David  parts.  i n terms  He  rejects  nationalism brought  -  usually  traditions manifest  common  op  that  they  of the c r e a t i o n  component theory  elements fuse  of are to  and thus s e t i n motion the elements common  common t e r r i t o r y ,  of a n a t i o n  as  automatically  These  descent,  certain  of  t h a t must be  ingredient  when  i n g r e d i e n t theory  t h a t as a process  the formation  than  themselves i n a common p o l i t i c a l  the formation  process  rather  of n a t i o n a l i s m ,  and customs,  constituent  that  views  the c o n s t i t u e n t  of a n a t i o n .  include  Potter  of process  association,  generate a s p i r i t establishment  110  communities as' a process  the idea  into  employ the - f u n c t i o n a l approach as  Potter.  scale p o l i t i c a l  explained  the  I will  during  or  ingredients  language, and they entity.  tends t o conceal  common tend t o  In s h o r t , the f a c t  or of a n a t i o n a l i t y i s a  of c o n d i t i o n s  i t cannot be e x p l a i n e d  of commonality, and by the. presence of  David P o t t e r , \"The H i s t o r i a n ' s . Use o f N a t i o n a l i s m and V i c e V e r s a , \" cit. .75  \u000Ca  fixed  set  of  ingredients  nation-builders. By  by  the  one may  observing  the  subject  or  qualified  or  gradations.  111  answer the question degree  to  which  conducive  to  group,  the  chapter.  '\"nationalism of  the  view  certain  is first  generically From t h i s absolute  deserves  is  a  a  condition  loyalty  evolves  functional  has  fine  achieved  is primarily  can, be  answered  in  d i s t i n c t i o n s \" and  concern the- p s y c h o l o g i c a l approach  and  foremost  character  to  be  which  focused  is upon  wholly in  the  a s t a t e of mind, an  form  of  follow as  large-scale  of  this'  stressed- because  assumptions..  i t would  to  group question  loyalty  d i f f e r e n t ' from  Loyalty  may  a \u2022  act  112  important  nationalism  by  of what i s a n a t i o n  it  with  an  of  psychological  nationalism  used  Thus, f o r example, Hans Kohn a f f i r m s t h a t  consciousness.\" The  and  terms,  Such a question  of  previous  observational, relative  attitudes  be  from  cohesiveness or group u n i t y . Here the descriptive  to  \u2022  approaching  perspective,  said  In  that  forms  of  national  collaboration  communities' i's  g r a d u a l l y by  imperceptible  P o t t e r , p. .63. . Hans Kohn, The Idea o f N a t i o n a l i s m , . p. 10. 76  it  it  group  loyalty  to  possesses  f i r s t - place,  group . l o y a l t y , other  the  the  approach  since is  not  loyalty. i s not  an  theorists, posit. relative  one,  for  degrees, both i r i  \u000Cthe  individual  and  the  group,  circumstances. If would degree  imply  of  is a that  further  the  nationality  that  they share the  must  exclusive  or  various group  groups  intensity  differ  exist  i n turn, in  the  allegiance,  individual's The  most  functional exists  the  in  individual  but: as  ancestral vital  an  by  the  among, i t s  members,  i s not  the  not  113  a  the  within  to  which  l o y a l t y to an  the  unique  concurrent  to  or  with  to church, and  to  ' , of  \"sense  a of  nation  written  from  belonging\"  psychological  r e s t r i c t e d to any  l i m i t a t i o n s . Walker Connor has  in  commitment  as  family,  fact  nationality,  extent  homeland.'  i s . . the  this  population  attachment  characteristic  perspective  f r a t e r n i t y that  altered  vary  their  would mean that  other forms of group l o y a l t y - to an  of  elements of  must  must  sense of group i d e n t i t y and  group purpose. T h i s , nation  often  relative' manifestation, national  completeness  and  i t is  ' .  nationalism also  and  strict  awareness  the that of  ethnological  that  Any n a t i o n can, of c o u r s e , be d e s c r i b e d i n terms o f i t s p a r t i c u l a r amalgam of t a n g i b l e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , f o r example, i n terms o f the number of i t s members, t h e i r p h y s i c a l l o c a t i o n , t h e i r r e l i g i o u s and l i n g u i s t i c c o m p o s i t i o n , and so f o r t h . But one can so d e s c r i b e any human' g r o u p i n g , even such an unimportant c a t e g o r i z a t i o n as the New Englander. By i n t u i t i v e l y v a l u i n g t h a t which t h e y have i n common w i t h o t h e r Americans more than t h a t which makes them unique, t h e New Englanders have s e l f - r e l e g a t e d themselves t o the s t a t u s o f a s u b - n a t i o n a l element. By c o n t r a s t , the Ibos c l e a r l y p l a c e g r e a t e r importance on b e i n g Ibo than b e i n g N i g e r i a n . I t i s t h e r e f o r e , the s e l f - v i e w of one's group, r a t h e r t h a n  113  Boyd S h a f e r , N a t i o n a l i s m and I n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m ; B e l o n g i n g i n Human E x p e r i e n c e (New York: H a r c o u r t , Brace, 1984) 77  \u000Cthe tangible characteristics, that i s t h e essence i n determining the existence or non-existence of a n a t i o n . 1 1 4  The nation  most  popular  p r o b a b l y belongs  who wrote  definition  Of  t o the French  what  constitutes  critic,  Ernest  a  Renan,  that  A n a t i o n i s a grand s o l i d a r i t y c o n s t i t u t e d by t h e s e n t i m e n t \u2022 of s a c r i f i c e s which one has made and those t h a t one i s t o make a g a i n . I t supposes a p a s t , i t renews i t s e l f e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e p r e s e n t by a t a n g i b l e deed; a p p r o v a l , t h e d e s i r e , c l e a r l y expressed, t o continue t h e communal' l i f e . . The \" e x i s t e n c e o f a n a t i o n i s an everyday p l e b i s c i t e . 1 1 5  The a  prime cause o f p o l i t i c a l  single  psychological  population. remains of  The  attempt  nature  shadowy  defining  of  and e l u s i v e ,  a nation  the t a s k .  Relations  focus  defines  d i s u n i t y i s the absence o f  shared that  by a l l segments  loyalty  and  and the consequent  i s u s u a l l y acknowledged  of  the  i t s source difficulty  by those  who  Thus a popular d i c t i o n a r y o f I n t e r n a t i o n a l a nation  as f o l l o w s :  A s o c i a l group which shares a common i d e o l o g y , common' i n s t i t u t i o n s and customs, and a. sense o f homogeneity. 'Nation' i s difficult t o define so p r e c i s e l y as t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e t h e term from such o t h e r .groups as r e l i g i o u s s e c t s , which e x h i b i t some o f the, same c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . I n the n a t i o n , however, t h e r e i s a l s o p r e s e n t a s t r o n g group sense o f belonging associated with a p a r t i c u l a r t e r r i t o r y c o n s i d e r e d t o be p e c u l i a r l y i t s own. ( i t a l i c s added) 116  Whereas sense,  other  intuition,  of' the  the key word  i n this  authorities  may  but proper, a p p r e c i a t i o n  nation  particular definition i s substitute  feeling  o f the a b s t r a c t  or  essence  i s customary i n d e f i n i t i o n s .  Walker Connor, \"Nation-Building or Nation-Destroying?\" World P o l i t i c s (1971) 337. E r n e s t Renan, \"Qu'est-ce qu'une n a t i o n ? , \" quoted from H u t c h i n s o n and Smith, op. cit. p. 16. Jack C. Piano' and Roy O l t o n , The I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e l a t i o n s D i c t i o n a r y (New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston, I n c . , 1969) p. .199 1 1 5  1 1 6  78  \u000CAfter  \u2022 focusing  psychological  bond,  attention  typically  little  f o l l o w s . Indeed, having d e f i n e d psychological treat  i t as f u l l y  nation  probing  . essential  of i t s nature  the n a t i o n . a s an e s s e n t i a l l y  synonymous , with  the very  d i f f e r e n t and  concept of the s t a t e . With the concepts of  and the s t a t e  thus  hopelessly  perhaps not too s u r p r i s i n g that mean  that  phenomenon.authorities then have a tendency t o  totally.tangible the  upon  identification  with -the  confused,, i t  nationalism  state  rather  the -nation.  \u2022  should than  is  come t o  l o y a l t y to  '  A f u n c t i o n a l approach to the t o p i c of what i s a n a t i o n encourages  the student  view of n a t i o n a l be  complete  national  t o abandon'\u2022 the  i d e n t i t y as a., natural  must  identities  a r t i f i c i a l l y  of n a t i o n a l i s m  obliterate are,  constructed,  development which t o  a l l \u2022 other  to  a  older  loyalties. A l l  considerable  for, n a t i o n a l i s m  extent,  i s ,at a l l times  based upon the. sense, of belonging t o what Benedict Anderson has  c a l l e d an imagined community. '' 117  Throughout h i s t o r y people have' belonged t o a v a r i e t y of ^groups, such' as f a m i l y , well have  as -nation chosen  groupings and  and more .recently  t o 'express  i n return  \"  their  tribe,  caste,'. church, as  the, n a t i o n - s t a t e . loyalty  f o r the-- f u l f i l l m e n t  p s y c h o l o g i c a l - needs, 117  village,  to  these  of t h e i r  for their . security,  People human  emotional  and f o r t h e i r  \"  B e n e d i c t Anderson, .Imagined Communities: R e f l e c t i o n s on t h e O r i g i n and Spread o f N a t i o n a l i s m (New York: V e r s o , 1991). 79  \u2022&gt;'\u2022\u2022''  \u000Cown economic, s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l e x i s t e n c e . L o y a l t y t o the nation  indicates  an  identification  with  a  human  grouping  t h a t may or may not be coterminous with a- s t a t e . I t i s based upon a s e l f - c o n c e p t i o n , of  a  delimited  relationship cultural  self-awareness,  group  between  of  self-assertion  people. . N a t i o n a l i s m  individuals,  and p h i l o s o p h i c  and  terms,  expressing  calling  is  itself  a in  upon s o c i o l o g y and  anthropology. , \u2022 With very from  few exceptions,, a u t h o r i t i e s have s h i e d away  d e s c r i b i n g ' the n a t i o n  u s u a l l y e x p l i c i t l y denied a factor.  1 1 8  a  kinship  ancestral  analyzing  such  illustrating  nationhood do i n f a c t  strains.  Most . n a t i o n s  1 1 9  approach  i s  but what  ignores  people  a s e l f - d e f i n e d rather  broadly  have  incorporate exist  as  a  a prime example.  the 'notion  that  when,  s o c i o p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n s , what u l t i m a t e l y matters  i s not what is  an  and  that the n a t i o n of shared blood i s  composite group, the United Kingdom being But  group  Such d e n i a l s are supported by data  t h a t most groups c l a i m i n g several  as  held  conviction  believe  than  other-defined  concerning  o r i g i n need not and seldom w i l l subconscious  belief  i n the  Since  is.  accord  group's  the  the n a t i o n  grouping, the  group's  with  singular  f a c t u a l data. A  separate  origin  and  e v o l u t i o n i s an important i n g r e d i e n t of n a t i o n a l psychology.  Joseph Levitt, \"Race and N a t i o n i n Canadian Anglophone H i s t o r i o g r a p h y , \" Canadian Review o f S t u d i e s i n N a t i o n a l i s m 8 (1981): 1. Connor, \" N a t i o n - B u i l d i n g o r N a t i o n - D e s t r o y i n g ? \" p. 320. 1 1 8  1 1 9  80  \u000CWhen one avers that' he i s B r i t i s h , not  j u s t with the B r i t i s h  with B r i t i s h It has  caused  twentieth  numerous  centuries  references  people and c u l t u r e of today, but  people and t h e i r  i s the r e c o g n i t i o n  to  an  he i s i d e n t i f y i n g h i m s e l f  activities  of t h i s writers  time.  dimension of the n a t i o n of the n i n e t e e n t h  to employ race English,  throughout  or  120  that  and e a r l y  as a synonym f o r n a t i o n ,  German  race  being  quite  121  \u2022  '  common.  B r i t i s h North Americans and N a t i o n a l i s m Just seen  as i t i s not the case  a conflict  their  local,  awareness  between  that  a sense  p r o v i n c i a l or r e g i o n a l l o y a l t i e s ,  of a Canadian  mid-nineteenth  period to  national, i d e n t i t y ,  century.  a f t e r Confederation  .them  identity.  a 1 2 3  Canadians  of n a t i o n a l  nationalism,, d i d not e x t i n g u i s h other the  most  global  psychological  focus  the c o n t r a r y ,  within  to -the B r i t i s h that  i d e n t i t y and a  developing  or- Canadian  older l o y a l t i e s  a sense of being  system  Loyalty  On  1 2 2  which  nation  during  for a  British  they  have  found  provided  long  defined their the  was shared by a l l segments of the  For an example o f t h e importance o f t r a d i t i o n and h i s t o r y t o a sense o f n a t i o n and n a t i o n a l i s m , see I a i n Hampsher Monk, The P o l i t i c a l P h i l o s o p h y o f Edmund Burke (New York : Longman, 1987). For a d i s c u s s i o n on t h e importance o f \" r a c e \" f o r t h e sense o f u n i t y among I m p e r i a l i s t s d u r i n g t h e l a t e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , see Douglas L. C o l e , \"Canada's ' N a t i o n a l i s t i c ' I m p e r i a l i s t s , \" J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s V, 3 (August, 1970): 44. T22  A.W. R a s p o r i c h , \"The N a t i o n a l Awakening: Canada a t M i d - C e n t u r y , \" i n J . M. Bumsted, ed., Documentary Problems i n Canadian H i s t o r y (Georgetown: I r w i n Dorsey, 1969.) 229-251. 123  \u2022  \u2022  Pocock, \" H i s t o r y and S o v e r e i g n t y , \"  81  381-82.  \u000CEnglish-speaking of the so  traits  that  can  both  collaboration to  Great  be  a  and  i o y a l t y . was  'and  to  a  a  a  North  reason.  theory  of  loyalty,  Americans  As  I  of  discussed  these  community.  tradition in  loyalties  and  the  were  Britain  before  e m i g r a t i o n , . and  The  loyalty to  established  the over  This  sentiment,,  chapter  on  the  acquired  in  the  of s o c i a l c o n d i t i o n i n g . T h i s c o n d i t i o n i n g  Great  so much  devoted attachment  cultural  mixture  many  Canadian, nationalism.'  institutions  historic  complex  and  in  and  British  c o n s i s t e d of a  c hoice  course  that  nationalism,  theory does not c o n s i d e r the f a c t t h a t  ideals  centuries,  said  British  Britain  political-  This, l o y a l t y , had  commonly i d e n t i f i e d with  it  exhibited  Canadian p o p u l a t i o n .  in  took p l a c e  the  colonies  themselves. Habits, customs and b e l i e f s were i n t e g r a t e d the  character  conscious factors  s t r u c t u r e of  thought.  B r i t i s h North Americans  Loyalty  .was  not  alone. Their  determined \"  loyalty  to  Great  Britain\u2022  in  existence  and  empowering  making t h e i r people  to  make  to a known framework. I t was  extension  of the  British It  more  them with  a shared  pattern  their'lives intelligible with  some an  English-speaking  i n the n i n e t e e n t h inventory  82  a  a sense of being  B r i t i s h n a t i o n that bound  North Americans together  furnished  organize  life-choices  reference  economic  provided-  could  setting,  without  .. \u2022  through which B r i t i s h c o l o n i s t s a new  into  of  ideas,  century. images  \u000Cand  myths  from  which  to  draw. . In  Canadian newspapers during found t h a t He  there  was  his  study  of  Central  the Union\u2022period, J.M.Si  a constant  reference  Careless  to B r i t i s h  ideas.  went on to state, t h a t , These newspapers f e l t v e r y s t r o n g l y t h e sense o f b e l o n g i n g to a British intellectual community, no l e s s t h a n o f b e l o n g i n g t o a p h y s i c a l B r i t i s h empire. They were i n a stream o f i d e a s emanating from B r i t a i n a t t h e h e i g h t o f her power and p r e s t i g e . 1 2 4  Much George right too  of  Brown and to  issue  \"George  Americans In  Britain  colonies  Globe,  immigrants  view.  were  was  created. during  to i n s i s t  framework  is that  of  saw  on  undoubtedly  as  Careless's  a l l British  conservatives,  contributed  outlook  ideas\"' was  Wise  Not  to Any  this  of  the  period  ideas,  to  North  political  and  diversity  view the  125  and  came  as. p o s s e s s i n g  misguided.  despite  three  political  attempt  surely  liberals  all  Canadians conducted t h e i r p o l i t i c a l general  concentrated  Globe's p a r t i c u l a r form of l i b e r a l i s m .  representatives  they  S.F.  and  has  h i s .corrective to what he  there  and  political  scholarship  Brown-centered\"  and  societies  correct  the  shared the  radicals,  of  Careless's  But  even  to of  the the  whole body a  singular  Careless  was  divisions, British  disputes  w i t h i n the same  that . \" t h i s  framework  of  dominant throughout the. Anglo-American /world,  on  J.M.S C a r e l e s s , \" M i d - V i c t o r i a n L i b e r a l i s m i n C e n t r a l CanadianNewspapers,\" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review v.31(3) (June 1950): 221. Gad H o r o w i t z , \" L i b e r a l i s m , C o n s e r v a t i s m and S o c i a l i s m i n Canada: An I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , \" Canadian J o u r n a l o f Economics and P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e 32 (1966): 18. , . 1 2 4  8 3 '\u2022  \u000Cboth and  sides  of  the  Atlantic.  Brown L i b e r a l s ,  and  Canadian  in  their  identities,\"  s u p e r i o r m e r i t s of the  scale  British  movement  North  positions  colony,  brought  S.F.  128  of  of with  was men  America.  obtained  Conservatives  attitudes in. t h e i r  p r o f o u n d l y i n f l u e n c e d by  the  and  ideas  their  Wise expands .on t h i s theme by  and  \u2022 -  1 2 7  from  immigrants,  influence  belief  their the  These  them  toward in  British constitution.  Thus, Canadian s o c i e t y large  The. .Macdonald  d e s p i t e t h e i r p o l i t i c a l warfare, were i n  fundamental ' agreement British  1 2 6  Britain  many  of  importance  intellectual stating  in  to  whom the  property.  129  that  B r i t i s h N o r t h America was never i s o l a t e d from Europe; i t was never f r e e t o develop f u l l y a c c o r d i n g t o i t s own i n n e r impulsions. I t was not s i m p l y the c o n t i n u i n g f a c t o f the i m p e r i a l presence, an imposing f o r c e i n i t s e l f i n t h e r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l and weak c o l o n i a l s o c i e t i e s . Even more i m p o r t a n t was the c o n t i n u i n g t r a n s m i s s i o n t o B r i t i s h N o r t h America o f the p o l i t i c a l . and s o c i a l i d e a s o f the O l d World. 130  Wise p o i n t s , out the  \"official  substantial. established  that  culture\"  the  influence  upon  the  I t d e l i m i t e d the' r o l e s , the  norms  of  the  of  what he . c a l l e d  political set  political  the  n a t i o n . was standards and\u2022  leadership  which  Careless, \"Mid-Victorian Liberalism in Central Canadian Newspapers,\" 223, 233. W.L. Morton, \" V i c t o r i a n Canada,\" i n The S h i e l d of A c h i l l e s ; A s p e c t s o f Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n Age ed. Morton, ( M o n t r e a l : M c C l e l l a n d and S t e w a r t , 1968) 317. 1  128  J.K. Johnson, Becoming Prominent : R e g i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p i n Upper Canada, 1791-1841 ( M o n t r e a l : McGill-Queen's U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1988). Laurence F a l l i s , \"The I d e a \u2022 o f P r o g r e s s i n t h e - P r o v i n c e o f Canada: A Study i n the H i s t o r y of Ideas, \" i n The S h i e l d o f A c h i l l e s ; A s p e c t s of Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n Age ed., ( M o n t r e a l : M c C l e l l a n d and S t e w a r t , 1968) p. 169. \u2022 S.F. Wise, \" L i b e r a l Consensus or I d e o l o g i c a l B a t t l e g r o u n d : Some R e f l e c t i o n s on the H a r t z T h e s i s \" , C H A . H i s t o r i c a l Papers (1974): 6., i / y  84  \u000Cdirected  the  attitudes  colonial  and  administration,  behavior  of  those  the s t r u c t u r e . T h i s o f f i c i a l for  those  figures  opposition.  The  who  imperial metropolis, of p o l i t i c a l , was  this  editor  found  s o c i a l and  Globe  left  the  with a  intensely  Americans  Liberal  Upper  ethnic  Canadian,  British.  being  131  North  British.  the  in  limits  political  London,  from i t a  values. the  So  the flow  great  pro-American  to  leaders  Canada  which \u2022 some  pro-republican  little  shared  the  British  sense,  a  strong  . rather  it  by  was  a  common  nation,  pool they  of also of  no. s t r e t c h of  the  emphatically  and  ethnic  this  point  in  time  Americans  chose  to  identify  At  than  consciousness  This  1 3 2  more  he  1 3 1  not ' only  members of  deep  self-definition. British  a. p l a c e  to  period  n a t i o n a l i t y . T h e i r e t h n i c i d e n t i t y was imagination  tied  the  Canada i n d i s g u s t because \"to h i s c h a g r i n ,  other  possessed  to  in  Sheppard,  during = the  microcosms of E n g l i s h s o c i e t y . \"  ideas  places  George  to show the  shape  c u l t u r e a l s o d e f i n e d the  o u t l i n e was  communities . of  British  aspired  economic ideas and  Brown's point  helped  received constantly  that  historians leanings,  and  influence  of  who  occupied  official  and  component was and  a matter  in  this  of  place  themselves  as  B r i t i s h North Americans demonstrated a l l the  '  '  \u2022  M.'H. Lewis, \"A R e a p p r a i s a l o f George Sheppard's C o n t r i b u t i o n t o the P r e s s o f N o r t h A m e r i c a , \" O n t a r i o H i s t o r y , L X I I (1969): 178. For an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f an attempt t o c r e a t e a d i s t i n c t l y Canadian e t h n i c myth, see C a r l Berger, \"The True N o r t h S t r o n g and F r e e , \" i n R u s s e l l , N a t i o n a l i s m i n Canada,.p.3-26.  85  \u000Cu s u a l n a t i o n a l i s t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of consciousness descent,, c u l t u r a l \u2022possessed  a  commonality,  . pan-national  g e o g r a p h i c a l .boundaries. of  of common  and a sense of m i s s i o n . creed  that  reached  There was.: yet l i t t l e -  They  beyond'  consciousness'  Canadians as. a n a t i o n as d e f i n e d by its\" 'separateness  by  language, descent, .myths or. t r a d i t i o n s ^' In a very \"real, sense,, North  Americans'' ' f e l t  sentimental loyalty,  with\", the, B r i t i s h  attachment  t o Empire  i t s readers  Americans national  t o the mother  be. reduced  economic s e l f - i n t e r e s t have,  the. p s y c h o l o g i c a l u n i t y  expressed loyalty.  as-the  was  not simply  country,  t o a. crude  British. a  nor- can- the  calculation  of  collaboration' theorists  would  believe.  The . l o y a l t y  North  possessed  a l l the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s \"of a  They.' were  'because i t - symbolized  l o y a l . to  British  the - B r i t i s h  nation  and s u s t a i n e d d e e p l y - h e l d v a l u e s . When  John A.. Macdonald d e c l a r e d f o r p a r t i s a n ..purposes i n 18 91 \"A British \u2022die\",  133  s u b j e c t .1 was born he was e x p r e s s i n g  . - a British  a d e s i r e widely  subject  I  will  h e l d , even, by a, ;  s u b s t a n t i a l , m a j o r i t y of...those who would .vote against-.him i n the e l e c t i o n t h a t would f o l l o w . While,  a sense  of being  1 3 4  -  Canadian  n i n e t e e n t h .century,, f o r the m a j o r i t y  d i d grow their  during' the  sense  of. being  . C i t e d i n Donald Creighton,' John A. Macdonald: The O l d C h i e f t a i n , \" (Toronto': M a c m i l l a n Co. , 1955), .553. . ' : ..For a survey-, o f t h e importance: o f .the B r i t i s h c o n n e c t i o n ' d u r i n g the t u r n o f the 'century, see C a r l Berger, ' The Sense o f Power: S t u d i e s i n . t h e Ideas o f Canadian .Imperialism,. 1867-1914' (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 197 0)'. \u2022''.'.'\u2022 '' ' '\u2022\u2022-'\u2022 1 3 3  134  :  '  .r  .' ' ;  \" '\u2022  .8 6  ' - ':\u2022 ..  ' -' . : :  \u000CBritish  d i d ,not- weaken.  became .stronger nineteenth  during  t h e middle.and  century.' Even  increasing  \u2022 control  administrative  British  escalating in.  this  processes,  were'  while.Canada  the B r i t i s h  probably  decades  . was  loyalty  o f the  exercising  an  among,  1 3 6  .'\u2022\u2022\u2022'-'  1 3 7  to'- the- Empire\" was.  As  Reformers, Careless  . . .\u2022 ' . v'  ,  becoming  There ' was ' l i t t l e .difference:'  moderate  \"High: T o r i e s .  was  f o r the monarchy, to  traditions,-.'and  to greater h e i g h t s .  C o n s e r v a t i v e s : or  later  intense. Loyalty  political  feeling  sense  over' \u2022\u2022 p o l i t i c a l , . . economic, ' \\ and-  more,- r a t h e r than l e s s the  In- fact-, ' t h i s  135  :'  Liberal.  stated,  \u2022\u2022:  ideas' '  channeled front B r i t a i n by. steamship'\" and t e l e g r a p h , or, ., carried w i t h t h e i m m i g r a n t s , who so. i n f l u e n c e d their.' \u2022 community t h a t 1't \"kept l o o k i n g ' t o the c e n t e r o f the B r i t i s h \". w o r l d f o r the s o u r c e of- it's thought'. This, i s ' not--merely t o \u2022\"be-- c a l l e d dependence. Feeling a unity, with Britain, E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g Canadians a c c e p t e d a bulk; o f heir 'ideas as.: t h e i r -own. . ..Canada, perhaps,, never be'fore o r s i n c e \"[had]\" \u2022' ' .been so B r i t i s h . -, ' - . ' - ' .' \u2022 \u2022 \u2022 -,,.-'\" 1 3 8  The provided  traditional  loyalties  the necessary  to B r i t a i n  and things. B r i t i s h  psychological... u n i f y i n g  135  force  during  ' -  \u2022  F.H. U n d e r h i l l , \"Canada's' R e l a t i o n s - w i t h the -Empire, as - Seen by the Toronto Globe, 1857-67,\" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review, X (1929): 106; J.M.S-. C a r e l e s s , \"The P o l i t i c a l Ideas of - George Brown,\" - Canadian Forum 36 (February, 1957): 247, 249; Donald Creight.on, \" S i r . John MacDonald and Canadian H i s t o r i a n s , \" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review v.29(1) '(March, 1948,): 1. ' \"..-\u2022\u2022-\u2022' .'\u2022'..-'.\" \" .'..\u2022''',Robert Page, \"Canada\u2022and the I m p e r i a l Idea i n the Boer 'War Y e a r s , \" J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s V, 1 (February, 1970\") 33;'-Carman\u2022 M i l l e r , P a i n t i n g the \u2022 Map Red; Canada and t h e South A f r i c a n War, .18 99^1902 ( M o n t r e a l : M c G i l l - Q u e e n ' s U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1993). .1 3 5  137  -  A.W. R a s p o r i c h , . \" I m p e r i a l Sentiment i n t h e Province..' o f Canada .during the Crimean War, 1854-1856, \" i n W:L. Morton, ed. ,; .The S h i e l d , o f , - A c h i l l e s ; A s p e c t s o f Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n Age ( M o n t r e a l : M c C l e l l a n d and S t e w a r t , 1968) p.\" 139.- See a l s o George \"W.- Brown, '\"The G r i t P a r t y and the Great Reform C o n v e n t i o n o f 1859, \" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review' XVI (1935) : 245. . '-...1  138  \u2022\"  .  . -  \u2022 C a r e l e s s , -\" \"Mid-Vietor-ian . L i b e r a l i s m , Newspapers,\" 235, 234. 87  \u2022  \u2022  i n . Central\" -'  Canadian\" . -  \u000Cthe  early  the  years of Union.  heritage  heritage. erode,  a  century  1 3 9  of  the  whole  with  British  In time this, l o y a l t y  casualty and  of B r i t a i n ' s  of n a t i v e - b o r n the United  of. the  of B r i t i s h  and  of  W.L. Morton when he wrote \u2022 that  their  nation  would  i n the t w e n t i e t h Empire,  traditions  of  the  to. a.growing  of i n c r e a s e d  integration  the changing  pattern  immigration. T h i s development was given a poignant by  Americans  became  to . a B r i t i s h  Canadians,  States  North  Isles  decline  the ' d i s m a n t l i n g  increasingly, irrelevance number  For many B r i t i s h  the B r i t i s h  of  resonance  world he had  known, the w o r l d i n which I 'had been r e a r e d , t h e w o r l d by whose s t a n d a r d s I had f i t f u l l y b u t not d i s l o y a l l y l i v e d , t h e w o r l d I had b o t h e r e d w i t h and had t r i e d t o keep i n , o r d e r r e p a i r , t h a t w o r l d no l o n g e r e x i s t e d . I t was no l o n g e r t h e r e - i t had v a n i s h e d . I was l i k e a man alone i n t h e A r c t i c waste, i n t w i l i g h t and w i t h no landmark. . 140  Donald Smiley, \" F e d e r a l i s m , N a t i o n a l i s m and t h e Scope ' Of P u b l i c A c t i v i t y i n Canada,\" i n P e t e r R u s s e l l , ed., N a t i o n a l i s m i n Canada. (Toronto: M c G r a w - H i l l o f Canada, 1966), p. 100. \u2022 \u2022\u2022 W.L. Morton, .\"The Dualism o f C u l t u r e and the F e d e r a l i s m , o f Power,\" in A New Concept Of C o n f e d e r a t i o n ? (Canadian Union o f S t u d e n t s , 1964) p. 128. 139  140  88  \u000CCONCLUSION  This loyalty  paper has  thesis'.  has  been  I  have  analyzed  used argued  the.\"nation-building\" is  based  on  the  'nation-state', must be  a l t e r n a t i v e conception multiple The posits  their  that  in  to  other  idea  of  'collaboration theorists  share  l o y a l t y , a view t h a t  order  to  strengthen  large-scale  I have  of \u2022 l o y a l t y  also is  the  communities  argued  that  necessary.  an  This  would have to e x p l a i n the v i t a l i t y  t h e o r e t i c a l ' research the  non-national  a  or  pattern  through  making  people  preserving  their  which  subject  development  e n t i t i e s i s a u s e f u l , i f not  lives,  empowering  done on the  preservation  i n c r e a t i n g and  provides  the  the  of  loyalties.  that  factor  to  view of  destroyed.  conception  i n which  collaboration  school's  loyalties or  way  relation  that  belief  weakened  alternative  in  the  of l o y a l t y  loyalties  to  indeed a necessary  national l o y a l t y . Loyalty i n d i v i d u a l s . may  existence  more  organize  intelligible  to make l i f e - c h o i c e s with  some  and  reference  to a known framework. Loyalties they be  be  of  the  jealous  narrow. Thus, a l o y a l t y to an  need i n no group.  need not  sense d e t r a c t  Vigorous  and  nature,  ancestral  loyalties  encourage a l l i n d i v i d u a l s , whether they be new  89  of  need  homeland  from 'a l o y a l t y to another  sustained  nor  :  national  all  sorts  immigrants  or  \u000C\"old-stock\" attach  citizens,  themselves  community  they  acceptance natural  of  td  to,  that  might  towards  that  by  become  multiple  step  feel  finding  is the  genuinely  loyalties a  there  is a  national  something roots  of  the  of  it.  The  first  and  part  necessary  loyalty  to  of  a  meaningful  sort. Robinson's  collaboration  conceptualization the  historical  of l o y a l t y that fact  of  economic  the  colonial  collaboration  commitment to the  transference natural  of  as  a  the  formalistic  approach,  national  loyalty  antithesis approach and  as  a  disloyalty.  underestimating  the  a  with  period  leading an  stark This-  simplistic  to  a  and  absolute  .regards  theorists loyalty  treat  value,  the  theory  nation-state  national them to  consciously  underpinned  collaboration of  a  the  that as  a  have  from  a  concept  of  placing  to other forms or group l o y a l t y . The  renders  the  collaboration  phenomena,  loyalties  subject  to  which  empire. The  The  considered  in  theorists  factors  finite  primary  occurrence.  upon  reconciled  loyalties  relationship  non-economic  loyalty  based  f o r s e v e r a l decades afterwards.. By  imperial  . model,  neglected  regards  the  is  cannot be  multiple  b e f o r e Confederation,, and contracting  thesis  it  in  formalistic  c o n t r a d i s t i n c t i o n between l o y a l t y has  importance  , resulted to  90  British  . in North  Robinson Americans  \u000C.that : l o y a l t y  to B r i t a i n , , and the' idea' of b e i n g B r i t i s h , was  to the i d e n t i f i e s ]of B r i t i s h North Americans.' The v i e w of l o y a l t y presented by Robinson i s untenable if  examined  using  shared  loyalties  feel  part  common  loyalty  that  collective  to B r i t a i n ,  to their  approach..  enabled B r i t i s h  of an ongoing  Americans . were p a r t loyalty  a\" f u n c t i o n a l  I t i s .through  North. Americans t o process.. Through , ,a  English-speaking. ' B r i t i s h  of an organic . s o c i a l \" e n t i t y . '  North  A common  a n c e s t r a l 'homelands was an e s s e n t i a l  part  of the cement that, bound the c o l o n i s t s t o g e t h e r . They shared a sense o f a; common h i s t o r y , ways they sought  language, and . c u l t u r e .  to r e p l i c a t e  In many  the world they had known i n  the U n i t e d Kingdom i n t h e . P r o v i n c e of Canada, as can be seen in  the p o l i t i c a l , ideas,  l a b e l s . and, i n s t i t u t i o n s  to  m a i n t a i n and develop. L o y a l t y  /they chose,  to Great, B r i t a i n  was the'  d i r e c t r e s u l t of the c o l o n i s t s d e s i r e to r e l a t e t o something outside they  .of and l a r g e r  found  than.the  themselves.' B r i t i s h  settler North  community  Americans  emotional g r a t i f i c a t i o n from the maintenance tie, The  of  i n which  derived  an  the imperial,  which Robinson and B a s k e r v i l l e have 'underestimated.' ..\u2022''\u2022 s t o r y of B r i t i s h  North America  i n the p r e - C o n f e d e r a t i o n  p e r i o d .is not the s t o r y of an absolute British resulting  imperialism in.  to  complete  -an . i n e v i t a b l e  shift  from complete -  Canadian  nationalism,  -decolonisation.  :  Multiple  l o y a l t i e s ' are nof a matter of one . t o t a l l y r e p l a c i n g another.  ' 91. ' .  ' '  '  .  \u000CLoyalty  i s 'not \u2022 a  question  of  America as national older  ebb  matter  and  of  flow.  a British  l o y a l t i e s created  example  of  If  1 4 1  the  dependent on  contrary,  a  healthy  Multiple  multiple part  the  loyalties  to  such  a  obvious  communities could  live  fact  about  was  \"as  of  within  are-  an  whole  federal  question  nature of  society  wrote,\"' i s of  the  of the  i s ' that  a  which  same s t a t e ,  and  condition  of  a  in  a  tomorrow's  society' in  necessary  combination of men  any  psychological  Trudeau  kind  i s the  and  society.  the  the  Scots  communities  Pierre  for  Canada  to  The  democratic,  was  Intrinsic  multiple  the norm,  ' molding  l i f e as the  government  scale  of  society.  federalism,\"  combination  civilized  large  of a federal  1 4 2  that  seen to be  the  civilization.\" different  viewed . .from .\u2022 a  pluralistic,  prototype  English,  a  North  destruction  the experience of  l o y a l t i e s w i l l be a  \"Canadian brilliant  is  of  i n t e g r a l part  British  is  ah atmosphere of heightened p l u r a l i s m .  loyalty  perspective,  it  settlement community demonstrates  p o l i t i c a l n a t i o n a l i t y embraced French and Irish.  rather,  1  The  development i s not  l o y a l t i e s . On  \u2022' e i t h e r - o r ;  society.\" federal  society it  1 4 3  form  of  itself.-  An  consists  of  a  A l l a n Smith, \"Metaphor and N a t i o n a l i t y i n N o r t h A m e r i c a , \" i n Canada - An American N a t i o n ? Essays on C o n t i n e n t a l i s m , I d e n t i t y , and the Canadian Frame of Mind; ( M o n t r e a l : M c G i l l - Q u e e n ' s U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1994) p. 134. P i e r r e Trudeau, F e d e r a l i s m and the French Canadians .(Toronto: M a c m i l l a n , 1968), p. 179. L o r d A c t o n , Essays on Freedom and Power (New York: M e r i d i a n , 1955), p. 160. 1 4 1  1 4 2  1 4 3  .92  \u000Cplurality  o f groups, each enjoying the l o y a l t y  Federalism  is  loyalties Richard their  local  have  They  communities  reconcile  identities,.  communities  f o r a l l o f Canada.  to  written,  community.  provincial  state,  attempt  and m u l t i p l e  Simeon  national  the  As  Canadians have  Elkins  t i e s to  ties  t o the  strong  want  of a c t i o n  as w e l l  as a centre  and  strong  and e q u a l l y freedom  multiple  f o r their  that  can speak  \"The i m a g i n a t i v e f e a t , \" \u2022 E l k i n s and Simeon  \" i s t o f i n d a way t o r e c o n c i l e and harmonize what may  Behind political  Canadian  loyalties.  credited  with  distinct  federalism  nationality  multiple  Georges  the  \"Etienne  145  had\u2022a  144  o f a Canadian existence  Cartier  has  I would  of a  t o the i d e a  argue  substantial  of been  conception  that was not t i e d  nationalism. duality  on  the f i r s t  Canadian n a t i o n a l i t y  French-English  images.\"  i s the i d e a  predicated  articulating  assimilationist  the  the  David  on the s u r f a c e appear t o be i r r e c o n c i l a b l e  of  of c i t i z e n s .  that  while  impact on t h e  manner with which f e d e r a l p o l i t i c s has been conducted a t the elite  level,  the  experience  of  Canada  as  settlement community had an e q u a l l y . s i g n i f i c a n t  David 1980J,  Elkins  p. 2 8 2 .  \u2022  and R i c h a r d  Simeon,  Small  World  a  British  i n f l u e n c e on  (Toronto:.. Methuen,  '  .  See P-.B. ' Waite,- ed., The C o n f e d e r a t i o n Debates, (Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1963), pp. 5 0 - 5 1 . See a l s o Donald S m i l e y , \" R e f l e c t i o n s on C u l t u r a l Nationhood and P o l i t i c a l Community i n Canada, \" i n Ken C a r t y and P e t e r Ward eds., E n t e r i n g t h e E i g h t i e s : Canada i n C r i s i s (Toronto: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 8 0 ) , p. 2 7 . . 1 5  \u2022'  \u2022 93  \"  \u2022 -  \u000Cthe  way  idea  English  of  loyalty.  Canada French  question  of  product formative  Canadian  Morton  those  who  to  Upper  W.L.  truly  conceived  of  linguistic  distinctions.  democracy  1 4 7  demanded  required  only  In a  so  frequently  \u2022 seen In  it  homelands pointed  is  worth  have  out  had  a  to  perhaps  the  Canada's  Morton's  many y e a r s  ago,  the.  as new  last  Canadian  Imperial  legacy.  n a t i o n a l i t y ' ' as based  a  Canada's  Canada,  a  m a t t e r .of  upon  cultural  or  view,  allegiance  to  rejection  political  long  as  Lower  and  to The  equally  conformity.  remembering  on.  B r i t a i n were  of.  majoritariah  Canadian  political  a l l e g i a n c e . \u2022'  W h i l e more n a t i o n a l i s t minded C a n a d i a n s may fact,  -  Great  something  represented  which  nationality  than  loyalties  relationship.  was  \"political  many  B r i t a i n , and  is  appreciated  rather  monarchy  and  Morton  of  Great  loyalties  allegiance  the  to  l o y a l t i e s to  nation.  scholar  country  French-English  years,  as  a  Ireland,  the  the  ' \u2022 \u2022  multiple  of  have\" c o n c e p t u a l i z e d ;  borne to  Canadians  \u2022  1 4 6  was  Canada,  strong  speaking  that  l o y a l t i e s to  tradition in Canada i s  bemoan  Canada.- As  a country  the  ancestral Careless  of.\"limited  A l a n C a i r n s has argued t h a t t h i s composite' n a t i o n a l - i m p e r i a l ' i d e n t i t y \" c o u l d not be shared by French Canadians,\" with, t h e r e s u l t t h a t \" p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y the two European f o u n d i n g p e o p l e s l i v e d i n d i f f e r e n t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l w o r l d s and had d i f f e r e n t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i d e n t i t i e s . \" See A l a n C a i r n s , \"The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l World We Have L o s t , \" i n C.E.S. Franks e t . a l . eds., Canada's Century: Governance i n a M a t u r i n g S o c i e t y ( M o n t r e a l : M c G i l l - Q u e e n ' s U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1995) p. 57. W.L. Morton, The Canadian I d e n t i t y (Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y o f T o r o n t o P r e s s , 1972). For a r e c e n t commentary of Morton's i m p o r t a n c e t o the contemporary debate, see Ramsay Cook, \" N a t i o n , Identity, Rights:r e f l e c t i o n s on W.L.- Morton's Canadian I d e n t i t y , \" J o u r n a l o f Canadian S t u d i e s , 29 (Summer, 1994): 5. 1 4 6  1 4 7  94  \u000Cidentities,\"  a c o u n t r y based  1 4 8  recognition  that  necessarily  detract  that  English-speaking  unites  loyalties  written  that  this  citizens  with  \"a  source  of  in  to  old  homelands,  Canadian By  by  the  variety  of  of  devout  had  to  federal  and  state,  or  value  country  has of  i s a. \" r e c u r r e n t professional . single-minded  often  coexist  provinces  The not  Morton  a  his  citizenship  \"has  newer  Desmond  Canada,  those  do  foundational  allegiances,\"  to  Canadian  i s the  of  loyalties.  community  Canadians.  conception  francaise . \"  one  another  a t t a c h e d , \" and  protected  to  search ' of  nation-builders.\" \"hyphens  from  frustration  colleagues  upon m u l t i p l e  comes  with  nations  with  loyalties  within  specifically  la  and  nation  1 4 9  acknowledging  the fundamental  importance of  multiple,  loyalties,  Canadian p o l i t i c a l , nationalism, i s compatible with  pluralism.  To  always  been  political provided the  borrow a  community  sphere, room  Reform  and  a phrase  the  of  and  Within  Carl  Berger  wrote  the  identities.  Canadian  about,  J.M.S. C a r e l e s s , \"'Limited I d e n t i t i e s , ' H i s t o r i c a l Review v o l . L, 1 (March, 1969) 1. 1 4 8  14 9  has this  t r a d i t i o n - has  Conservative p o l i t i c i a n s  C o n f e d e r a t i o n , t h r o u g h .to ably  Morton,' C a n a d a  political  loyalties  about  so  W.L.  allegiances.-  Canadian  for multiple Liberal  from  Canadians  who  From  brought  Imperialists who  i n Canada,\"  have  Canadian  Desmond Morton, \" D i v i d e d L o y a l t i e s ? D i v i d e d C o u n t r y ? i n W i l l i a m K a p l a n , ed., B e l o n g i n g : The Meaning and F u t u r e o f Canadian C i t i z e n s h i p ( M o n t r e a l : McGill-Queen's U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1993) p. 51.  95.  \u000Cemphasized the B r i t i s h connection have been at the same time Canadian  nationalists.  political tp  Within  h i s or her own. s t r u c t u r e  commitment's- each Canadian.has had the o p p o r t u n i t y  f a s h i o n h i s dr. her own array of p r o v i n c i a l ,  international not  of  national  l o y a l t i e s . '. This Canadian p o l i t i c a l  and  nationalism  only permits, but assumes', m u l t i p l e l o y a l t i e s . . In p r a c t i c e ,  men and. women o f t e n have double,  'or even, quadruple l o y a l t i e s , \"mentally l o c a t i n g according, to. the circumstances, region,  and even  possible and  i n a particular  in' one 'or two \u2022 c o u n t r i e s . \"  1 5 0  triple,  themselves,, community, I t i s quite-  f o r i n d i v i d u a l s ' to see themselves as being, .at one  the same time, a c i t i z e n , of Montreal, a Quebecer:,' and an  Irishman.  \u2022;'\u2022'\u2022'  :  .Lord Acton wrote that  \u2022 -'  \u2022  I f we t a k e t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t of. l i b e r t y -for the' r e a l i z a t i o n o f .moral d u t i e s t o be the' end o f c i v i l s o c i e t y , , we must \u2022 c o n c l u d e that,.'' those \"states' a r e s u b s t a n t i a l l y t h e most p e r f e c t which,' like... the - B r i t i s h and A u s t r i a n empire, \"includev a r i o u s d i s t i n c t n a t i o n a l i t i e s w i t h o u t o p p r e s s i n g them; 151  'Canada's loyalties  has  experience  of  unique come  experience close-, to  immigrants-  as a community Acton's  created  a  of  multiple,  ideal'. ...The;, common  common  psychology,  a  psychology ,that, encouraged the p r e s e r v a t i o n - o f l o y a l t i e s i n the  face 150  of the a s s i m i l a t i v e  p o l i c i e s , of  nation-builders. '  1  -  '  1 5 2  L i n d a C o l l e y , \" B r i t i s h n e s s and Otherness: An Argument,\" J o u r n a l o f B r i t i s h S t u d i e s ' 31 (October, 1992) 315. \" C i t e d i n D a n i e l Matthew, A c t o n ; t h e Formative Years' (London, Eyre &amp; S p o t t i s w o o d , 1946), p. 180. ' '. ' W.L. Morton, \"The H i s t o r i c a l Phenomenon, o f . M i n o r i t i e s : \" The Canadian E x p e r i e n c e , \" . C a n a d i a n E t h n i c S t u d i e s , X I I I , 3 .(T981) :\u2022 1.' 1 5 1  52  96  \u000CEnglish-speaking exchange  their  'national'  Canadians  have  heterogeneous  values  created  relentlessly,  pluralism  in' order  refused  for a sterile  to  set of  t o b r e a k down d e e p l y  felt  loyalties. Political loyalties'.  nationality  Each  individual  associations, functions.  each  Under  institutional competitive. nationality loyalties  certain  is  that  I would  favoured  matter  enmeshed  of a  multiple  matrix  and  limited  are  rather  complementary  Canadian  notion  tradition  that  that  political  i n any s e n s e  political  override what  makes  by E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g of a B r i t i s h were t a k e n  i f  i t  were  loyalties. century by  The  would  another. destroying parts.  of  a l l  strength  the parts,  As D a v i d  Potter  \u2022  of  national  b u t was  in  distinct legacy i n  was  fortified  has s a i d ,  97  other  the. nineteenth  loyalties,  supportive whole  with  loyalty  loyalty- f l o u r i s h e d not  a l l other  the  of  for.granted.  inconsistent  a mutually  other  the form  Canadians  settlement  Canada  or overpowering  them a l l . i n The  and  situation  i n d i c a t e that  challenging  subsuming  exclusive,  \"than  of  Robinson's c o l l a b o r a t i o n t h e s i s t r e a t s n a t i o n a l as  of  the person's  contend  loyalties  in  specific  institutions  i t i s a product  which m u l t i p l e  is  a  of a l l circumstances  English  rejects.the  affiliations. nationalism  the' b e s t  The  thus  . performing  loyalties  to  is  relation not  by  b u t .by t o one  enhanced  by  t h e sum. o f t h e  \u000CThe' o n l y c i t i z e n s who a r e capable of strong n a t i o n a l l o y a l t y a r e those who a r e capable o f s t r o n g group l o y a l t y . I n d i v i d u a l s a r e most l i k e l y t o express t h i s c a p a c i t y i n t h e i r devotion, t o t h e i r r e l i g i o n , t o t h e community, t o t h e i r p r o v i n c e , as w e l l as t o t h e i r c o u n t r y . The n a t i o n a l i s m which w i l l u t i l i z e t h i s c a p a c i t y most e f f e c t i v e l y , t h e r e f o r e , i s not t h e one which attempts t o o v e r r i d e and d e s t r o y a l l o t h e r o b j e c t s o f l o y a l t y , b u t t h e one which draws them i n t o one transcendent focus. 153  1ST  David P o t t e r , \"The H i s t o r i a n ' s Use o f N a t i o n a l i s m , \" p. 75.  98  \u000CBIBLIOGRAPHY Acton, Lord. Essays Meridian,'1955)  on  Freedom  and  Power  (New  York:  Allin, Cephas D.. and George M. Jones. Annexation, P r e f e r e n t i a l Trade and R e c i p r o c i t y . \"London: Mason Book, Co., 1912. Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: R e f l e c t i o n s on the O r i g i n and \u2022 Spread of N a t i o n a l i s m . New York': Verso, 1991. . . \u2022 Bagehot, Walter. The E n g l i s h U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1928.  C o n s t i t u t i o n . London:  Barth, A l a n . 1951.  Free  The  Loyalty  of  Men. .  New  York:  .Oxford Viking, '\u2022 .' . \u2022  Baskerville, Peter. \"Imperial Agendas and '.Disloyal' \u2022 C o l l a b o r a t o r s : D e c o l o n i z a t i o n and the John S a n d f i e l d Macdonald M i n i s t r i e s , 1862-1864,\" Old O n t a r i o : Essays' i n Honour of J.M.S. C a r e l e s s , ed. by David Keane and C o l i n Read. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1990. . \"The Pet Bank, the L o c a l State and the Imperial Center, 1850-1864,\" J o u r n a l of Canadian S t u d i e s , 20 (1985): 22-46 ' ' Berger, C a r l . \u2022 The. Sense'. of Power: Studies i n the' Ideas of Canadian Imperialism, 18 67-1914, T o r o n t o : , U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1970. . \"The True North , Strong and Canada. ed. by Peter R u s s e l l . \u2022 (.1966) .  Free,\" N a t i o n a l i s m In Toronto: McGraw-Hill  Bloch, Herbert Aaron. The Concept of Our Changing L o y a l t i e s . New York:. Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1934.. Brown, C r a i g . \"The- N a t i o n a l i s m of the N a t i o n a l \" P o l i c y , \" N a t i o n a l i s m i n Canada, ed.'by Peter R u s s e l l . Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson L t d . , 1.966. ' Brown, George W. \"The G r i t P a r t y , and the Great Reform Convention of 1859,\" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review, XVI (1935): 245-265 \u2022  9.9  \u000CBuckner, P h i l i p . \"The T r a n s i t i o n to Responsible Government; Some R e v i s i o n s i n Need of R e v i s i n g , \" From R e b e l l i o n to P a t r i a t i o n ; Canada and B r i t a i n i n the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. ed. by C.C.Eldrige. Wales: Studies i n Wales Group, 1989. Burroughs, Peter. \"The Determinants of Self-Government,\" \u2022 J o u r n a l of Imperial and Commonwealth H i s t o r y , 6 (1978) : 317-333 C a i r n s , Alan.. D i s r u p t i o n s -(Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d 1991)-  and  Stewart,  . \" W i l l .Canada Survive? Roadblocks i n the Way. of C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Change,\" C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Forum, 2 (Winter 1991): 54. Careless, J.M.S.' \" M i d - V i c t o r i a n Liberalism in Central Canadian Newspapers,\" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review, 31(3) (June 1950): 221. . \"Nationalism, Pluralism, Culture, XXIX (1968): 19-2 6  and  . \"The Political Ideas of George Forum, 36 (February 1957): 247-250  Canadian  History,\"  Brown,\"  Canadian  . The Union of the Canadas;. the Growth of Canadian ' Institutions,1841-1857. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1967. C e c i l , Andrew R. E q u a l i t y , Tolerance and L o y a l t y : Serving the Common- Purpose of Democracy. U n i v e r s i t y of Texas Press, 1990. Cole,  Virtues Dallas:  Douglas L. \"Canada's ' N a t i o n a l i s t i c ' I m p e r i a l i s t s , \" J o u r n a l of Canadian Studies, 3 (August 1970): 44-49  Commager, Henry S t e e l e . \"Who Is L o y a l To. America,\" Magazine, 195 (September'1947 )  Harper's  Connor, Walker. \"A Nation i s a Nation, i s a S t a t e , i s an E t h n i c Group, i s a....,\" E t h n i c and R a c i a l S t u d i e s , .1 (1978) : 379-388 . \"The Nature of the E t h n o n a t i o n a l Bond,\" E t h n i c R a c i a l Studies 16 (July 1993): 373-389  100  and  \u000CCornell, Paul G. The Alignment of P o l i t i c a l Groups i n Canada, 1841-1867. Toronto: U n i v e r s i t y of . Toronto Press, 1962. ' , Creighton, Donald. \"Sir John MacDonald and Canadian H i s t o r i a n s , \" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review 29(1) (March 1948): 1-13 . John A. Macdonald: Macmillan Co ., 19.55 . Den  The  Old  Chieftain.  Toronto:  O t t e r , A.A. ' \"Alexander G a i t , the 1859 Tariff', and Canadian Economic N a t i o n a l i s m , \" Canadian Historical Review, LXIII (1982).:- 160-188  Deutsch, K.W. Nationalism Cambridge :\u2022 M.I'.T . Press,  and - S o c i a l 1966.  Communication.  Deutsch, K a r l W. and W i l l i a m J . F o l t z . Nation-Building.York : Atherton Press, 1963.  New  Easton, David. The P o l i t i c a l System: An I n q u i r y i n t o State of P o l i t i c a l Science. New York: Knopf, 1953.  the  E l k i n s , David and Richard Methuen, 1980)  Simeon.  Small  World  (Toronto:  F a l l i s , Laurence. \"The- Idea of Progress i n the Province of Canada: A Study i n the H i s t o r y of Ideas,\" The S h i e l d of A c h i l l e s ; Aspects of Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n \u2022 A g e . ed. by W.L. Morton. Montreal: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1968. Feuer, Lewis. .Imperialism and B u f f a l o : Prometheus Books,  the A n t i - I m p e r i a l i s t , 1986.  Mind.  F l e t c h e r , George P. L o y a l t y : An Essay on the M o r a l i t y of R e l a t i o n s h i p s . New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, ,1993. Gallagher, John and Ronald V i c t o r i a n s : The O f f i c i a l 1961. \u2022  Robinson. Africa and the Mind of Imperialism. London:  . \"The Imperialism of Free Trade,\" Review, 2nd s e r . VI (1953): 1-15  Economic .History  Geertz, C l i f f o r d . \"Ideology as a . C u l t u r a l System,\" Ideology and Discontent, ed. by David E. Apter. New York: The Free Press, 1976.  101  \u000CGuetzkow, .Harold. M u l t i p l e L o y a l t i e s : T h e o r e t i c a l Approach to a Problem i n I n t e r n a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n . P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1955. H a l l o w e l l , Gerald A. \"The Reaction of the Upper Canadian T o r i e s to the A d v e r s i t y of 1849: Annexation and the British American League,\" Ontario Historical. A s s o c i a t i o n Papers (1970): 41-68 Hayes, Carlton Macmillan,  J.H. 1931.  Essays  on  Nationalism.  Heiman, George. \"The 19th Century Legacy: Patriotism?,\" Nationalism i n - Canada. R u s s e l l . Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Hinde, Wendy. Richard Cobden : a V i c t o r i a n Haven: Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1987.  New:  York:  N a t i o n a l i s m or ed. by Peter Outsider.  New  Horowitz, Gad. \" L i b e r a l i s m , Conservatism and S o c i a l i s m , i n Canada: An I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , \" Canadian Journal of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science, ,32 (1966): 143-171 Hutchinson, Oxford  John and. Anthony D. Smith, N a t i o n a l i s m . U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1994.  Oxford:  Johnson, J.K. Becoming Prominent : Regional .Leadership i n Upper Canada, 1791-1841. Montreal: McGill-Queen's U n i v e r s i t y . Press, -1988. Kedourie,  E l i e . N a t i o n a l i s m . Cambridge: B l a c k w e l l ,  1993.  Koebner., R i c h a r d and' Helmut Dan Schmidt. . Imperialism; The Story and S i g n i f i c a n c e of a P o l i t i c a l Word. Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1964. . Kohn, Hans. The Idea of N a t i o n a l i s m : A Study of \" i t s O r i g i n s and Background. New York: Macmillan, 1944. . N a t i o n a l i s m , I t s Meaning and ~Nostrand, 1955. K o n v i t z , M i l t o n R-. \" L o y a l t y , \" H i s t o r y of Ideas.: 108.  Vol.  History. Princeton: 3:  Dictionary  of  Van the  Kymlicka, Will. \" L i b e r a l i s m , I n d i v i d u a l i s m , and' -Minority R i g h t s , \" The.Law and the Community. Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989.  102  \u000CLadd,  John. \" L o y a l t y , \" V o l . 5.: E n c y c l o p e d i a o f Philosophy, (1967) : 97-98 . .: :'.:\u2022'. - ' \u2022 \u2022 .. \u2022' \u2022 \u2022  Levitt, Joseph. \"Race and Nation, in\" Canadian Anglophone \u2022 '\u2022 H i s t o r i o g r a p h y , \" Canadian \"Review of ' S t u d i e s in N a t i o n a l i s m , 8. (1981): 1-16 Lewis, M.H. \"A R e a p p r a i s a l of George Sheppard's C o n t r i b u t i o n \u2022'to-the Press of North America,\" Ontario.,. H i s t o r y , LXII (1969)' : 179-198 '., '. . Y . :  \u2022 L i t t l e , J . I . \"The. Short L i f e of a L o c a l P r p t e s t Movement.: The. Annexation.' . C r i s i s .of 1849.-1850 ' in- the ' E a s t e r n Townships,\" Journal- of the. Canadian Historical A s s o c i a t i o n , 3 (1992): 45-46 L o u i s , Win. Roger. The' Robinson and .New York: New Viewpoints, 1976.  Gallagher  Controversy. ' .  Macdonagh, O l i v e r . \"The A n t i - I m p e r i a l i s m of- F r e e T r a d e , \" The \u2022Economic H i s t o r y ..Review, 2nd s e r . , XIV (19,62),: . 101-115 :  Martin, Ged. . The Durham Report . and , B r i t i s h ' P o l i c y : / \u2022 A\" C r i t i c a l Essay. Cambridge: Cambridge'University Press, 1972.\" ' V v . Martin, Chester. , \"The United States and Canadian N a t i o n a l i t y , \" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review,\u2022XVI11&gt; (March ' . 1937,) : 1-11 McNa'ught, Kenneth. \"The N a t i o n a l Outlook of Canadians,\" N a t i o n a l i s m i n Canada, (Toronto:, McGraw-Hill, 1966) \". .  English-Speaking ed. by- R u s s e l l '  McRoberts, Kenneth.. \" E n g l i s h -Canada and. the ..Quebec. N a t i o n , \" Canadian Forum, 12 (February 1980):.11-15.. M i l l e r , Carman-.' P a i n t i n g the Map Red; \u2022 Canada and the South \u2022African War, 1899-1902. . .Montreal:.:- McGill-Queen' s U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1993. \u2022 Honk,  I a i n Hampsher. The Political Burke. New.York: Longman, 1987..  Philosophy  of  Edmund  Morton, \" Desmond. \"Divided Loyalties? D i v i d e d . Country\" Belonging: The Meaning and Future of Canadian Citizenship'. ed. by . W i l l i a m Kaplan. .\u2022 (Montreal: \u2022 McGill-Queens '.. U n i v e r s i t y Press,. 1993) .Morton, W.L. Toronto  . The Canadian Press, 1972)  Identity ' , :  10-3  (Toronto:  U n i v e r s i t y of  \u000C. \"The Dualism of C u l t u r e and the- F e d e r a l i s m of Power,.\" A New Concept. Of Confederation?. : Canadian Union of Students' (1964) \u2022. _. ' \" V i c t o r i a n Canada,\" the S h i e l d '\u2022' of Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n . Age, Montreal: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart,  of A c h i l l e s ; ed. by W.L. 1968.  Aspects Morton.  Page, Robert. \"Canada and the Imperial Idea i n the\u2022Boer War ' Years,\" J o u r n a l of Canadian Studies V, 1 (February 1970): 33-49 Piva, M i c h a e l . \" F i n a n c i n g the Union: The Upper Canadian Debt and F i n a n c i a l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n i n \u2022 t h e Canadas, 1837-45,\" J o u r n a l . o f Canadian S t u d i e s , 25 (1990-91): 82-98. Piano, Jack G. and Roy O l t o n . The ' I n t e r n a t i o n a l R e l a t i o n s D i c t i o n a r y . New York: H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969. Pocock, J.G.A. \"History' and Sovereignty: H i s t o r i o g r a p h i c a l Response to E u r o p e a n i z a t i o n i n British C u l t u r e s , \" J o u r n a l of B r i t i s h Studies, (1992) : 358-389  The Two 31  P o t t e r , David. \"The H i s t o r i a n s Use of N a t i o n a l i s m and V i c e Versa,\" H i s t o r y and American S o c i e t y : Essays, of David M. P o t t e r , ed. by Don E. Fehrenbacher. New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1973. Rasporich, A.W. \"Imperial Sentiment i n the Province of Canada. during the Crimean War, 1854-1856,\" The S h i e l d of A c h i l l e s ; Aspects of Canada i n the V i c t o r i a n Age, ed. by W.L. Morton. Montreal: McClelland. and Stewart, 1968. . \"The N a t i o n a l Awakening: Canada at Mid-Century,\" Documentary Problems i n Canadian H i s t o r y , ed. by J.M. Bumsted. Georgetown: Irwin Dorsey, 1969. Robinson, Ronald. \"Imperial Theory and the Question Imperialism a f t e r Empire,\" J o u r n a l of I m p e r i a l Commonwealth H i s t o r y , XII., 2 (1984) : 42-54 ______  of and  \"Non-European Foundations of Imperialism: Sketch f o r a Theory of C o l l a b o r a t i o n , \" Studies i n the Theory of Imperialism, ed. by Roger Owen and Bob Sutcliffe. London: Longman, 1972.  104  \u000C. \"Oxford i n Imperial H i s t o r i o g r a p h y , \" Oxford and the Idea of Commonwealth. ed. by F. Madden and D.K. F i e l d h o u s e . London: Croom Helm, 1982. . \" C o n c l u s i o n : Railways ..Imperialism. ed. , by Greenwood Press, 1991 Royce, Josiah. The Macmillan, 1908.  and Informal Empire,\" Railway Ronald ' Robinson. Westport: '  Philosophy  of \u2022 L o y a l t y .  New  York:  R u s s e l l , Peter H. \"The P o l i t i c a l Purposes' of the Canadian C h a r t e r of Rights and Freedoms,\" The Canadian Bar . Review, 61 (1983) : 35. Savelle, Max. \" N a t i o n a l i s m and Other . American R e v o l u t i o n , \" The American 67 (July 1962): 902-921  Loyalties Historical  i n The Review,  Semmel, Bernerd. The Rise . of Free '.Trade Imperialism: C l a s s i c a l P o l i t i c a l Economy, the Empire, of Free Trade and Imperialism, 1750-1850. Cambridge: University Press, 1970. Shafer,. Boyd C. \"Debated Problems i n the - Study Nationalism,\" Canadian Review ' of Studies N a t i o n a l i s m , XI, 1,(1984): 1-19  of in  _ . \" I f We Only Knew More About N a t i o n a l i s m , \" Canadian . Review of Studies i n Nationalism/ 7, . No. 2 (Autumn 1980) :. 197-218 . N a t i o n a l i s m and I n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m ; Belonging i n Human Experience. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1984. Shain, Y o s s i . The F r o n t i e r of L o y a l t y : P o l i t i c a l E x i l e s i n the Age of the N a t i o n - S t a t e . ,,.Middletown: Wesleyan U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1989. \u2022 \u2022 Skinner, Quentin. \"Meaning and Understanding i n the H i s t o r y of Ideas,\" H i s t o r y and Theory, V I I I , 1 (1969): 3-53 Smiley, Donald. \"Federalism, N a t i o n a l i s m and the Scope Of P u b l i c A c t i v i t y i n Canada,\" N a t i o n a l i s m i n Canada, ed. by Peter R u s s e l l . Toronto: McGraw-Hill of Canada, 1966. Stokes, E r i c . \"Late Nineteenth-Century Colonial Expansion and the Attack on'the Theory of Economic I m p e r i a l i s m : A Case of Mistaken I d e n t i t y ? , \" H i s t o r i c a l J o u r n a l , XII (1969) : -285-298 \u2022 . 105  \u000C. \u2022 \"Uneconomic Imperialism,\" H i s t o r i c a l (1975) :\u2022 409 '  Journal,  XXVIiI  T a y l o r , C h a r l e s . \"Why Do Nations Have to Become States?,\"' Reconciling the Solitudes: Essays on Canadian Federalism and N a t i o n a l i s m . ed. by Guy Laforest. Montreal: McGill-Queen's U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1994. Trudeau, Pierre. F e d e r a l i s m and . (Toronto: Macmillan, 1968)  \u2022 the ' French  Canadians  . U n d e r h i l l , F.H., \"Canada's R e l a t i o n s with the Empire, as Seen - by \u2022 the \u2022 Toronto Globe, 1857-67,\" Canadian H i s t o r i c a l Review, X (1929): 106-128 \u2022 ~ \u2014  Ward,  John M. Colonial Self-Government: Experience, 1759-1856. London: Macmillan,  The British 1976.  Way,  Peter. \"The Canadian Tory R e b e l l i o n of 1849 and the Demise of S t r e e t P o l i t i c s i n Toronto,\" B r i t i s h J o u r n a l of Canadian Studies, 10 (1995): 10-28  W i l t o n , C a r o l . \" B r i t i s h to the Core;. Responsible Government i n Canada West,\" Change and C o n t i n u i t y ; a Reader on PrerConfedera'tion Canada, ed. by C a r o l W i l t o n . Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, ,1992. Winks, Robin W. \"On D e c o l o n i z a t i o n and Informal American- H i s t o r i c a l Review, 81 (1976) : 540-556  Empire,\"  Wise, S.F. \" L i b e r a l Consensus or ' I d e o l o g i c a l B a t t l e g r o u n d : \u2022Some R e f l e c t i o n s ,on the Hartz T h e s i s \" , CHA Historical \u2022Papers, 6 (1974) :, 1-14 \u2022  106  "@en
<https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0099170>