In “Canadian Multiculturalism: Global Anxieties and Local Debates” Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka challenge the understanding that failed multiculturalism in Europe will follow suit in Canada. Although Canada is not immune from the challenges that can come with multiculturalism, the way in which they tackle problems are country specific and do not necessarily reflect the practice or outcomes of other nations. As UK critic of multiculturalism Trevor Phillips, observes Canada to be ‘sleepwalking towards segregation’ (44) when the dynamics are far more complicated. TRANSITION SENTENCE REQUIRED
The mention of the abolition of multiculturalism for a “new” post-multiculturalist approach becomes difficult to understand. It claims, “to avoid the ‘excesses’ of multiculturalism” (47), however where does this notable governmental and social switch take place? How is the term coined, and how is it understood in theory versus in practice? How is it different from its predecessor? Even the classification of history struggles to define what is considered to be modern, let alone post-modern, and yet the term suggests a positive approach to alleviating difficult assimilation projects similar to those faced elsewhere (47). This notion may developed on the grounds of “someone else’s problems” ¬– in regards to its Canadian context – as a means to label, or justify, miscellaneous aspects of multiculturalism. However, with the government-wide commitment to policies and programs, in conjunction with social understanding, it naturally becomes subject to a wide array of differing opinions. As both immigration and citizenship policies change, its public reception often shifts as well. Especially since the channels referred to within the ‘multiculturalism...
... middle of paper ...
... presence of religious diversity amongst the multiculturalist scene, multiculturalism and its relationships to ethnocultureal minorities, Quebec’s reasonable accommodation as well as the overlap of Aboriginal and multiculturalism issues, require research and development. This speak volumes about Banting and Kymlicka, as it places their work on a larger spectrum that will one day be surrounded by other impressive works that may compliment or challenge their findings. Canadian multiculturalism is completely different than what takes place in different countries. It goes without saying that not every picture can be painted with the same type of brush because the world is not full of the same picture that has a white washed idealized understanding. With that being said, the problems in other countries are not inherent to the multiculturalism picture in other countries.
Palmer, Howard. Patterns of Prejudice: A History of Nativism in Alberta. Toronto, Ont.: McClelland and Stewart, 1982. Print.
“inquire into and report upon the existing state of bilingualism and biculturalism in Canada and to recommend what steps should be taken to develop the Canadian Confederation on the basis of equal partnership between the two founding races, taking into account the contribution made by the other ethnic groups to the c...
35 Fleras, Augie, and Jean Leonard Elliott. Engaging Diversity: Multiculturalism in Canada. Toronto: Nelson, 2002: 164.
Turning now to Will Kymlicka’s article, I agreed with much of what Kymlicka says, however I find his ideas of multiculturalism over glorifying the Liberal accomplishments and success, as attributed to only Liberal success in making multiculturalism more popular. However, I find that the issue of multicultural...
Multiculturalism policy was first adopted in Canada in 1971, which reaffirms the dignity and value of all its citizens regardless of ethnic origins, race, religious affiliations, or language. Part of this policy, Canada confirms the rights of all the aboriginals along with the recognition of two official languages. Indeed, multiculturalism has great importance since its main purpose is to give equal treatment to all the citizens (Daniel, 2010). It ensures that all individual citizens could still maintain their identities, and have pride with their ancestry. Through this initiative, the Canadian government was able to give their citizens a feeling of self-confidence, making them more open to their diverse cultures. The multiculturalism policy
Ninette Kelley and M. J. Trebicock, The Making of the Mosaic: a history of Canadian immigration policy. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1998).
“Multiculturalism” entered public speech in the late 1960s and early 1970s in Canada that focused on unique cultural diversity, nationalities, and ethnicity across the nation. Multiculturalism and Immigration are important factors in the development of Canada to attain a strong multicultural example of economic stability, social and political growth which leads to the emergence of Canada’s identity and culture.
British citizens were the preferred immigrants because they embodied the ideal citizen of the nation-state (white, Anglo-Saxon). It was a known fact that the Canadian government “would seek only those vigorous northern races who were culturally sound and who could quickly conform to the norms of Anglo-Canadian life” (Avery 93). This racial advantage allowed them much power to influence work, social and political life” (Avery 95).
During a portion of the interview I wanted to learn how multicultural Canada was. After explaining to Shawn the concept of multiculturalism he stated that Canada seems to be multicultural. He stated that people didn’t care what people’s beliefs were and Canadians do not make a big deal if people hold different beliefs than them. In my opinion
Renewing Immigration: Towards a Convergence and Consolidation of Canada’s Immigration Policies and Systems, Published by The Conference Board of Canada, p, 15 2008 assed at http://www.conferenceboard.ca/documents.aspx?DID=2758
Many people across the globe argue that nationalism within Canada is simply not feasible. It is said that we as a people, differ so greatly with our diverse cultures, religions, and backgrounds that we cannot come together and exist together as a strong, united nation. In his book, Lament for a Nation, George Grant tells the reader that “…as Canadians we attempted a ridiculous task in trying to build a conservative nation in the age of progress, on a continent we share with the most dynamic nation on earth. The current history is against us.” (1965) Originally directed towards the Bomarc Missile Crisis, the book argues that whatever nationalism Canada had was destroyed by globalization as well as the powerful American sphere of influence. Although it is true that the book was initially written as a response to the events that took place in the late 1950s, many of the points are still valid today.
Most people are often unaware or misinformed of many situations that affect them in their everyday life. Some of this issues could include the topics that the authors mention – multiculturalism or white privilege. Gates explains that “the debate [on multiculturalism] has been miscast from the beginning [and] it may be worth setting straight” (26). Gates is addressing the opposition to multiculturalism by expressing that the topic that they might have original viewed as negativity, could actually the key to achieving true ethnic diversity. He is stating that if people continue to believe that multiculturalism is just a way to boost the self-esteem of minorities, then it will continue to create a problematic situation where different ethnicities constantly clash because people fear what they do not understand. McIntosh reveals a prime example of this dismissive nature of understanding cultural diversity. She states that she believes that “whites are carefully taught not to recognize white privilege” (1). Gates is able to shed light on McIntosh’s claim because the miscomprehension of cultural diversity and the idea of white privilege are intrinsically tied. If people are not taught to respect other ethnicities and their traditions then it creates this idea that the cultural that is being taught – in this case white – is the dominant one. McIntosh states that this is an unconscious effort and I would have to agree.
... A successful strategy in the accommodation of national minorities within a liberal democracy could be founded upon mutual trust, recognition and sound financial arrangements. However, a certain degree of tension between central and regional institutions may remain as a constant threat in this complex relationship since they entertain opposing aims. The federal governments determination to protect its territorial integrity, and its will to foster a single national identity among its citizens clashes with Quebec’s wish to be recognized as a separate nation and decide upon its political destiny and to foster its distinct identity (Guibernau pg.72). Moreover, if the ROC and the federal government can come to an agreement on terms that satisfy the majority and an identity that encompasses the heart of a country; Canada will continue to exist with or without Quebec.
Banting noted that some Canadians fear multiculturalism will bring, “…challenges to historic cultures, anxieties about Islam, and fears about insecurity,” (797). As people migrate from one cultural or religious backgrounds, maintaining the identity of the host country becomes difficult. Young children born interact with the immigrants and they could easily emulate foreign cultures thereby putting the historic cultural identity of Canadians at risk of erosion. Winter Elke warned that multiculturalism is changing to give too much preference to the immigrants thereby risking it to become a minority affair (638). Therefore, the relationship between national the majority of Canadians and immigrants need rethinking. Erosion of other cultures as immigrants introduce new ways or adapt to the cultures of the host county (Canada). Furthermore, education of the immigrants could face challenges if they experience difficulty settling in Canada. Given that immigrants later work in Canada, the human resource sector faces a new challenge of managing a diversified workforce, which can create headache for Canadian employers. Banting indicated that there is, “a strong sense that multiculturalism policies have “failed” a reaction that is strongest perhaps in the Netherlands, but is felt in many other countries as well,” (797). Such assertions only fuel resentment towards
multiculturalism hype is not all it is cut out to be and segregates communities rather