Home
The Politics of Resentment
Having gained access to Vancouver Sun archives to ex-tract comments about B.C. regionalism-mostly from 'opinion-makers' (journalists and politicians)-Philip Resnick has taken the notion of B.C. separatism just seriously enough to produce The Politics of Resentment (UBC $34.95).
Resnick makes the obvious conclusion that British Columbia would have a pivotal role to play if Quebec ever voted 'Yes' to separation. More provocative is his penultimate chapter in which he examines the immaturity of British Columbia: The resentment many British Columbians feel towards Quebecois society is essentially envy.
In his opening sentence Resnick wonders what accounts for British Columbia's 'peculiarities'. Readers who are fervently aware of the economic and political reasons for B.C.'s alienation, in turn, might wonder if The Politics of Resentment is essentially a long-distance report to the people who really matter, the people in Ontario and Quebec. "I would argue," Resnick writes, "that the desire for recognition as a self-standing region of Canada articulated by a number of different B.C. governments stems from a pent-up resentment over the relatively backseat role British Columbia has been playing in Confederation ever since 1871."
Well, duh. Unfortunately The Politics of Resentment doesn't provide any historical summation of the causes of British Columbia's disaffection.
"To be honest," Resnick confides in his preface, "I found, and still find, the minutiae of B.C. politics of little interest. My horizons are more Canadian than British Columbia." Does a psychiatrist ignore the childhood of a patient? And would he justify his failure to do so on the grounds that he can't be bothered?
Just as newspaper publishers are routinely parachuted into Vancouver to decide what's news in branch-plant dailies and the big ad agencies give us Vince Carter on our billboards outside B.C. Place instead of Shareef Abdur-Rahim, British Columbians are continually asked to take seriously the views of academics whose roots are elsewhere. It's an old story, 129 years old.
Yes, peculiarities abound here. Resnick's text refers to Peter Newman as a 'transplant' even though Newman has lived in B.C. for almost 20 years; at the same time no mention is made of the fact that Resnick is a more recent newcomer. Is it irrelevant minutiae? If, after living in Quebec for ten years, a transplanted British Columbian wrote a book about Quebecois separatism, would it be seriously considered?
Philip Resnick says British Columbians have been at the back of the bus since 1871; Resnick also says B.C.'s resentment mustn't be taken seriously. This is tantamount to the parental voice talking to the kids in the back seat. If we shut up and be good, we might get an ice cream cone. 0-7748-0804-7
[BCBW WINTER 2000]
Resnick makes the obvious conclusion that British Columbia would have a pivotal role to play if Quebec ever voted 'Yes' to separation. More provocative is his penultimate chapter in which he examines the immaturity of British Columbia: The resentment many British Columbians feel towards Quebecois society is essentially envy.
In his opening sentence Resnick wonders what accounts for British Columbia's 'peculiarities'. Readers who are fervently aware of the economic and political reasons for B.C.'s alienation, in turn, might wonder if The Politics of Resentment is essentially a long-distance report to the people who really matter, the people in Ontario and Quebec. "I would argue," Resnick writes, "that the desire for recognition as a self-standing region of Canada articulated by a number of different B.C. governments stems from a pent-up resentment over the relatively backseat role British Columbia has been playing in Confederation ever since 1871."
Well, duh. Unfortunately The Politics of Resentment doesn't provide any historical summation of the causes of British Columbia's disaffection.
"To be honest," Resnick confides in his preface, "I found, and still find, the minutiae of B.C. politics of little interest. My horizons are more Canadian than British Columbia." Does a psychiatrist ignore the childhood of a patient? And would he justify his failure to do so on the grounds that he can't be bothered?
Just as newspaper publishers are routinely parachuted into Vancouver to decide what's news in branch-plant dailies and the big ad agencies give us Vince Carter on our billboards outside B.C. Place instead of Shareef Abdur-Rahim, British Columbians are continually asked to take seriously the views of academics whose roots are elsewhere. It's an old story, 129 years old.
Yes, peculiarities abound here. Resnick's text refers to Peter Newman as a 'transplant' even though Newman has lived in B.C. for almost 20 years; at the same time no mention is made of the fact that Resnick is a more recent newcomer. Is it irrelevant minutiae? If, after living in Quebec for ten years, a transplanted British Columbian wrote a book about Quebecois separatism, would it be seriously considered?
Philip Resnick says British Columbians have been at the back of the bus since 1871; Resnick also says B.C.'s resentment mustn't be taken seriously. This is tantamount to the parental voice talking to the kids in the back seat. If we shut up and be good, we might get an ice cream cone. 0-7748-0804-7
[BCBW WINTER 2000]
Submitted on July 4, 2003 in By David.
