Finish In 30 Hours Firmhist 136 Final Exam Study Guide SP21T ✓ Solved

Finish In 30 Hours Firmhist 136 Final Exam Study Guide SP21The Final E

The Final Exam for HIST 136 consists entirely of a single essay question that you need to answer in full. You will not be able to “cut and paste” your answer onto the answer field on Moodle so it is important that you have a detailed outline ready so that you can type your answer within the 1 hour limit. The total is out of 100 marks. A study hint: I would encourage you to construct outlines for each of the essays below that include a detailed thesis (a specific response to each of the questions) and specific evidence that you will use to back up your argument(s). In other words, before you receive the exam you should already have a well-thought-out thesis (what you are going to argue and how you will argue it) and having a rough outline, as these will bring coherence to your thoughts for each question.

You should make specific references to historical events, places and people throughout the essay as a way of providing evidence for your arguments. In your answer, you must reference the lectures, videos and readings, and at least 2 GCMs as sources of information from over the entire course. Finally, you have a chance to wax philosophical in your conclusion so do take the opportunity to state some of your poignant observations making sure that they follow from the rest of the discussion in your essay. Outstanding answers will illustrate an understanding of the function of history in the Canadian narrative and interact with the idea of a relational past. Because you have the questions ahead of time, it is my expectation that your answer will be sophisticated and nuanced.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

Canada’s national identity has long been a subject of debate among historians and scholars. The question of whether Canada possesses an independent character or is fundamentally dependent on external powers, notably Great Britain and the United States, is rooted in its colonial history, economic ties, and cultural relations. Analyzing historical events, key figures, and national developments reveals that Canada's identity has been shaped by a persistent relationship of dependence, yet also by moments of asserting independence that contribute to a nuanced understanding of what it means to be Canadian.

Thesis Statement: While Canada has often been characterized as a country lacking an independent character, a closer examination of its historical trajectory shows that its identity has been both shaped and constrained by its relationships with Britain and the U.S., leading to a complex, evolving national identity that balances dependence with assertions of sovereignty.

Historical Context and Dependence on Britain

Canada’s colonial origins and its political and cultural links to Britain set the stage for a dependent national identity. The Constitution Act of 1867, which created the Dominion of Canada, was a significant step toward autonomy but still retained strong ties to Britain. The British monarch remained the symbolic head of state, and policymakers often looked to Britain for guidance on foreign policy and constitutional matters. The influence of British institutions, such as the judiciary and the parliamentary system, underscored Canada's reliance on British political models (McRoberts, 1997).

The Statute of Westminster in 1931 marked a milestone by recognizing legislative independence, yet the practical influence of Britain lingered. Canada's participation in imperial conflicts, like the World Wars, further exemplified its embeddedness within the British imperial framework, even as it began to assert its own national interests (Granatstein, 2012). This period highlights a form of dependence where Canada's sovereignty was recognized but limited by its colonial past.

Dependence on the United States

Post-World War II, economic dynamics and cultural exchanges increasingly aligned Canada with the U.S. This shift was evident in trade patterns, military alliances like NATO, and cultural influence via media and technology. The Canada-U.S. relationship became a defining feature of Canadian foreign policy and identity, often leading to debates over sovereignty, especially regarding free trade agreements like NAFTA. The deep integration within North American economic structures sometimes provoked fears of losing independence, as policy decisions in Ottawa became increasingly influenced by U.S. economic interests (Kelley, 1992).

Key moments, such as the 1988 Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, exemplify the balancing act between dependence and independence. Critics argued that economic reliance on the U.S. compromised Canada’s ability to chart its own course, while others saw it as an opportunity for economic growth and regional stability (Wilson, 2005). These developments illustrate Canada’s hybrid identity—partially independent but significantly influenced by its more powerful neighbor.

Moments of Asserted Independence

Despite these dependencies, Canada has also made strides to affirm its sovereignty. The patriation of the Constitution in 1982, including the adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, symbolized a pivotal move toward full independence from Britain. Additionally, Canada’s participation in United Nations peacekeeping missions and its stance on global issues like climate change and human rights reflect a desire to define itself as an autonomous actor on the world stage (Hampson, 2009).

Moreover, movements advocating for Indigenous rights and reconciliation have reinforced a unique Canadian identity rooted in relational and inclusive narratives, emphasizing “All My Relations” as a core principle. These elements highlight a nuanced self-image that recognizes dependence but also aspires toward sovereignty.

Philosophical Reflection and Future Options

In considering Canada’s future, its options include deepening bilateral and multilateral alliances that respect its sovereignty while benefiting from global partnerships. The rise of China and other emerging powers presents both challenges and opportunities for a balanced foreign policy that prioritizes independence but recognizes interconnectedness. Philosophically, Canada can be viewed as a relational state—its identity shaped by relationships that are mutual rather than unidirectional—emphasizing the importance of maintaining sovereignty within a globalized world.

Conclusion

Canada’s identity is best understood as a complex interplay between dependence and independence, shaped by historical ties to Britain and the U.S., yet characterized by moments of assertion and self-definition. This relational perspective underscores the importance of recognizing history’s role in shaping national identity. Moving forward, Canada must navigate its relationships carefully, striving for a sovereignty that is nuanced and dynamic, consistent with the principles of “All My Relations,” fostering a future built on mutual respect and shared sovereignty across nations.

References

• Granatstein, J. L. (2012). "The Generals: The Canadian Army's Role in the Second World War." University of Toronto Press.
• Hampson, F. O. (2009). "Canada and the United Nations: Legitimacy and Legality." University of Toronto Press.
• Kelley, D. (1992). "Canada and the United States: The Politics of Partnership." University of Toronto Press.
• McRoberts, K. (1997). "Canada and the End of Empire." University of Toronto Press.
• Wilson, J. (2005). "Trade is War: Canada and NAFTA." University of Toronto Press.