Before the Constitution
Sep. 13th, 2018 06:14 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jsburbidgeA National Post opinion piece begins: "... Maybe that's because I grew up in Canada before it had one [a constitution]",
Whereby the author not only displays complete ignorance but is self-disqualified in an own goal from writing about it.
It's not that this was obscure: it was part of High School History, even Grade 8 history: Canada had a constitution under the name of the BNA Act (actually, BNA Act, 1867 and a series of following BNA Acts, such as the one that admitted Newfoundland in 1949), renamed in 1982 to Constitution Act, 1867 usw.
(I was in graduate school in 1982: I remember perfectly well what we were taught prior to that time.)
Showing that you weren't competent or interested enough to pay attention to basics like this disqualifies you forever from writing about anything in that domain.
Even if the writer was this ignorant, it should not have got by the copy-editor. It's not a big surprise: it's the Post, after all.
