Canadian Multiculturalism - Essay Example

Canadian Multiculturalism/ Interculturalism Introduction Multiculturalism and Interculturalism policies in Canada have been a sociological interpretation in theory and approach. When defining multiculturalism it is seen a descriptive term in which it refers to the policies that formed a demography that has come endogenously by the conjunction of two or more ethnic groups into one jurisdiction, e.g. Canada (Roberts et al, 1982). The emphasis that we look upon the theoretical foundations is of the policies instead of focusing on their historical roots. Another important theory and policy would be that of Interculturalism which involves the acceptance of a multicultural fact and tries to effectively exist in a society thus promoting dialogue and interaction between cultures (Garcea et al, 2008). The constant criticism it has brought forth of the existing policies of multiculturalism and maintains the ideology that multiculturalism failed to include different cultures within our society, and instead it has divided society and has isolated and accentuated their specificity e. g. Québec. The question that arises in particular; Is Canadian Multiculturalism the same as it was before? Therefore, the primary goal of this paper is to outline multicultural policies in Canada in an historical context. Thus this will relate to the change from the ‘new nationalism’ to a philosophy of multiculturalism as the basis of the national identities of English-speaking Canada. Afterwards, this paper will dive into the exploration of the issues ensuing Québec’s Interculturalism and its discriminatory rights and religious persecution of immigration. The change in context influences the government’s policies towards migrants, which integration to a multicultural policy is the basis of the approach in Canada. Looking further at some benefits of multiculturalism, the policies that it encourages migrants to be able to retain their culture thus benefitting a new national culture in Canada. Finally a conclusion paragraph will summarize the contents presented and a final thought. Historical Events of Multiculturalism in Canada History of Canada and Québec In the 1940s Canada was seen in terms as an English and French culture, by linguistics and political identities, and to some extent Aboriginal. During the First World War, Jewish Canadians were seen, especially in Quebec as anti-Semitism which the Catholic Church of Québec associated the Jews as modernists, and liberalists, which was an unacceptable value. Asians in this case as well had a hard time with legal obstacles pertaining to limited immigration in the early 1800s and 1900s, because they were mainly seen as equipment provided and not as beings (Brotz, 1980). In addition, many ethnic groups faced barriers within Canada preventing participation in political and social matters, including the right to vote. Although this mood started to shift after the Second World War, French and English Canada was no longer composed of these two dominant ethnic groups. When looking back the Canadian Bill of Rights in 1960, which later gave way to its successor the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, Canada’s laws did not provide much civil rights and concerns, which were strictly dealt by the courts. In 1971, Canada was one of the first countries to officialise a policy in order to adopt multiculturalism (Day, 2000). Afterwards, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, embraced multiculturalism and this experience portrayed a fundamental success where different cultural groups were able to share their customs and learn from one another. In October of 1971, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau mentioned that multiculturalism will be an official government policy. During Trudeau’s speech to the House of Commons, he stated that the other cultural communities that they, too, are essential elements in Canada (Brotz, 1980). The reason being for that is because cultural freedom, diverse ethnic groups, and recognition of cultural contributions were important to preserve in Canadian society. Basically multiculturalism promoted respect for cultural diversity and granted ethnic groups the right to develop their own cultures within the Canadian society. The Official Languages Act of 1969, showed that Canada’s two primary languages were English and French. This policy was pursued specifically in this bilingual framework. In Québec, the rise of separatism was a concern for the Liberal party. When they won the votes, Trudeau was hoping that the policy of multiculturalism would help appease the opposition of bilingualism in Western Canada (Brotz, 1980). In this case the idea of multiculturalism was well-received throughout Canada, except in the province of Québec. They emphasized that the policy of multiculturalism lacked substance and that cultural equality diminished the importance of the French and English contributions to the Canadian society. They preached in favor of Interculturalism instead of Multiculturalism. Issues of Interculturalism Québec due to its distinct nation within Canada decided to develop its own answer to the issues of integration. Québec’s policy is known as ‘Interculturalism’ (Powell et al, 2004). This distinct model of integration has been in existence for some time. The signature aspects of this policy revolve within the context of a common culture. The reason why the development of interculturalism was so strong and a contender is because in 1971, the Canadian federal policy implemented multiculturalism. In Québec, multiculturalism was widely seen as an attempt by the Trudeau government to undermine Québec and its rights (Dion, 1996). Multiculturalism in this case seemed to be designed to delegitimize the increasing demand for Québec sovereignty. In effect, it reduced Québec’s status of the three founding nations comprising Canada to just one of the many ethnic provinces under a centralized, predominant English-speaking Canada (Leman, 1999). Looking at these issues that Québec faced and dealt with it was in this political context that the Québec government began to develop the policy of interculturalism as an alternative to Canadian multiculturalism (Labelle et al., 2007). Québec argued that multiculturalism wanted to promote ghettoization and encouraged discrimination. It highlighted the sole awareness of ethnic, religious and cultural differences which distorted the view of a shared Canadian identity. Just because interculturalism originated in a specific context does not mean that this model is the best in dealing with cultural difference. It emphasizes reciprocity, and the difference in the context of a shared public culture, Québec might see Interculturalism as a middle point between multiculturalism’s tendencies. Québec acknowledges that the newcomers will be transformed into a new common culture. Bouchard and Taylor mention that the past must be acknowledged, but in the same time a connection to future must be as important for a proper dialogue among diverse and equal citizens (Bouchard & Taylor, 2008). Benefits of Canadian Multiculturalism Once Canada decided to actively adopt multiculturalism as a policy, the assumption was that cultural diversity was good for the nation and it must be promoted continuously. To a certain point, it preserves cultural heritage and the government provided the needed support and as a result, the new society is officially recognised by their ethnic identities (Kymlicka, 2008). In this case migrants can have multiple identities and are not required to have a national allegiance. Multiculturalism also is bound on three specific aspects that help it benefit as a policy. Basically the economic, political, and social benefits are what make it so successful. Economic Benefits Multiculturalism helped integrate visible minorities into the labour market. This increased participation resulted in the government's effort for providing various programs and ensured equality at the workplace. The federal government implemented the Employment Equity Act which maintains equal opportunities in the work force for all visible minorities and genders (Reitz, 2005). This type of policy implementation can be seen that all genders, cultures around the world get an equal opportunity to in Canadian society to move along together in unison to live better lives. Political Benefits In the Canadian political process it has been recorded that minority groups have had higher participation rate then what it was in the past. Immigrants in Canada have a much higher ration of becoming a citizen in comparison to other Western countries; this is due to a bigger percentage of people participating in the electoral process (Kymlicka, 2008). By comparing Canada and the U.S, Canada has higher volume foreign-born members in parliament than in the United States. This is just an example of how much opportunities Canada and its multicultural policy gives to immigrants and visible minorities to be a part of the political sphere. Social Benefits Finally the social benefits that the multicultural policy brings to the table in Canada are the educational institutions. The population of culturally diverse students interact with one another on a regular basis. The government made efforts in order for most of the programs and services brought in a variety of schools such as: universities and colleges so that minorities would feel welcomed in the educational environment and the opportunity of success (Kymlicka, 2008). This contributes to the Canadian economy, and because of that many international students are choosing Canada as a destination for their studies and to receive a welcoming cultural experience. The end result of this acceptance helped Canadians respect other religions even more in comparison to the rest of the world. The interactions between visible minorities and native-born Canadians through activities, such as sports, music, and dance are very well seen (Kymlicka, 2008). Canadians and multiculturalism at this point are represented by a multitude of cultural groups, and the merging of these groups helps what was unchanged in the past go further into a new futuristic unison. Conclusion In conclusion, the differences between multiculturalism and interculturalism can be summarized at the most general level. Multiculturalism follows the model of cultural diversity; it is as a stable defining feature of society. It is guided by a political policy and by public campaigns. Interculturalism, on the other hand, follows the model of integration into a shared societal culture. It is guided by the suggestion that immigration is temporary, and that interculturalism means adaptation, and new members of society have to create a new family or in this case a new identity. Whether or not the Multiculturalism moved beyond politics and became general practice in Canadian society. Canada in has not always been the ideal model of immigrant integration, however, the examining research and analysis provided gives us a good idea of its aim for successful integration of immigrants. In this paper both research articles and literary works have been examined to try to determine whether multiculturalism or interculturalism play any significant role in Canada’s success or failure. The Canadian author’s insights help address issues inherent in a multicultural or intercultural society, such as racism, cultural tensions, and individual rights. The Canadian policy has become more globalized and this is why it is important not to make rash decisions about Multiculturalism, with many interpretations and an abundance of discourses. This is where it becomes a bit confusing since some critics believe that the abolition of multiculturalism is the only remedy, or perhaps interculturalism should be abolished precisely in Québec. The fundamental question is if Canadian Multiculturalism is the same as it was before? It can be agreed upon that multiculturalism in some Canadian provinces is evolving into a state of its own. The circumstances that Canada is facing in the 21st century have completely changed since 1971. The different ethnicities and customs are no longer important as the transcultural relations between individuals and groups of immigrants. Canadians have become a transnational culture which created a single globalized culture. So to finalize the debate it is imperative that living within multiple cultures is a reality in our day and age, and achieving the concept of a single human race is our purpose and destiny.   References Bouchard, G., & Taylor, C. (2008). Building the future: A time for reconciliation. Québec: Commission de consultation sur les pratiques d’accommodement reliées aux différences culturelles. Brotz, H. (1980). Multiculturalism in Canada: A muddle. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, 41-46. Day, R. J. (2000). Multiculturalism and the history of Canadian diversity. University of Toronto Press. Dion, S. (1996). Why is secession difficult in well-established democracies? Lessons from Quebec. British Journal of Political Science, 26(02), 269-283. Garcea, J., Kirova, A., & Wong, L. (2008). Introduction: multiculturalism discourses in Canada. Canadian Ethnic Studies, 40(1), 1-10. Ghosh, R. (2004). Public education and multicultural policy in Canada: The special case of Quebec. International review of education, 50(5-6), 543-566. Kymlicka, W. (2003). Canadian multiculturalism in historical and comparative perspective: Is Canada unique. Const. F., 13, 1. Kymlicka, W. (2008). The current state of multiculturalism in Canada and research themes on Canadian multiculturalism, 2008-2010. Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Labelle, M., Field, A. M., & Icart, J. C. (2007). Le concept d'interculturalisme en contexte québécois: généalogie d'un néologisme. Centre de recherche sur l'immigration, l'ethnicité et la citoyenneté, Université du Québec à Montréal. Leman, M. (1999). Canadian multiculturalism. Library of Parliament, Research Branch. Reitz, J. G. (2005). Tapping immigrants' skills: New directions for Canadian immigration policy in the knowledge economy. Law & Bus. Rev. Am., 11, 409 Roberts, L. W., & Clifton, R. A. (1982). Exploring the ideology of Canadian multiculturalism. Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de Politiques, 88-94. Read More