Canada's Panamerica Identity

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Hmmm. My U.S. chain store is bigger than your U.S. chain store. This could have legs.

Hmmm, I'm insecure because my fishing shop is not the biggest anymore.

I wasn't bragging. I wish it wasn't built.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Regarding hunting and fishing in Ontario (and even the southern part of the province), it's definitely a thing there, as evidenced by the fact that Canada's first (perhaps) and largest (likely) Bass Pro Shop Outdoor World is in Vaughan just 8 km from Toronto city limits.

People who report seeing no hunting culture at all in their regions may be having a bit of selection bias.

Sure, it might be less than in many parts of the States and even in southern Ontario.

Or perhaps you're going in the "right" direction for hunters in the U.S. (I-75 N going to the UP is a prime route) but not the right one in Canada. Tryh Highway 400 in the northern suburbs of Toronto going north in the fall for example.

Just to prod this a bit further, because I'm curious, and I'm also willing to admit my selection bias.

Hunting and fishing are fundamentally different, right? People go fishing everywhere, and it doesn't involve lethal weapons or potentially dangerous game. At least not in our waters, anyway. I can see how they get linked together as "outdoor sports," but still, the two aren't really in the same league. I can't help but think that the hunting aspect of this massive outdoors shop isn't all that big.

I mean, look at the site: the four "pro staff" at the shop are all fishing pros. No hunting pros are listed. But the various stores in the US that I checked all have hunting "pros" or guides as well as fishing ones.

I don't think I've ever been on the 400 going up north during the fall months. But I still can't help but think that the hunting exodus on the I-75 north in Michigan is orders upon orders of magnitude greater than any equivalent on the 400 going north. I mean, the hundreds of trucks I drove past all had Michigan plates (apparently Pennsylvania is the most hunting-crazy state in the US--they don't much go to other states to hunt). And every single gas station was packed with hunting supplies (yes, I asked at the two we stopped at).

I'm honestly curious: do you really see hundreds upon hundreds of pickups obviously packed with hunting gear on the 400 just north of Toronto on certain Fridays in the fall? Does every gas station north of Toronto have corn and other hunting stuff stacked all over the pumps? Is hunting really the talk of the town in the suburban fringes of the GTA?

I just don't think so. I have this really strong impression that there's a vast difference in scale between southern Ontario and southern Michigan when it comes to how much hunting is a part of the respective cultures, and the evidence I've seen seems to confirm this.

On the other hand, I know it's true that you more readily notice certain things in other places during your temporary visits than you do in the place where you live, so I'd really like to see the evidence that I'm wrong on this.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I'm honestly curious: do you really see hundreds upon hundreds of pickups obviously packed with hunting gear on the 400 just north of Toronto on certain Fridays in the fall? Does every gas station north of Toronto have corn and other hunting stuff stacked all over the pumps? Is hunting really the talk of the town in the suburban fringes of the GTA?

I just don't think so. I have this really strong impression that there's a vast difference in scale between southern Ontario and southern Michigan when it comes to how much hunting is a part of the respective cultures, and the evidence I've seen seems to confirm this.

On the other hand, I know it's true that you more readily notice certain things in other places during your temporary visits than you do in the place where you live, so I'd really like to see the evidence that I'm wrong on this.

I know this question wasn't for me, but I'll answer it anyway. My general impression is that hunting is a far bigger deal in the US than it is in Canada. Whenever I go to the US, particularly in the fall, it's hard not to notice hunting. The newspapers have pages devoted to it (particularly in less populated, "outdoorsy" states and not in east/west coast cities although very much present in south coast cities), flyers have page upon page of guns and accessories, there are massive Cabela's and Bass Pro Shops type places in any city of significance, you see hunting segments on the local TV... it's inescapable.

Contrast that with Canada where hunting comes across as way more of a niche pursuit. It's not something you notice even in a city like Winnipeg, which is surrounded by good hunting areas. So many of the hunters I encounter are rural people and Americans who come up to hunt... urbanites who hunt are rarer than hens' teeth here.

Fishing is a big deal down there too, but the passion for it here rivals the enthusiasm you see down in the US.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by esquire

I know this question wasn't for me, but I'll answer it anyway. My general impression is that hunting is a far bigger deal in the US than it is in Canada. Whenever I go to the US, particularly in the fall, it's hard not to notice hunting. The newspapers have pages devoted to it (particularly in less populated, "outdoorsy" states and not in east/west coast cities although very much present in south coast cities), flyers have page upon page of guns and accessories, there are massive Cabela's and Bass Pro Shops type places in any city of significance, you see hunting segments on the local TV... it's inescapable.

Contrast that with Canada where hunting comes across as way more of a niche pursuit. It's not something you notice even in a city like Winnipeg, which is surrounded by good hunting areas. So many of the hunters I encounter are rural people and Americans who come up to hunt... urbanites who hunt are rarer than hens' teeth here.

Fishing is a big deal down there too, but the passion for it here rivals the enthusiasm you see down in the US.

If you live somewhere like northern Ontario, even in the cities, a large number of people are hunters. But it doesn't seem to be popular among the largest cities in Canada (such as the GTA).

[Trevor3]

Originally Posted by esquire

I know this question wasn't for me, but I'll answer it anyway. My general impression is that hunting is a far bigger deal in the US than it is in Canada. Whenever I go to the US, particularly in the fall, it's hard not to notice hunting. The newspapers have pages devoted to it (particularly in less populated, "outdoorsy" states and not in east/west coast cities although very much present in south coast cities), flyers have page upon page of guns and accessories, there are massive Cabela's and Bass Pro Shops type places in any city of significance, you see hunting segments on the local TV... it's inescapable.

Contrast that with Canada where hunting comes across as way more of a niche pursuit. It's not something you notice even in a city like Winnipeg, which is surrounded by good hunting areas. So many of the hunters I encounter are rural people and Americans who come up to hunt... urbanites who hunt are rarer than hens' teeth here.

Fishing is a big deal down there too, but the passion for it here rivals the enthusiasm you see down in the US.

There are differences to be sure, but I think once you leave the big cities in Canada there is a substantial hunting culture. The biggest difference is in guns and ammo, that in and of itself is a hobby in the US. In Canada it's more about the animal you're after than the weapon you use. American hunters seem to spend much of their time coddling their gun and talking about prepping for it, gun maintenance, talking about what weapon they used on a particular hunt, etc... Canadian hunters talk about the animals they shot, the place they went, the one that got away, the trip out with the guys, etc... We get a lot of American hunters who come up this way to hunt during moose season and that's the difference I've seen.

We don't have the big hunting/fishing shops, but every Canadian Tire has a large department devoted to it. Every town of a couple thousand people has a shop that deals in ammunition and hunting supplies. For instance we have a store that sells ammunition and hunting supplies, sex toys, lingerie, drug paraphanalia (bongs and such), and does tattoos and piercings, I kid you not that is one store.

I think this might speak to the population density of the country. The US is spread out all over and even rural areas are often not that far from major cities, so it's not hard to trip into Pittsburgh to go to Cabela's. Someone from Kapuskasing isn't exactly a quick drive from Winnipeg, Ottawa or Toronto. I just feel like our major cities in Canada have less influence on people in rural areas than they do in the US.

A weekend morning on NTV out here will have a bunch of hunting and fishing shows like Fish'n Canada or the Newfoundland Sportsman. There are a couple others on Eastlink Cable out of Nova Scotia as well.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by esquire

... urbanites who hunt are rarer than hens' teeth here.

Here and everywhere else, I suspect.

Anyone who likes hunting is unlikely to be a fan of the ultra-urban downtown lifestyle and vice versa.

Also, I have to strongly second everyone who said that the importance of the gun in hunting is one of the differences between the strong hunting culture here and the strong hunting culture south of the border. (Incidentally, my hunting weapon is the crossbow.)

Something else that people do in the US that almost no one does here is that they'll go in the woods to shoot things (inanimated, obviously...) for fun. Using the gun is the end goal of the activity, not catching a prey. It seems to be a big thing in northern NH, usually with younger guys, but maybe that's local, because now that I think of it, I haven't really seen as much of a "gun culture" in other New England states even rurally.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I mean, look at the site: the four "pro staff" at the shop are all fishing pros. No hunting pros are listed. But the various stores in the US that I checked all have hunting "pros" or guides as well as fishing ones.
.

Ir could also very easily be something other than a lesser lack of interest in hunting. For example, the Canadian stores might have less leeway with respect to firearms, so that might lead to less emphasis on that aspect of their business.

[BretttheRiderFan]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

Calgarians had a weird pseudo american drawl when I visited. It was like a mix of a stereotypical Canadian accent and the deep south. It was weird.

You're on crack.

[lio45]

On the other hand, do you really think that health care is something that makes a big cultural impact?

I mean, if you para-dropped an alien in Vancouver, Seattle, Halifax, Boston, with his given assignment being to observe the "culture" for a while and report his observations, you really think he'd manage to identify health care as a major culture-shaping characteristic shared by the Vancouver-Halifax and Seattle-Boston duos and unshared between the two groups?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

I mean, if you para-dropped an alien in Vancouver, Seattle, Halifax, Boston, with his given assignment being to observe the "culture" for a while and report his observations, you really think he'd manage to identify health care as a major culture-shaping characteristic shared by the Vancouver-Halifax and Seattle-Boston duos and unshared between the two groups?

I think this reflects the bias toward superficial characteristics I was talking about earlier. Most people evaluate cultural differences on the basis of how obvious and apparent they are, but there's no reason why these differences must be considered the most important. I think the most interesting differences are the ones that have the largest impact on the way people think and behave and consequently the way they live.

The health care you get has a very big impact on your life, and the lack of public health care in the US is pretty directly related to how much people there buy into the extreme free market rhetoric that has become a key feature of US culture.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by lio45

On the other hand, do you really think that health care is something that makes a big cultural impact?

I mean, if you para-dropped an alien in Vancouver, Seattle, Halifax, Boston, with his given assignment being to observe the "culture" for a while and report his observations, you really think he'd manage to identify health care as a major culture-shaping characteristic shared by the Vancouver-Halifax and Seattle-Boston duos and unshared between the two groups?

Originally Posted by someone123

I think this reflects the bias toward superficial characteristics I was talking about earlier. Most people evaluate cultural differences on the basis of how obvious and apparent they are, but there's no reason why these differences must be considered the most important. I think the most interesting differences are the ones that have the largest impact on the way people think and behave and consequently the way they live.

The health care you get has a very big impact on your life, and the lack of public health care in the US is pretty directly related to how much people there buy into the extreme free market rhetoric that has become a key feature of US culture.

Yes, obviously an alien that's just arrived on Earth is going to be examining very basic things that are mostly the same across the developed world. Someone would need to already be very knowledgeable about the basics before attempting to study the nuances. But someone suitably qualified would certainly be able to see the differences, whether they be human or otherwise.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yes, obviously an alien that's just arrived on Earth is going to be examining very basic things that are mostly the same across the developed world. Someone would need to already be very knowledgeable about the basics before attempting to study the nuances. But someone suitably qualified would certainly be able to see the differences, whether they be human or otherwise.

No one is saying there aren't noticeable differences. What some of us are saying is that there are also many noticeable cultural differences between various areas of the US and various areas of Canada, and in some cases, these differences can make given areas of the US and given areas of Canada feel more like each other (in terms of general feeling: how foreign or how familiar living in one feels to someone who's used to the other) than they feel like some of the most markedly different areas of their own respective countries.

I'm of the school of thought who on this matter firmly believes that for example an (unilingual Anglo) Vancouverite would feel less of a cultural shock relocating to Seattle than relocating to Iqualuit or Quebec City, even though he/she would cease to routinely have loonies and twoonies in his/her wallet and would have to get healthcare coverage from an insurer.

Just my opinion, of course.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by lio45

No one is saying there aren't noticeable differences. What some of us are saying is that there are also many noticeable cultural differences between various areas of the US and various areas of Canada, and in some cases, these differences can make given areas of the US and given areas of Canada feel more like each other (in terms of general feeling: how foreign or how familiar living in one feels to someone who's used to the other) than they feel like some of the most markedly different areas of their own respective countries.

I'm of the school of thought who on this matter firmly believes that for example an (unilingual Anglo) Vancouverite would feel less of a cultural shock relocating to Seattle than relocating to Iqualuit or Quebec City, even though he/she would cease to routinely have loonies and twoonies in his/her wallet and would have to get healthcare coverage from an insurer.

Just my opinion, of course.

But in case of Iqualuit we're talking about several non-cultural factors like temperature and city size too. These things can influence culture but are not actually culture themselves.

But really, if we're talking about relocating to the closest and most similar part of the US compared to the most distant and dissimilar part of Canada, then yes I agree it's possible. But even then I wouldn't say it's automatically a given. I suspect it would also depend on the exact scenario and the person involved.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by someone123

I think this reflects the bias toward superficial characteristics I was talking about earlier. Most people evaluate cultural differences on the basis of how obvious and apparent they are, but there's no reason why these differences must be considered the most important. I think the most interesting differences are the ones that have the largest impact on the way people think and behave and consequently the way they live.

Well, yeah, cultural differences that are "very apparent and very obvious" are probably going to be considered important...

If I go to, say, Japan, and look at the main cultural differences that strike me during my time I'm over there, I'm pretty sure that the specifics of their healthcare system aren't going to be anywhere near the top of the list.

I think that what we're talking about (my understanding, at least) in this thread are all the little things that make a place (and the locals) "feel foreign" or "feel like home" to someone, and I think that a very foreign place on all counts but with a Canadian-style healthcare system would feel very foreign while home with a different healthcare system would still feel mostly like home.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by someone123

I think this reflects the bias toward superficial characteristics I was talking about earlier. Most people evaluate cultural differences on the basis of how obvious and apparent they are, but there's no reason why these differences must be considered the most important. I think the most interesting differences are the ones that have the largest impact on the way people think and behave and consequently the way they live.

The health care you get has a very big impact on your life, and the lack of public health care in the US is pretty directly related to how much people there buy into the extreme free market rhetoric that has become a key feature of US culture.

Arguably it has less to do with ideological factors. The separation of powers and federalism, among other things, can make overhauling the health care system difficult. There is also path dependency; a well entrenched private health insurance system is difficult to uproot.

That said, describing the American health care as free market in any sense is wrong. 1/3 of Americans receive public health insurance from the US government; this will climb to 1/2 of Americans by 2022. Meaning that more than 160 million Americans will be insured by the US government. Quite possibly the largest public health insurance plan in the industrialized world.

Moreover, private health insurance companies are extensively regulated, to the point where it is even difficult to say whether it is 'private' in any substantive sense. Firstly, profits are regulatorily capped. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, insurance companies are constrained in using actuarial data to determine premiums -- determining insurability, as you may imagine, is the heart of what insurance companies do. And this, too, is regulatorily constrained.

Finally, even to the extent it is ideologically based, there is substantial ideological diversity on the topic.

To use the rhetoric of some neoliberals in the US and paint the entire US with that brush is not just an unfair overgeneralization, it is also simply wrong. That neoliberals invoke some mythical historical unregulated version of the US is sad and entirely inaccurate. I've been studying American regulations for the last 2.5 years and I can provide you with sources if you'd like.

Seriously, to use the neoliberals to paint the US or to assume their views reflect US policies is like using UKIP as the basis for describing UK culture.

The US is thoroughly a mixed market economy with extensive regulations. I 100% grant that many of those regulations are not optimal. They are the product of compromises between numerous groups (some of which really should not have as much influence as they do, like corporations) and systemic gridlock. But the US is extensively regulated. There's no free market.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

The US is thoroughly a mixed market economy with extensive regulations. I 100% grant that many of those regulations are not optimal. They are the product of compromises between numerous groups (some of which really should not have as much influence as they do, like corporations) and systemic gridlock. But the US is extensively regulated. There's no free market.

Well, I don't think there can be a free market in health care in the same way most people understand the market for, say, spoons. For one thing you can't consent to being provided with health care in a lot of cases and you're often not in a position to negotiate in the first place. I didn't claim the US has a free market for health care and I think anybody who proposes a free market for health care should be viewed with great suspicion.

My point was more about how people think about these issues and how public discussions proceed. There seems to be a marked difference between Canada and the US. This part I guess is debatable.

I also disagree that regulations etc. can be disentangled from culture. I pointed this out in a previous post. The platonic ideal of culture completely detached from government regulation and economic pressure is nonsense. There are no examples of this in the world, only instances where we've forgotten why people started thinking a certain way. If people think that their folk dancing or whatever is a true reflection of the way they view the world but their government is not, well, they're just not very perceptive.

[Mister F]

lol...anyone who thinks that Sarah Palin sounds like a typical Ontarian needs to get their hearing checked.

Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker

I think, if we all went out for a beer, one from each state, I sure as hell wouldn't be with the TO crowd.

If that's your attitude towards "the TO crowd" then the feeling is probably mutual. Then again, "the TO crowd" feels totally fine hanging out with Newfoundlanders. We try not to get so hung up on preconceived notions.

Originally Posted by Ramako

What exactly is the connection between Canada and South America?

Well, other than the colonial histories, they're both Western societies with a lot of similar cultural norms compared no other cultures. Still, you're right that the connections to Europe are stronger. I'd say that the ties to Latin Europe are just as strong as ties to Latin America.

Originally Posted by lio45

I mean, if you para-dropped an alien in Vancouver, Seattle, Halifax, Boston, with his given assignment being to observe the "culture" for a while and report his observations, you really think he'd manage to identify health care as a major culture-shaping characteristic shared by the Vancouver-Halifax and Seattle-Boston duos and unshared between the two groups?

That depends, did the alien injure itself when it hit the ground?

You don't experience the nuances of a culture by being para-dropped somewhere to observe for a while. But if this alien spent some time with the locals then yes, it would notice how differently we think about health care.

[Procrastinational]

Originally Posted by Mister F

lol...anyone who thinks that Sarah Palin sounds like a typical Ontarian needs to get their hearing checked.

Didn't really mean she sounds like a typical Ontarian, I meant that the accent common in parts of (mainly rural) Ontario shares certain elements that are highly highly exaggerated in her case, namely vowel raising.

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/t...alin_have.html

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Mister F

You don't experience the nuances of a culture by being para-dropped somewhere to observe for a while. But if this alien spent some time with the locals then yes, it would notice how differently we think about health care.

It would notice that, yes, along with a trillion other things, many of them different, many of them similar, and many of them noticed way before the health care differences.

And if you have to

Originally Posted by Mister F

experience the nuances of a culture

then it's because you're kinda saying that I'm right; if it's only nuances that we're talking about, and it's something that you need a long time to start to notice, then it means the cultures are actually quite similar.

You don't need to "experience the nuances for a long time" to begin to find noticeable cultural differences between Barcelona and Tokyo and Yakutsk and Dubai and some African village. The places are strikingly different from each other.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by lio45

On the other hand, do you really think that health care is something that makes a big cultural impact?

I mean, if you para-dropped an alien in Vancouver, Seattle, Halifax, Boston, with his given assignment being to observe the "culture" for a while and report his observations, you really think he'd manage to identify health care as a major culture-shaping characteristic shared by the Vancouver-Halifax and Seattle-Boston duos and unshared between the two groups?

Good point.

Americans don't view their complex health care system -- a mix of coverage received from state, federal, philanthropic, religious, school, employer, and private sources that varies state by state -- to be a unifying or essential component of American culture.

Americans don't think, after football, what defines us is our complex health care system, that varying mixture of state, federal, philanthropic, religious, school, employer, and private source system.

Moreover, there are diverse points of view in the US on health care -- including a very substantial percentage that support universal health care. Not to mention that 1/3 of Americans are on government provided health insurance, and it will climb to 1/2 by 2022.

In fact, I think few countries do this. Canada is an exception. Many Canadians do point to the public health care system as a defining aspect of what it means to be Canadian. Whether this suggests that Canadians are scrounging at the bottom of a barrel for unique cultural traits or genuinely value health care more than other societies when it comes to defining themselves is up for debate, I suppose.