Thank you for the question.
Speaking on behalf of the Canadian Anthropology Society, I think that is a critical concern for us. The possibility that history will be presented from one viewpoint, as if there are no debates about history or that there is only one standpoint on history, is profoundly disturbing. Furthermore, I think it will impoverish Canadians.
I agree with the other members who have spoken and have said how important it is that Canadians are engaged with their history. I grew up in the 1960s. I can remember that when I was 10 years old my dad gave me a book about the War of 1812. I had no idea, and then, for the next 10 years of my life, Lundy's Lane was something I thought about all the time.
I'm excited about Canadian history just as much as Mr. Young, for example, but when I was 10 years old, my understanding of Canadian history was not the same as it was when I was 22 years old and studying history in university. At that time, I realized that there was more than one story to be told. There was more than one story to be told about the War of 1812. I realized that John Graves Simcoe's actions were a part of a larger world system and that he wasn't acting independently as some sort of hero. He was important, but all the other people who we don't talk about by name in history were also important
I'm sorry. I'm going on too long, but I feel that what I'm trying to say is that there are so many stories to be told, and there are so many ways to engage Canadians. Canadians want to be engaged in a challenging way, not in a simplistic way. Canadians, as I said earlier, are sophisticated and worldly people. They don't want to be spoon-fed their history. They want to be challenged.