In the past week, there has been considerable debate on campus about the role that Remembrance Day should play in Canadian life. Some have questioned whether the annual event transcends remembrance, and instead, glorifies war and idolizes a willingness to die for one’s country. Here, a key question emerges: is it possible to separate political motivations from the act of remembering and respecting those who went to war?
Remembrance Day is, at its core, an observance rooted in personal reflection. For that reason, it has different significance for different people. For some, it is a day to honour loved ones lost in war, and to pay respect to those who continue to serve. For others, it is a time to acknowledge the fact that war is a part of Canada’s history that must never be forgotten.
Although Remembrance Day presents a possible opportunity to question and critique how our society views war, there are other occasions both more pertinent and appropriate for such scrutiny.
Canada’s new $20 bill, released into circulation last Wednesday, features the Vimy Ridge monument as its key image. Undoubtedly, it is important to honour the sacrifice of Canadian troops in the First World War, but we must also question if we are prioritizing a romanticization of war at the expense of, for example, the promotion of peacekeeping efforts. Notably, the current Canadian $10 note depicts a female peacekeeper atop the banner “Au service de la paix/In the service of peace.” A new $10 note will be unveiled in 2013.
In the same vein, the federal government’s $60 million advertising campaign for the 100th anniversary of the War of 1812 calls the government’s priorities into question. Was the War of 1812 as important a ‘turning point’ in our country as the signing of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Remembrance is crucial, but we must consider what these signal about what we collectively value as a nation, and what impact it may have on future generations of Canadians.
Canadian history lessons are a fundamental fixture in primary and secondary education. Which stories we choose to tell—and which we choose to withhold—need to be thoughtfully and critically considered. Glossing over unjust relations with Indigenous peoples—as often happens when the ‘discovery’ of this continent is first presented in school—is an egregious failure to educate about wrongdoing. So, too, is the selective, one-sided presentation of war. There is a pressing need to critique the way we teach history to children.
Remembrance Day is a day to remember those who died in the service of our country. That is not to say that the event—and the way we observe and remember past instances of war—is above criticism. But the focus of the day should remain on veterans and their individual sacrifice. At the same time, we should continue to question the extent to which our society glorifies war, and the level to which our government weaves narratives of war into national sentiment.
