Turks and Caicos Islands to join Canada?

[Ramako]

If people restricted their travels to only places where they had social policy like Canada, we wouldn't be a very well travelled populace. Sometime you have to go to places that do bad things if you want to experience the world. Believe it or not, sometime they do some things right.

 

[Whoaccio]

^
There is a difference between "experiencing the world" and having a bunch of Canadian's prop up the most repressive regime in this hemisphere for the sake of cheap hotels in which to get drunk. If Canadian's actually went to places like Cuba to "experience" the daily life of Cuban's that would be one thing, but that most definitely is not the case.

 

[Ramako]

^
There is a difference between "experiencing the world" and having a bunch of Canadian's prop up the most repressive regime in this hemisphere for the sake of cheap hotels in which to get drunk. If Canadian's actually went to places like Cuba to "experience" the daily life of Cuban's that would be one thing, but that most definitely is not the case.

If we're talking about holiday resorts, then you're right. I was speaking more about travel as discovery, not relaxation.

 

[toraerach]

Canadians need to think about travelling to countries like Jamaica that condone homophobia. By doing so you are essentially supporting discrimination and persecution through your tourist dollars... good times! The hypocrisy is that the same liberal Canadians who are 'outraged' by the perceived human rights violations of the Harper Conservatives will blindly overlook these issues in the pursuit of a February tan and some ganja. It would be fantastic to be able to travel to a warm and sunny yet tolerant and safe Caribbean destination where Canadian laws and values prevail. Call me a xenophobe but it would be a nice option and a progressive one for the region.

By no means is that hipocrisy limited to the Left when it comes to travel choices. I'm sure there are more than a few conservatives who were outraged at Dion's deal with the "socialists" who'd happily take a vacation in Cuba. In either case, I see this as one of the problems with resort-based vacations. You get a very limited and often staged idea of the local culture, government policies, etc.

That said, you can't expect people to make vacation choices solely on moral issues - everyone would end up with very very little selection in destinations. For example, I don't agree with the Turkish government's heavy-handed approach to Kurdistan or their denial of the Armenian genocide, but I'd still love to visit that country some day. As a gay man, I probably won't ever visit Jamaica or some of the other more homophobic nations of the world (at least until they change), but I'm not going to hold it against anyone who decides to vacation there.

When it comes to the Turks and Caicos, I don't know how gay-friendly the local population is, but I would be cautious with the idea that becoming part of Canada would change their values somehow. The laws might change, yes, but a cultural shift does not happen over night.

I wonder though if people are really motivated to do this for the right reason. Is this an example of Canadian expansionism or is it perhaps a demonstration of our inclusiveness and hospitality? I assume the truth, as it usually does, lies somewhere in between. If we are going to dump all of our historical and cultural baggage on to them, will we take up any of theirs? For example, will school children in Ontario learn about the history of slavery in the Turks and Caicos, and if so, will they learn about it as a domestic issue?

 

[Tewder]

... you can't expect people to make vacation choices solely on moral issues - everyone would end up with very very little selection in destinations.

Not many are heading to Jamaica or the islands to experience the culture or broaden their horizons. Most people don't even ever leave their all-inclusives. It is somewhat arrogantly bourgeois of us spoiled North Americans to view the world as our playground. Our choices have consequences whether it is where we choose to spend our tourist dollars or the products we choose to buy: how do you feel about wearing those diamonds these days? We can ignore those consequences, as most due, or we can take them into consideration and make informed decisions based on what it is we seek. A trip to Turkey to better understand that country may be worth that choice whereas a trip to a resort to get your party on at the beach may not.

I wonder though if people are really motivated to do this for the right reason. Is this an example of Canadian expansionism or is it perhaps a demonstration of our inclusiveness and hospitality? I assume the truth, as it usually does, lies somewhere in between. If we are going to dump all of our historical and cultural baggage on to them, will we take up any of theirs? For example, will school children in Ontario learn about the history of slavery in the Turks and Caicos, and if so, will they learn about it as a domestic issue?

Why would Canada choose to offer confederation to another region if there was nothing in it for Canada? Sorry, please explain as I clearly just don't get that logic. As for historical and cultural baggage, well yes that would be the deal of joining confederation, no? Bilingualism for sure, Canadian laws and the charter, all the social benefits etc etc., yes absolutely. Not all the baggage is bad. As for Canada, why wouldn't we celebrate the uniqueness of a new region joining our confederation? I agree that we would have to be culturally sensitive and respectful, and not just railroad over the place with crass development and so on.

 

[Therion]

Deny tourist dollars to a country and you push it further into poverty. That's not going to help the homophobia. Besides, what's wrong with resting my weary bones on a warm beach somewhere? Most third-world societies are very homophobic, it's just more overt in some.

 

[Dan416]

I think TCI would be a great addition as a territory. I don't think the population warrants a province. Only problem would be what postal codes they would get?

 

[kEiThZ]

As much as I'd want this to happen, quite often I think it's too much for Canadians to handle. For starters we'd have to hope that everyone can set aside their constitutional differences to let this new province join (fat chance for that...) and we'd have to re-orient our foreign and defence policies to include a much wider presence in the Caribbean. Are Canucks willing to support higher military spending so that we can protect our overseas territories? This would probably be a condition as well for support from the UK government. They would most likely want a Canadian military base there to have access to. It would also mean a much more involved role for Canada in Latin America. Is Harper willing to go toe-to-toe with Chavez?

 

[GenerationW]

Canadians need to think about travelling to countries like Jamaica that condone homophobia. By doing so you are essentially supporting discrimination and persecution through your tourist dollars... good times! The hypocrisy is that the same liberal Canadians who are 'outraged' by the perceived human rights violations of the Harper Conservatives will blindly overlook these issues in the pursuit of a February tan and some ganja. It would be fantastic to be able to travel to a warm and sunny yet tolerant and safe Caribbean destination where Canadian laws and values prevail. Call me a xenophobe but it would be a nice option and a progressive one for the region.

It's a nice thought, but people will tend to opt for the best place at the cheapest price.

I wouldn't go to many places right now, Jamaica and Cuba among them, but that's just me.

 

[Tewder]

Deny tourist dollars to a country and you push it further into poverty. That's not going to help the homophobia. Besides, what's wrong with resting my weary bones on a warm beach somewhere? Most third-world societies are very homophobic, it's just more overt in some.

Are they going to blame poverty on the gays? Homophobia and violent crime are rampant in Jamaica, in areas the tourists don't go. It doesn't seem like the people of Jamaica are actually benefiting from your tourist dollars. The large corporate resort chains are however.

I don't blame you for wanting some sun, sand and R&R but there are other choices. A major decline in tourism to places like Jamaica for ethical reasons may be the impetus for change if the country realizes it needs to modernize its attitudes and become safer and more tolerant.

 

[urbanfan89]

Are Canucks willing to support higher military spending so that we can protect our overseas territories? This would probably be a condition as well for support from the UK government. They would most likely want a Canadian military base there to have access to. It would also mean a much more involved role for Canada in Latin America. Is Harper willing to go toe-to-toe with Chavez?

First, other countries have possessions in the region and keep a low profile. The Netherlands has islands directly off Venezuela, and I've never heard of Chavez complaining about Dutch imperialists. Second, simply because Canada has a pile of sand in the region doesn't necessarily make it a big player in all of Latin America. Finally, if Harper is still in office in 10 or 20 years this country is in deep trouble.

I don't blame you for wanting some sun, sand and R&R but there are other choices. A major decline in tourism to places like Jamaica for ethical reasons may be the impetus for change if the country realizes it needs to modernize its attitudes and become safer and more tolerant.

Canada is, relatively speaking, a small source of tourists to those islands, and if Canada were to annex T&C no more than a small fraction of those tourists will change their travel plans. Their attitudes on some social issues is in their culture (as opposed to government policy), and boycotting them over their customs on gays takes grandstanding to a new dimension.

 

[Therion]

A major decline in tourism to places like Jamaica for ethical reasons may be the impetus for change if the country realizes it needs to modernize its attitudes and become safer and more tolerant.

It would just make them more pissed off at us than they already are. While big corps syphon away a lot of the profit from resorts, they do employ locals in large numbers, who really have no fallback options in countries without industry or services. You said there are other choices. I'd like to hear about them, keeping in my that I'm not loaded.

 

[lordmandeep]

Please most tourists who go to Jamaica never set foot outside the resorts. So why would they care about the homophobia and violence. They are there to get away from problems not to get involved in more problems.

 

[Tewder]

It would just make them more pissed off at us than they already are. While big corps syphon away a lot of the profit from resorts, they do employ locals in large numbers, who really have no fallback options in countries without industry or services. You said there are other choices. I'd like to hear about them, keeping in my that I'm not loaded.

Why would we care that Jamaica be pissed at us, or more pissed off as you imply?

It's all about personal choices. People should be aware what they are supporting when they travel or when they buy certain products.

As for other choices there are cruise lines that no longer stop in Jamaica because of violence and there are islands in the area that are respectful and more tolerant of other lifestyles. As you say tourism is the main source of income for many in Jamaica and in other countries and attitudes would have to change eventually if certain markets were to decline as a result of a raising of social consciousness on these issues. Wouldn't changes on these issues be far better in the long run for the people who live there??

 

[Jonny5]

Interesting story I came across in The Guardian.

Apparently some of these Caribbean tax-havens have been hit so hard by the financial crisis that they are facing national bankruptcy:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/sep/13/british-tax-havens-need-bailouts

...the Cayman Islands, the capital of the world's hedge fund industry and the fifth biggest banking centre, was so cash-strapped it may not be able to pay its own civil servants. The Caribbean tax haven was forced to ask the Foreign Office permission to borrow £278m to repair huge deficits. The Foreign Office refused, advising the island's authorities to impose property or payroll taxes. Talks are ongoing over a £30m emergency loan package.

Turks and Caicos is not mentioned in this article, but it is mostly focused on British affiliated islands.