Year in Review (100 Years Later): Underrated 1911 Edition

      1 Comment on Year in Review (100 Years Later): Underrated 1911 Edition

By Aaron Boyes and Sean Graham

We offer our two cents on the events of 1911. Let us know what you think in the comments.

This is the 9th time we have convened to do one of these 100 Years Later brackets and it’s always a lot of fun to go through the list of events and consider what could be a contender to win. Most years it has been hard to determine if there any favourites, but as we looked through 1911 it was a bit of a different story. While all the events are interesting and influential in their own way, it felt that there was a power group within the list and we were curious to see how it would play out in the bracket.

We have divided the events into 4 brackets. For 1911, we have the Power to the People Bracket, This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things Bracket, Is This a Good Thing? Bracket, and, of course, Potpourri Bracket. As always, we welcome your thoughts on the matchups and hope that you enjoy these brackets in the lighthearted spirit with which they are written.

Power to the People Bracket

(1) Direct Election of United States Senators

v.

(4) United Kingdom Passes Parliament Act

Image depicting the 1856 caning of Charles Sumner

Sean: In 1897 George Frisbie Hoar, a Massachusetts senator who had been an elected official for nearly 50 years, said that the United States Senate “was created that the deliberate will, the sober second thought of the people might find expression. It was intended that it should resist the hasty, intemperate, passionate desire of the people.” Referred to by many Americans (usually senators) as ‘the world’s most deliberative body,’ the United States has seen a variety of political strategies employed, from punching your opponent, to hitting him with a cane, to reading stories to your children watching at home. Clearly, the chamber’s self-anointed status is well earned.

Continue reading →

Congress 2020, Interrupted: Racism, Academic Freedom, and the Far Right, 1970s-1990s

      No Comments on Congress 2020, Interrupted: Racism, Academic Freedom, and the Far Right, 1970s-1990s

Will Langford

In 1989, psychology professor Philippe Rushton inflamed debates over discrimination at Western University (then known as the University of Western Ontario (UWO)) by outlining his racist theories at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. For some, Rushton’s academic racism made him unfit to teach at UWO. For others, protecting academic freedom was ultimately more important than the content of Rushton’s work.

Perhaps the lines of debate will sound familiar. Jordan Peterson, University of Toronto psychology professor, came to prominence in 2016 for attacking gender-neutral pronouns. Like Rushton, Peterson welcomed debate that made academic freedom, not prejudice, the core issue.

In my first of three posts about the now-cancelled Congress 2020 at Western University, I noted that the most ardent opponents of university codes of conduct mixed up academic freedom and free speech in the early 1990s.

This second post takes up a related history: how academic freedom, as a valued principle of university life, became useful cover for professors trying to beat back criticism of their fringe or far-right views.

Edmund Burke Society bumper sticker, 1970 (Source: LAC, MG 32 C 21, Vol 407, File 7-9)

Continue reading →

How do we teach history after this? Thoughts from the “Pandemic Pedagogy” series

      No Comments on How do we teach history after this? Thoughts from the “Pandemic Pedagogy” series

By Samantha Cutrara

I went into self-isolation about a week before many others. Because I had come into contact with family traveling abroad, I worked from home while the university and college I work for continued to prepare for what felt like an inevitability after the WHO’s declaration. Being by myself that first week exacerbated the sense of shock that schools would be closing and learning moved online.  I thought of the release of my upcoming book and my new video series talking to K-12 teachers about ways to expand their pedagogies and practice related to history. Would these conversations even matter any more? Would history be understood as an indulgent and frivolous subject of study when there was an urgent need for health care, economic stimulus, a reorganization of work and home? How would we teach history after this, I asked on my video series. I didn’t know. I didn’t even know where to start. But, as with most things, when you explore topics within a community you lessen your sense of isolation and broaden your capacity to understand perspective and approaches far beyond yourself. So came the “Pandemic Pedagogy” video series where I’ve been talking with historians, history teachers, and people in the heritage community about how we can think about history and teaching history during and after this moment.

Three women working at desks during the 1918 Spanish Flu

Three masked women working at desks, c 1918-1920

Continue reading →

Revisiting “Was Laurier Canada’s Obama?”

      1 Comment on Revisiting “Was Laurier Canada’s Obama?”

By Elsbeth Heaman

In September 2016 I published at Active History an argument that the 2016 election in the United States was shaping up like the 1911 election in Canada. The previous elections had seen a diversity candidate (Catholic and French in Canada, Black in America) win the highest office. But instead of inaugurating a new and more equitable political life, the consequence was electoral repudiation of the progressivism and partyism that delivered such results, and a turn towards plutocrats who promised effective business-like governance.

Of course, the real interest in the piece, as in the book manuscript I had just completed, wasn’t what happened in 1911 but what happened at the next election in 1917, namely, the most racially polarizing campaign in Canadian history. The plutocrats couldn’t run on their record because they had too spectacularly enriched themselves—and had too obviously continued to do so amidst a global catastrophe, the First World War—that seemed to require better things. So they campaigned on racism. The dog-whistle was dropped and racism, along with voter suppression and a host of other nasty tricks, became the core of the Conservative government’s campaign. They claimed to repudiate “party” and embrace “union,” but this was party politics rebranded and intensified.

Credit: Library and Archives Canada, Acc. No. 1983-28-727

“Good luck in 2020 guys,” I was warning Americans, should they elect Donald Trump.

My forecasting was dismayingly accurate. I didn’t predict either the pandemic or the economic collapse of 2020, of course, but the more predictable pattern of plutocracy and racism was confirmed. And plutocratic rule does tend to have catastrophic consequences.

Of course one can only carry the parallels so far: Robert Borden was no Donald Trump. Continue reading →

Plagues and Social Change: Putting Covid-19 in Historical Context

      3 Comments on Plagues and Social Change: Putting Covid-19 in Historical Context

Extract from the plague-era Second Statute of Laborers, 1351. British National Archives, C 74/1, m. 18 (1351).

Alvin Finkel

After the Black Death of 1347-52, which cut the population of Europe in half and accounted for some 75 million deaths globally, the feudal system faced challenges from peasant uprisings while labour shortages resulted in large wage increases for day workers. Orphanages and hospitals, run by churches and wealthy lay people, sprang up in towns across the continent. While social changes in the aftermath of plagues build on transformations that were already occurring in societies, they often rapidly accelerate such changes.

The so-called Justinian plague from 541 to 750, which may have accounted for as many deaths as the Black Death, severely limited ambitions of the Eastern Roman Empire to extend its reach and eventually re-establish the western empire that had been captured in the century before the plague struck. The Persians and other powers in the eastern Mediterranean developed immunities to the diseases that were causing massive declines in the Roman population. So Constantinople was reduced mainly to campaigns to hold on to whatever territories it already held in the pre-plague period.[i]

In the aftermath of the Black Death, the monarchy led efforts by landlords and town guilds to maintain the status quo and resist efforts by workers to get more wages and by peasants to keep more of their crop from the exactions of lords, the church, and the monarchy. Continue reading →

Annual Year in Review (100 Years Later): Physical Distancing/Bored At Home Edition

      2 Comments on Annual Year in Review (100 Years Later): Physical Distancing/Bored At Home Edition

By Aaron Boyes and Sean Graham

We offer our two cents on the most important events of 1910. Let us know what you think in the comments.

Remember December? It was only 4 months ago, despite how long ago it feels. When we convened for our Annual(?) Year in Review (100 Years Later)™ we wrote that 2019 had been “a slog” and that “consuming news this year has rarely left us with an overwhelming feeling of optimism.” Then 2020 came along and said “hold my beer.”

The work that has been published here on Active History and elsewhere putting contemporary events into context has been remarkable and we have eagerly visited the site every morning to see what new gem has been published. As we discussed in the most recent episode of the History Slam, though, we are also seeking content that will provide a brief respite from the news. That’s why marble racing has become a staple of lunch time at Sean’s house.

So we got to thinking if there was something we could do in that same vein and Aaron remembered that in our zeal to review years 100 years later, we hadn’t looked at the entirety of the 1910s and that it would be good to back and rectify this unacceptable oversight. So that’s what we are doing. Over the next 3 weeks we will recap the years which were not included during our annual brackets. This will culminate on May 13 when we determine the most important event of the 1910s with the eagerly anticipated ‘Winners at War’ Bracket.

Today, it’s 1910. We have 16 events broken into four brackets: Things That Move, Pre-Netflix and Chill, Well Intentioned Inventions, and, of course, Potpourri. As always, we welcome your thoughts on the matchups and hope that you enjoy these brackets in the lighthearted spirit with which they are written.

Things That Move Bracket

(1) Establishment of the Royal Canadian Navy

v.

(4) German Zeppelin Deutschland Makes 1st Commercial Passenger Flight

Aaron: The British Empire was built on the strength of its navy. As an island nation, the United Kingdom had to dominate the seas if it had any chance of expanding its influence. Before 1910, Canada, as a British dominion, was reliant on the Royal Navy to protect its offshore interests and maritime defence, which, up until the 20th century, was not a priority. The Royal Navy patrolled the seas and, until this time, was unrivaled on the seas.  That changed in May 1910, however, when the government of Sir Wilfrid Laurier introduced the Naval Service Act. Its intent was to create a separate navy for Canada but one that, if necessary, could be placed under British control in times of war.

Recruiting poster from the First World War

The main impetus for the creation of a Canadian navy was the arms race between Britain and Germany – the Dreadnought crisis. Britain required assistance from its Dominions, either in the form of money or them assuming more responsibility for their maritime defence. Laurier and his supporters preferred the creation of a unique Canadian navy, arguing it was a better long-term solution. Canadian imperialists, on the other hand, believed that Canada’s responsibility was to the Empire first and that monetary contributions were the preferred option. French Canadian nationalists, led by Henri Bourassa, opposed Canada having any involvement whatsoever in Britain’s naval problems.

Continue reading →

Congress 2020, Interrupted: A Brief History of University Codes of Conduct

      1 Comment on Congress 2020, Interrupted: A Brief History of University Codes of Conduct

Will Langford

Congress 2020 is cancelled. But before the conference is forgotten, let’s ponder the anti-racism Congress that never was.

At last year’s gathering, in a brazen act of racial profiling, a participant harassed political scientist Shelby McPhee and falsely accused the Black graduate student of theft. Following an investigation, the perpetrator was issued a ban for violating the Congress Code of Conduct.

The Black Canadian Studies Association led the way in demanding redress. In part, it challenged the Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences to add anti-Black racism to the theme of Congress 2020.

Before the response to COVID-19 intervened, about 8,000 academics were set to attend Bridging Divides: Confronting Colonialism and Anti-Black Racism, the re-titled event hosted at Western University (commonly known as UWO prior to its rebranding in 2012).

Continue reading →

Jean Little: Celebrating Friendship and Kindness

      1 Comment on Jean Little: Celebrating Friendship and Kindness

By Catherine Carstairs

One of Canada’s best-known children’s writers, Jean Little, passed away at the beginning of April at the age of 88.  With COVID-19 dominating the news cycle, her death attracted little attention.

Jean Little just before delivering the 2016 Margaret Laurence Lecture in Toronto. (Wikimedia Commons)

And yet, as we live through a severe epidemic, perhaps we need Jean Little’s wisdom more than ever.  Little created a world in which injustice was real, but her characters did their best to make the world a kinder place. Continue reading →

History Slam Episode 143: Building the Greatest Hockey Team Ever

      1 Comment on History Slam Episode 143: Building the Greatest Hockey Team Ever

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

By Sean Graham

One of the great things about sports is the ability to argue passionately and vehemently about subjective things that, ultimately, don’t matter. Would you rather a defensive stalwart who can’t score or a gifted offensive player who is a turnstile on defense? Did a coach make the right decision in switching lines down the stretch? And, of course, most debated question across all sports: who is the greatest player of all time?

One of the things that makes that question so tough is that comparing players across eras is nearly impossible. In the NHL, for instance, the 1980s saw a scoring surge while the mid-1990s were notorious for low-scoring plodding games (See: Devils, New Jersey). So how do we assess goalies who played in these eras? Could a 1980s goalie with a higher goals against average than a 1990s goalie be considered a better player?

A popular off-shoot of the greatest player debate is the greatest team debate. Teams like the 1985 Chicago Bears, 1927 New York Yankees, 1980s Boston Celtics, and 1976 Montreal Canadiens have become mythic within the canon of their respective sports, but definitively knowing who is the greatest is impossible to know.

Fortunately, there are simulators available that attempt to settle these long-standing debates. To put these programs to the test, I asked History Slam veterans Aaron Boyes, Jeremy Garrett, Mike Thompson, and Pat Fournier to put together a roster for what they would consider to be the greatest NHL team of all time. Each person selected 11 players for their teams, which I then put into a 30-game simulated season, the results of which were at times what I expected and, in a couple cases, shocking.

Continue reading →

Deep listening and remote interviews with military families

      1 Comment on Deep listening and remote interviews with military families

Isabel Campbell

In the midst of the Covid 19 pandemic, blogs, webinars, and posts with expert advice about remote interviewing in oral history have blossomed. For example, three experts at Baylor University in the United States put together a webinar which is available on YouTube.[i] It is particularly aimed at Americans; Canadians will quickly realize that our legal environment is very different, though the webinar includes relevant ethical and technical information. The Oral History Society (of Britain) has also created a helpful web page which begins with “Oral historians have always favoured the face-to-face interview and discouraged remote interviewing.” This piece cautions us about the need for informed consent with signatures, trust building, and concern for the archival quality of the end product. It contains a list of helpful sources.[ii] Graham Smith, an oral history activist, responded to this piece, emphasizing the vital role of oral history in exposing ageism and violations of basic rights to life which are heightened during this crisis.[iii]

The best practices remain the same, but may be more challenging to achieve during a pandemic, while utilizing remote technology. Joy Parr’s ‘”Don’t Speak For Me”: Practicing Oral History amidst the Legacies of Conflict’[iv] was written in 2010, but is especially relevant as it addresses the problems of vulnerable narrators and power relationships based in academic authority which utilizes methodology as a thick barrier. In effect, she asks: Do we have the right to interview traumatized people, and who are we to speak for them?[v]

And yet, I have learned that whole life oral history methodology is a powerful way of allowing people to speak for themselves. Continue reading →