Multiculturalism in Canada - Does it Unite or Divide?

[Big Guy]

On Canada Day, I posted the following to the thread with the OP “What unites Canadians?”. My post stated; “I believe that one of the factors is our acceptance of multiculturalism. About 40% of Canadians are of the first or second generation. While there are a few who are still bigots the vast majority embrace the idea of and the strength of the mixture of cultures and the diversity of experiences in other countries.”

This post seemed to steer the topic away from the OP and focus on the issue of multiculturalism in Canada. Since I appear to have created the tangent then I will try to separate this avenue of discussion from that of the original OP.

[guyser]

I dont think it does either.

Sometimes Im irked at some cultural habits, but it never goes to the "effin *****'s should pack and go home" I get irked at plenty of CDN cultural habits.

On the other hand I am quite pleased to be able to go to , be welcomes at, and enjoy the wide variety of culture that we have in Toronto.

I can go enjoy food, dress and other specific traits of various cultures on a weekly basis if I want and not a repeat once in a summers worth of trying. (not that I do of course...but I can)

Id have to say it has made us somewhat unique the world over and I like that.

In my office over half speak Chinese exclusively, phones are answered in Chinese, letters go out in Mandarin and Cantonese, and nary a problem. I work in a community that has signs almost entirely in Chinese, including shop signs etc.

Is it a problem? Not at all.

And when I go to my GF's house, well...shes spanish Filipino Chinese Jamaican. (and if you want a larf, close your eyes and listen to Jamaican patois only to open your eyes and they are all chinese speaking it)

And when I visit my brothers house, I get Venezualan (Spanish) And his kids (not all biological) never watched English TV growing up, only French, mom spoke only Spanish to them. Always funny to see my 4 yr old excitedly talk to me all the while going from French to spanish to english and back again and not even realizing it . ( I did though, Engrish please)

Spoken in my household, some from necessity, some for fun are...English (well duh) French Spanish, German.

So perhaps I am used to itm so it doesnt bother me. Culturally this country will take the best of them all, forge a varying culture than we have now (as it has varied already) and we should be all the better for it.

Please though....I dont want to return to Shoe leather ROast Beef dinners on Sunday nights. Oh those British.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Guyser2

[Bonam]

I think having lots of people of different cultures (within limits) in Canada is great.

On the other hand, I think the policy/consequences of "multiculturalism" as it concerns a kind of forced tolerance or acceptance of practices that might otherwise be disagreeable, illegal, or even abhorrent; or as it promotes the formation of "ethnic enclaves" in Canadian cities; or as it creates an atmosphere/attitude where anyone critical of our immigration system is labelled a bigot, is not good for Canada, and will in the long run be much more divisive than uniting.

[guyser]

On the other hand, I think the policy/consequences of "multiculturalism" as it concerns a kind of forced tolerance or acceptance of practices that might otherwise be disagreeable, illegal, or even abhorrent; or as it promotes the formation of "ethnic enclaves" in Canadian cities;

Are you under the impression that anyone is forcing this?

Ethnic enclaves are there because people seek the same when moving to a strange country.

[dre]

I think having lots of people of different cultures (within limits) in Canada is great.

On the other hand, I think the policy/consequences of "multiculturalism" as it concerns a kind of forced tolerance or acceptance of practices that might otherwise be disagreeable, illegal, or even abhorrent; or as it promotes the formation of "ethnic enclaves" in Canadian cities; or as it creates an atmosphere/attitude where anyone critical of our immigration system is labelled a bigot, is not good for Canada, and will in the long run be much more divisive than uniting.

Keep in mind people have made these claims about every single group of immigrants in history... That they would form enclaves, and that they had odd customs etc. Its partially true for the first generation of immigrants sometimes but almost never true for the next.

And critisism of our immigration system is fine as long as its rooted in something real, but it almost never is. The reality is we probably have the best system in the world, and our immigrants are among the most educated and skilled in the world, and contribute the most economically.

[Bonam]

Are you under the impression that anyone is forcing this?

Yes. There are laws regarding the use of helmets in certain situations that have exemptions for people of certain religions. There are laws regarding carrying weapons in schools that are ignored regarding certain "ceremonial" weapons. There are legal cases where for some reason the religion/culture of an offender is used as a mitigating factor (some of which have been discussed at length on MLW). Those are just a few examples. In general, I oppose exemptions to laws and requirements that are given to people based on their affiliation with a religious or cultural group. I believe all individuals should have the same rights and should be subject to the same laws and regulations. I do not claim that the current situation in Canada in this regard is particularly egregious, but I think this is one area where a "slippery slope" argument is very applicable.

Ethnic enclaves are there because people seek the same when moving to a strange country.

And they grow larger when immigration rates are higher. And in Canada, immigration rates as an annual % of population are very high, more than in my opinion can be integrated over time, especially if they start out with very different cultures. Some people claim an economic justification for our current rates of immigration (though no evidence for this claim is ever presented), but many others simply claim that high immigration rates are good for their own sake as it makes our society more multicultural, as if that is its own reward. In that way, high immigration rates (and the ethnic enclaves that form as a result) are a result of the belief in multiculturalism.

And critisism of our immigration system is fine as long as its rooted in something real, but it almost never is. The reality is we probably have the best system in the world, and our immigrants are among the most educated and skilled in the world, and contribute the most economically.

Our immigration system may not be bad and is likely one of the better ones, but there is always room for improvement and room for legitimate criticism and analysis. At the very least, there should be a justification made for the high number of immigrants that are brought in annually, and why this continues even in times of economic difficulty where unemployment rates are already elevated. Unfortunately, the reflexive reaction by many to any criticism of our immigration system is to label the critic a bigot, whatever their argument might be. And this reflexive reaction is, again, due to the general attitude that multiculturalism is good for its own sake, without needing any further justification, and a sense of outrage that anyone might disagree with this general attitude. I disagree with this, more is not always better. There are limits past which the harms exceed the benefits. Would we be ok with 1 million immigrants a year? 5 million? How many is too many? How many is too few? The numbers need to be explored, the annual rates justified and optimized. But the attitudes associated with multiculturalism interfere with legitimate debate on these topics. In fact, the policies associated with multiculturalism even make it so that the statistics necessary to debate these issues intelligently are not allowed to be gathered.

Like I said before, I think having lots of people of different cultures in Canada is beneficial to a certain point. What I am opposed to is the moralistic view of multiculturalism as an end in itself, a value that is used to shut down debate, an intangible claim that is used in place of any analysis of real costs and benefits of our policies.

Edited July 10, 2014 by Bonam

[Hydraboss]

While there are a few who are still bigots the vast majority embrace the idea of and the strength of the mixture of cultures and the diversity of experiences in other countries.

Case in point. I guess this statement makes Bonam a bigot.

[Hydraboss]

So, to dislike or even question multiculturalism is in and of itself a "bigoted" action. And people think conservatives are close-minded.

[WestCoastRunner]

I am a little concerned that we would differentiate between multi-cultural and other canadians. It bothers me that we continue to separate these threads between 'identifying as canadians' and multicultural'. Are we not all canadians? Why do we need to separate these threads?

[Guest]

As a Canadian from another culture, I prefer to think of myself as English, just taking advantage of you guys.

[-1=e^ipi]

The premise of the question is flawed and it sets up a false dichotomy. Multiculturalism isn't inherently good or bad and it doesn't necessarily unite or divide. That would depend on the form of the multiculturalism, on cultural circumstances, etc.

This is from the wikipedia article on multiculturalism:

"Multicultural ideologies or policies vary widely,^[2] ranging from the advocacy of equal respect to the various cultures in a society, to a policy of promoting the maintenance of cultural diversity, to policies in which people of various ethnic and religious groups are addressed by the authorities as defined by the group they belong to.^[3][4]

Two main different and seemingly inconsistent strategies have developed through different government policies and strategies. The first focuses on interaction and communication between different cultures. Interactions of cultures provide opportunities for the cultural differences to communicate and interact to create multiculturalism. This approach is also often known as interculturalism. The second centers on diversity and cultural uniqueness. Cultural isolation can protect the uniqueness of the local culture of a nation or area and also contribute to global cultural diversity.^[5][6] A common aspect of many policies following the second approach is that they avoid presenting any specific ethnic, religious, or cultural community values as central.^[7]"

While there are a few who are still bigots the vast majority embrace the idea of and the strength of the mixture of cultures and the diversity of experiences in other countries.”

It is ironic that you imply that those that disagree with your interpretation of 'multiculturalism' are bigots, while in the other thread you were upset that I dared to call some of your claims 'nonsense'.

[-1=e^ipi]

I am a little concerned that we would differentiate between multi-cultural and other canadians. It bothers me that we continue to separate these threads between 'identifying as canadians' and multicultural'. Are we not all canadians? Why do we need to separate these threads?

Multi-cultural is an adjective. Canadians is a noun. I would be concerned if people didn't differentiate between nouns and adjectives.

I don't really understand what you are trying to say in your post. It appears incoherent to me.

[-1=e^ipi]

Do you know what is divisive though? Progressive idiots that want to group and categorize people based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc. rather than treat people as individuals with equal rights.

[jacee]

Do you know what is divisive though? Progressive idiots that want to group and categorize people based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc. rather than treat people as individuals with equal rights.

And gender?

"Equal" doesn't always mean "same" ya know.

.

[-1=e^ipi]

And gender?

Yes. I had an 'etc.'.

"Equal" doesn't always mean "same" ya know.

Depends on the context, but I said 'equal rights' so there should be no ambiguity.

[jacee]

I think having lots of people of different cultures (within limits) in Canada is great.

What limits?

On the other hand, I think the policy/consequences of "multiculturalism" as it concerns a kind of forced tolerance or acceptance

Who's forcing who to do what?

Do you mean social pressure to be polite?

I thought that was the Canadian way!

of practices that might otherwise be disagreeable, illegal, or even abhorrent;

Ya like those Scottish, eh? ... friggen caterwauling pipes hurt your ears from blocks away, now that's a lethal weapon in disguise! very disagreeable ... and the men wearing skirts fercrissakes! oughta be illegal! ... and eating porridge in a cow stomach, gagmewithaspoon ... absolutely abhorrent!!

or as it promotes the formation of "ethnic enclaves" in Canadian cities;

Ya and the Mennonites out in the country too ... How the heck did they get away with that for so long! The Dutch are kinda cliquey too ... and did you know that all over the country and the US, Latvians have these hidden summer camps where they gather on summer solstice and ... dance!?

or as it creates an atmosphere/attitude where anyone critical of our immigration system is labelled a bigot,

bigots? critical of immigration?

Where the hell were they when we needed them to keep the Scots out?

And the English, friggen act like they own the place ... French too, part of it anyway ... but nobody tries to mess with Little Italy ... and Chinatown's a pretty nice tourist draw ...

is not good for Canada, and will in the long run be much more divisive than uniting.

I don't know ... ya ok I guess we should kick the bigots out ... but how can we tell who they are ? They're mostly all white, and they all look the same!

Oh right ... just say "multiculturalism" or "immigration" and their gums start flapping.

On the boat buster!

/sarcasm

.

[Bonam]

What limits?

I'd start with limits regarding the total annual rate of immigration. Research should be conducted to determine how many immigrants per year can be effectively integrated into Canadian society without creating social upheaval. If I had to come up with a number from the top of my head, I'd say perhaps ~100k/year rather than today's ~300k/year, but that's just a guess, like I said, some research should be done.

bigots? critical of immigration?

Where the hell were they when we needed them to keep the Scots out?

I dunno, but the natives of Canada probably coulda used a few "bigots" critical of immigration, before they got overrun. Today's "Canadians" are over the next several decades going to get overrun by immigrants from Asia and Africa in the same way that "Canadians" of 4 centuries past were overrun by immigrants from Europe, if current policies are continued. If there's one thing we can learn from the natives, it's to not repeat their fate.

[jacee]

Yes. I had an 'etc.'.

Depends on the context, but I said 'equal rights' so there should be no ambiguity.

So men can breastfeed in public too?

Equal doesn't always mean same, ya know.

Catholics have equal rights to their religion, but they can't be gay ... or at least they can't be clubby about it.

Sikhs have equal rights to their religion ... but they can't wear a ball cap.

Atheists have equal rights to their nonreligion ... I think ... is freedom FROM religion a right?

Equal doesn't always mean same.

I can inherit property from my family

... you can inherit property from your family

... but mine has none and yours has some

... so what's "equal" about that!!

Split yours in half so we get the "same"

... there, that's "equal"

... right?

.

Edited July 10, 2014 by jacee

[jacee]

I'd start with limits regarding the total annual rate of immigration.

We have that.

Research should be conducted to determine how many immigrants per year can be effectively integrated into Canadian society

We have that too.

without creating social upheaval.

What? Where? Who's upheaving?

Get a bucket! Go outside!

If I had to come up with a number from the top of my head, I'd say perhaps ~100k/year rather than today's ~300k/year, but that's just a guess, like I said, some research should be done.

You do that. The top of your head just might be a slippery slope.

I dunno, but the natives of Canada probably coulda used a few "bigots" critical of immigration, before they got overrun.

I dunno ... they probably did ... so they were pretty prepared with laws and treaty-making processes ... overrun yes ... when the Brit/Euro lairds starved and drove massive hordes of us desperate peasants out ... and we ended up with second son lairds who abandoned treaties and colluded with churches in committing abominations ... but it's finally starting to right itself now ... because of the treaties.

I guess our treaty with newcomers is the Constitution/Charter of Rights.

Today's "Canadians" are over the next several decades going to get overrun by immigrants from Asia and Africa

Cite?

Overrun ... how? If they accept and respect the 'treaty' (Constitution/Charter) we offer, they're not overrunning us ... they are becoming 'us' ... Canadian.

A lot of 'Canadians' thought the Irish were overrunning them at one time - mid 1800's.

I don't think it worked out that way ... except on March 17.

in the same way that "Canadians" of 4 centuries past were overrun by immigrants from Europe, if current policies are continued.

If there's one thing we can learn from the natives, it's to not repeat their fate.

And not to repeat our own race-based abominations.

So we honour all of our treaties this time, including:

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

...

25. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including

- any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and

- any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.

...

27. This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.

...

35. (1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html#docCont

.

Edited July 10, 2014 by jacee

[-1=e^ipi]

So men can breastfeed in public too?

Yes, men should have a right to do this.

And actually, using the right hormone therapy, male humans can lactate.

Equal doesn't always mean same, ya know.

I never claimed that it does. In the context of mathematics, equals and same are equivalent. But in this context you probably mean 'equal rights' when you mean equal.

Catholics have equal rights to their religion, but they can't be gay ...

Sure they can. http://gaycatholic.info/

Sikhs have equal rights to their religion ... but they can't wear a ball cap.

Sure they can. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ujjal_Dosanjh

Atheists have equal rights to their nonreligion ... I think ... is freedom FROM religion a right?

Is anything a 'right'? Do 'rights' exist outside of what the government enforces?

I can inherit property from my family

... you can inherit property from your family

Actually, we can inherit property from eachother's family. It depends on the person writing the will to decide.

... but mine has none and yours has some

My family has property and not mass debt? Wow, you know so much about me...

... so what's "equal" about that!!

Everyone has an equal right under the law to create a will and decide who inherits their stuff.

[Boges]

And actually, using the right hormone therapy, male humans can lactate.

[carepov]

I'd start with limits regarding the total annual rate of immigration. Research should be conducted to determine how many immigrants per year can be effectively integrated into Canadian society without creating social upheaval. If I had to come up with a number from the top of my head, I'd say perhaps ~100k/year rather than today's ~300k/year, but that's just a guess, like I said, some research should be done.

Here are some studies:

The first two suggest 350,000:

http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/ff912_immigration_levels.pdf

http://ftp.iza.org/dp6743.pdf

There is definitely room for improvement in our system:

http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/ff0212_immigration.pdf

But the government seems to be planning:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/backgrounders/2013/2013-06-21.asp

[Argus]

Sometimes Im irked at some cultural habits, but it never goes to the "effin *****'s should pack and go home" I get irked at plenty of CDN cultural habits.

Could you tell us what those Canadian cultural habits are that irk you?

In my office over half speak Chinese exclusively,

When people speak a language you don't understand, do you not feel excluded? If you are at someone's house and they're all speaking French or Chinese, don't you just sit there with a stupid smile on your face, wondering what they're saying, wishing they would speak English, and maybe checking your watch as you imagine being somewhere else?

How do you/would you feel if you were sitting at a table speaking to two Chinese people, and a third Chinese person sits down and all three start speaking Chinese? Do you sit there pretending to understand or do you get up and walk away?

[Argus]

I think having lots of people of different cultures (within limits) in Canada is great.

On the other hand, I think the policy/consequences of "multiculturalism" as it concerns a kind of forced tolerance or acceptance of practices that might otherwise be disagreeable, illegal, or even abhorrent; or as it promotes the formation of "ethnic enclaves" in Canadian cities; or as it creates an atmosphere/attitude where anyone critical of our immigration system is labelled a bigot, is not good for Canada, and will in the long run be much more divisive than uniting.

Balkanization is the term. Whole groups with different languages, different cultures, different ideas, some of them completely contrary to each other and to us. How this is supposed to inspire unity is beyond me.

[Black Dog]

Do you know what is divisive though? Progressive idiots that want to group and categorize people based on race, ethnicity, religion, etc. rather than treat people as individuals with equal rights.

You know who does that? People. People do that.