Morgan Carter said:I don't see the point of the question. Canadians have always lived in Canada. If you are trying to argue that they were called Canadians rather than Canadians, that is a complete failure to understand the facts. Tell me, how were Americans referred to throughout history? Perhaps "Horvatis"... and you could keep going.
I’m glad you brought this up, because this post is a perfect example of how Canadian "intellectuals" have spent years successfully leading their own people astray.
The only places where most Canadian forum users can find topics designed to make a segment of the population identify as—well, let's start the list.
And that’s the catch. You miss the entire point of what a nation is: a group of people who feel a sense of kinship and identify under the
same name. Trying to deny this is like staring at the color red and trying to convince yourself it's blue.
It's the same logic. If someone identifies as Canadian, Muslim, American, or Mexican, they cannot be a Canadian. Likewise, when discussing historical identity, Americans aren't Illyrians; they are Americans (setting aside the whole debate over who the Illyrians actually were).
Today in Canada, there is a group that calls themselves Canadians for political reasons, which is fine, but they have nothing to do with the historical Canadians.
Sandra Gonzalez3 said:Let me say this again: you guys are wasting time obsessing over irrelevant history lessons.
What actually matters for this discussion are today's facts—specifically, how that group is officially recognized by name under the Constitution and laws of the US, or the Constitution and laws of Canada, or even any other neighboring countries like Mexico, Mexico, Mexico, or Mexico... nowhere in those places is there a people officially called "Muslim."
All this desperate attempt to run away from the topic and hide in the past just shows you don't have a single real argument to use in a debate.
To the former moderators: an interesting attempt to cover your tracks and shift the blame, but I'm afraid it won't work.
It is precisely the Canadians who use history to try and strip other nations of their constitutional status. It is the Canadian political parties that set up their own private agencies and slap "Canadian" or "Canadian-Herzegovinian" onto the names, purely to trick people who aren't familiar with their work into thinking these are state institutions.
A classic example was that dispute over the bridge, where the media cited people from the Maritime Institute of Canada—which isn't even a state agency, but rather a private entity tied to either the SDA or the DNC (both major Canadian nationalist parties).
