“Anti-Americanism” In Canada

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31333, 1 April 1967, Page 14

“Anti-Americanism” In Canada

“A persistent, general, but low-key antiAmericanism in Canada” had had tremendous influence which was often overlooked, said Dr. A. H. Clark, professor of geography at the University of Wisconsin, who arrived yesterday to spend a month at the University of Canterbury as an Erskine fellow assisting in American studies. Dr. Clark said it was also common for American studies to take account mainly of the United States. Dr. Clark feels a “certain freedom” to make these comments “in a friendly way” because he was born and educated in Canada, took his Ph.D. at the University of California at Berkeley and

served on its staff, was an assistant lecturer in the geography department here in. Canterbury in 1941 and 1942, was professor of geography at Rutgers University after the war, and has held its present chair since 1951. As a Canadian he was naturally keen to show his country’s influence in American studies. Dr. Clark said, but there were also good historical, geographical, economic, political, military, and cultural reasons. Canadians, a generation or two ago, began to resent “control from London” and developed a sort of anticolonialism. At the same time they were conscious of cen-turies-old bitterness that boundary decisions gave the United States the rich heartland of the Middle West “The average Canadian chiefly resents the fact that a lot of things happen without his being consulted personally,” said Dr. Clark. But in a changing world which now looked to North

America to lead in so many political, military, and economic matters (instead of north-west Europe), the United States and Canada had developed an interdependence “whether they like it or not.” Canada had tremendous reserves of raw material used by the United States. Canada had been a very healthy moderating influence on American foreign policy, although not much was heard about it directly. “I don’t think even Canadians realise the strength of their quiet and subtle influence," said Dr. Clark. Sentimental ties with Britain remained, but this left Canada like a can tied to the tails of two dogs. Dr. Clark said: “A Canadian knows he may be involved in a war at any time, without having any say in it; but he also knows that, if the United States got involved in a world war, Canada would not stay out for more than three days.”

So Canada had an influential role in which it tended to “thumb its nose at the Old Man, whichever side of the Atlantic he happens to live.” Dr. Clark said there was a deep-seated desire that Canada should establish clearly Its own identity in world affairs. Dr. Clark said that in a month’s lectures to American studies classes, 12 general university lectures, a lecture to the Geographical Society on April 12 and a public lecture on April 17, he hoped to bring out some of the less obvious influences now in play. In the same way, in America, he tried to show that the South-west Pacific had influences on North America far beyond the “flutter of interest” caused by the Second World War. Dr. Clark said he believed he trained more university teachers on this line than anyone else in the United States. They carried the torch.