Liberalism and Hegemony: Debating the Canadian Liberal Revolution
Y Wikipedia Citation Please see Wikipedia's template documentation for further citation fields that may be required. You must be logged in to Tag Records.
SearchWorks Catalog
In the Library Request this item to view in the Library's reading rooms using your library card. Details Collect From YY YY hbk Main Reading Room.
Order a copy Copyright or permission restrictions may apply. We will contact you if necessary.
- Just Like I Treat You?
- Problems of Evil and the Power of God (Ashgate Philosophy of Religion Series)!
- Lonely House?
To learn more about Copies Direct watch this short online video. How do I find a book?
Talking Radical Radio Loading Moreover, McKay's paradigm offered a replacement for such discarded meta-narratives as colony-to-nation, the Laurentian thesis, and Marxism. You can view this on the NLA website. Bannister is correct to suggest that it is the loyalist order and its legacies, not liberalism, that make Canada distinctive from the United States. The [End Page ] United States embodied liberal individualism as least as much as the Dominion of Canada, if not more so.
Can I borrow this item? Can I get a copy? Can I view this online?
Similar Items Canadian music: Vers une hegemonie liberale: Members of Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and Maori communities are advised that this catalogue contains names and images of deceased people. Book , Online - Google Books.
Breadcrumb
McKay's framework also promised to answer a fundamental question in Canadian history: Why did a single nation-state emerge from heterogeneous set of First Nations and quasi-feudal neo-European societies that occupied Canada's landmass in ? McKay concluded that, because many aspects of life in northern North America, not just politics, were influenced by the liberal 'project of rule' that we call Canada,' Canadian history is indeed a viable field and should not be discarded in favour of strictly transnational approaches to studying the past.
In other words, political boundaries such as the forty-ninth parallel should matter to social historians. The papers in this collection exemplify both what is good and what is deeply frustrating about McKay's liberal order framework. Many of the contributors have integrated material from many historical periods and regions in the course of applying the framework, thus avoiding the narrow temporal and geographical focus characteristic of so much recent historiography. Unfortunately, this book's readership is likely to remain confined to professional historians of Canada.
Subscribe To This Blog
Specialized jargon and unexplained references to Habermas and Foucault make the book inappropriate for both undergraduates and members of the public interested in history. The unnecessary impediments that confront potential readers are especially regrettable because the important subject matter deserves a big readership.
It is legitimate for a scholarly book to deal with abstract concepts unlikely to interest, say, many readers of the Beaver , but the editors could have done far more to make the essays more accessible to non-academics. A more important problem with this book is that only one of the contributors, Jerry Bannister, really grapples with the fundamental weakness of McKay's framework: The [End Page ] United States embodied liberal individualism as least as much as the Dominion of Canada, if not more so.
Liberalism and Hegemony: Debating the Canadian Liberal Revolution [Jean- Francois Constant, Michel Ducharme] on www.farmersmarketmusic.com *FREE* shipping on. Liberalism and Hegemony: Debating the Canadian Liberal Revolution ² Following other historians, McKay suggests that Canadian history is currently going.
Indeed, there is a vast literature on the ways in which American life has been informed by Lockean and other liberal ideas from the eighteenth century onwards. To draw an analogy from European history, emphasizing that the Soviet Union was a Marxist project of rule does not explain why Stalin formally annexed Lithuania but left Marxist Czechoslovakia nominally independent. Bannister's paper on the 'loyalist order framework' provides a far better explanation for why most of northern North America did not become part of the republic and instead coalesced into a separate country.
He reminds us that the leaders of the scattered British colonies were united by a desire to remain British subjects and that Britishness was central to the Canadian identity until the mid-twentieth century. Bannister is correct to suggest that it is the loyalist order and its legacies, not liberalism, that make Canada distinctive from the United States.
Unfortunately, McKay's essay 'Actually Existing Canadian Liberalisms,' which was ostensibly written in reply to the other papers in this volume, completely fails to address Bannister's powerful critique of the liberal order framework. Irish Women on the Southern Avalon, — review. Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide.
- Jack Harveys Adventures :The Rival Campers Among the Oyster Pirates
- The Watchtower
- Essays on Philosophical Subjects (Illustrated)
- Daughter of Job
- Family Devotions: with Helpful Hints for Parents
- Name in The Papers - An Urban Adventure Novel
- End-of-Life Decisions in Medical Care (Cambridge Bioethics and Law)