The following paper was delivered in 2004 at Simon Fraser University by Dr. Godwin Eni (photo), a leading member of the African-Canadian community in Vancouver, Canada. As we celebrate Black History Month we hereby publish it with very minor changes because we think it is still relevant as far as multiculturalism and diversity are concerned in Canada and the rest of the world.
Concepts and Challenges of Canadian Multiculturalism and Diversity
Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia,
October 26, 2004.
By Dr. Godwin O. Eni
International Health Consultant
(Former) President, Vancouver Multicultural Society
(Former) Vice President B.C. Citizenship Council.
The Canadian Society
Much like the United States of America, Canada is a nation of immigrants outside of the First Nations consideration. But there are differences in the social, political and ideological systems of governance which are linked to their respective histories.
Early European North American explorers had an economic agenda to harvest the riches of the continent or to escape from religious persecution.The French arrived first in Canada, followed by the British. Subsequent conflict between the two colonial powers led to British dominance with the French-speaking Canadians concentrated primarily in the Province of Quebec and in some “pocket communities” in different parts of Canada.
The emergence of different racial demographics in Canada was not by design or accident but of necessity. Primarily, persons of Indian and Chinese ancestry were needed for building the trans-Canada railway.
Some blacks escaped slavery in the U.S. via the underground railway passage and found refuge in Canada. In both cases, the European settlers were not willing to accord citizenship to immigrant labourers especially those from Asia.
However, blacks were tolerated because of differences with the U.S. on the slave trade. Over time, the vast Canadian land occupied by a small European or Caucasian population needed to be filled with more people. In order to support Canada’s liberal ideology and social welfare, immigrants were needed to work and pay taxes. In other words, the talents of different racial immigrants were being rented to support Canada’s way of life.
Contrary to popular beliefs, immigration to Canada was not based on charity but on necessity and later on humanitarian considerations. As different non-European racial groups immigrated to Canada, the society increasingly became diverse and multicultural. In other words, the concepts of diversity and multiculturalism were recent formulations to accommodate the obvious growth in ethnic or non-European populations resulting from incremental changes in the social and economic realities of Canada which are later supported by constitutional guarantees.
Question of Identity
Before the adoption of Canada’s Multiculturalism Policy, 73% of Canadians were classified as of either English or French ancestry. For most of the 20th century, Canadians were classified by ethnic origin either as English, French or “other”.
In 1996, Statistics Canada gave up the practice because most Canadians could not be classified simply as British or French. The ethnic heritage of Canadians had become so diverse and complex that the 2001 Canadian census report identified over 200 groups as having different backgrounds. More importantly, individual Canadians began to identify themselves as having multiple ancestries, 29% in 1991 and 38% in 2001. Also, in 2001, only three in ten Canadians selected “Canadian” as their ethnicity, which made it quite difficult to trace the origin of Canadians back to the two European groups.
Diversity and Multiculturalism - Unidentical Twins
Today, Canada has a Multiculturalism policy in support of the reality of diverse populations. What, therefore, is the fit between diversity and multiculturalism? For the businessman, diversity connotes involvement in various economic ventures for profit or organizational survival. Sociologists may view diversity in terms of different social groups within a given population.
The average Canadian often views diversity as parallel to multiculturalism. But the two concepts are quite different. A society must first achieve diversity of ethnic and racial groups in terms of composition before progressing to multiculturalism. In other words, diversity of population is a precursor to multiculturalism.
However, many Canadians consider the presence of many ethno-cultural groups in society as proof of multiculturalism. Some would count heads or utilize the variety of ethnic presence in a work setting as a measure of multiculturalism. The reality is that a society can be diverse in composition without becoming multicultural.
The apartheid policy of previous South African governments encouraged such a social organization often known as “segregation”. The Ku Klux Klan in the U.S., and to some extent in Canada, does not want an integrated, multicultural society.
Multiculturalism is the accommodation of individuals and social-cultural groups to arrive at a collective sense of self and identity within a cultural mosaic. It involves equity of consideration and mutual protection of individual and collective rights. It is reflected by the social integration of diverse cultures resulting in mutual accommodation, a unique perspective, and commonly accepted understanding of life and activities of daily living in a given society. Multiculturalism accommodates the best that other cultures offer in language, symbols, customs, and traditions to produce a humanistic society in which positive traits overshadow negative challenges to the benefit of all citizens.
Canada prides itself on the multicultural nature of its society. Recently, I was invited to address a visiting group of senior citizens from Norway on Canada’s multiculturalism. Their key interest was in exploring the glue that holds Canada together in spite of so many diverse ethno-cultural individuals and groups they encountered on the streets of Vancouver, Richmond and Burnaby.
The visitors were shocked when I informed them that the first Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia, James Douglas, was a black man. They were even more perplexed when I indicated that Canada has an official policy of Multiculturalism which respects cultural differences within the context of constitutional and human rights considerations. They wondered how I became the head of the longest-serving non-profit agency in British Columbia dedicated to the promotion of multiculturalism in society. They were expecting a Caucasian to address them! More importantly, they wanted to know how such a society, Canada, is kept together in harmony in spite of racial and cultural differences.
Canadians have different theories, perspectives and opinions about how multiculturalism works or should work in Canada. Dr Max Wexler of Simon Fraser University refers to these them as the 10 characters of expectations and beliefs that make up the Canadian opinion on what should happen in a multicultural society. The opinions, theories, perspectives and propositions dictate individual or group attitudes to population diversity and multiculturalism.
1. Assimilationists want individuals to hide or submerge their identities and assimilate. They believe that in the long run it is best to join the winning team, which is the dominant culture.
2.Elitists believe in the superiority of those seen as the rightful upper class and legitimate holders of power. They believe the maintenance of the status quo or the way things have always been in dealing with these other burdensome immigrants or citizens. Multiculturalism is a way to deal with socio-cultural differences or these other fellows as long as the status quo is maintained.
3. Meritocratists believe that when individuals work hard enough, they can compete and rise to the rank of the elitists thereby enriching themselves and the country.
4.Diversity Advocates believe that groups can compete by working hard enough so that they can rise to the rank of the elitists. Diversification advocates believe that this is good for business.
5. Victims believe they are suffering from the generational impact of previous oppressions and so are due for some type of compensation or apology. Victims dislike assimilationists and battle with elitists. [As examples of victimization, they point to slavery, the internment of the Japanese during the Second World War, restriction of Asian immigration, the exploitation of Indian labor, and more recently the labeling of terrorism for people from the Middle Eastern Countries].
6. Seclusionists are members of a community who strongly believe they should protect themselves from racial, cultural and ethnic groups that would diminish their character and the quality of their own group’s experience. They often use the words “those people” to characterize people from other cultures.
7.Cultural Centrists seek to improve the welfare and competitive strength of their group by accentuating their history, bolstering their identity and creating communal infrastructure with bridges to other cultures. They are proud of their cultures and seek to represent it.
8. Integrationists support breaking down barriers between and among cultures in order to bring them together as a single culture but with an eye to creating a new, better and superior Canadian culture for everybody.
9. Transcendentalists focus on the commonality of all human beings and the human spirit. They believe in our ability to rise above or transcend the blindness of culture, race and ethnicity and form a color-blind, race-blind and ethnic blind society.
10. Multiculturalists celebrate the relationships between and among varying cultures and seek to sustain cultural uniqueness while creating a civil forum for discussion about issues important for reducing hate and increasing tolerance.
Challenges
There are challenges to Canadian ethno-cultural diversity and Multiculturalism in the form of unanswered question for the future:
1. Which perspective of multiculturalism is most pervasive in Canada today and what are the future conflict or functionalist implications?
2.Does the attribution of criminal behavior fit any of the perspectives? Why?
3. Canada learns by osmosis from the United States and readily influenced by developments in that country such as competitive, utilitarian ideology and responsibility for self. On the other hand Canada subscribes to liberalism and equity of consideration for individuals and groups in the context of collective responsibility. How will Canada’s Multiculturalism Policy that allows for individual and group cultural identity be influenced in future by the growing utilitarian Canadian orientation towards the ideology of the United States?
4. Does a disproportional increase in a segment of minority populations in Canada threaten the basic assumptions of Canadian ideology by acquiring the critical mass to influence public policy? In other words, is there a potential for the emergence of a “new majority population” from present day minority groups that would influence future directions?
Given what we know today, the policies that govern our relationships, the nature of Canadian identity, and continual dialogue among citizens, it is conceivable that Canada would continue to function as an example of a multicultural society at peace to other nations as long as there are checks and balances in social, economic cultural and political relationships.
Comments