The combination of the Quiet Revolutions in Quebec and the women’s movement in the 1960s and 70s broke apart the visuals of white men running a country. These movements were just the beginning of what would lead to multicultural policies and later a nations perceived identity. Put simply, the Canadian Multiculturalism Act is a law passed in 1989. The purpose of this act attempts to maintain as well as improve multiculturalism in Canada. The initial lead up to the Act began in 1971, under Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau, as he introduced multicultural policies that Canadians would adopt. These policies would ensure that Canada recognizes and respects all societies and their diversities regarding religion, culture and language. These policies also made Canada one of the first countries in the world to adopt such views. Two fundamentals of the Act, as per the Parole Board of Canada (PBC), are: “All citizens are equal and have the freedom to preserve, enhance, and share their cultural heritage.” And “ Multiculturalism promotes the full and equitable participation of individuals and communities of all origins in all aspects of Canadian society.”
The act establishes the policy of the government to ensure that every Canadian receives equal treatment and has the government celebrate diversity. Gingrich et al focus their attention to both the criticism and the applause that have been given to the Act. One criticism they states is that there is no definitive meaning attached to the term and as a federal policy, multiculturalism is difficult to explicate. They also state that no other policy initiative has greater relevance for the lives of new comers than it. The authors conducted research in order to investigate what Canadians understand by multiculturalism. On the one hand it brings positive light on those wishing to immigrate to this place to call it their new home. However, after reading the CanLIt guide, the multiple policies and acts that have been documented seem to all just be building blocks in what, on the outskirts, appears to be a nation’s identity.
After learning more about imagined communities through what Eric Hobsbawm and Benedict Anderson point out many nations have attached certain traditions and culture in hindsight, in order to take on a form of national pride as well as national loyalty. The idea of multicultural policies seems more to sugar coat and gloss over important social injustices that were and remain in “Canada”. Some critics, as stated in the CanLit guide, have argued that the multiculturalism policy leads to token displays of diversity while ignoring more important issues. As well, this form of diversity seems more to perceive minorities as exotic while taking attention away from political and economic exclusion.
Daniel Coleman introduces and discusses ideas of white civility, and he breaks the long silence and takes a step back to observe the roots of Canadian whiteness as a literary project of early colonials and nation builders. He states that the fictitious idea of a white and civil Canadian ethnicity has greatly distorted the perception of Canadians that live on the land. Coleman begins his book by recounting Himani Bannerji’s short story in which a South Asian mother from Toronto is shocked after seeing the picture her daughter drew of their family for a school assignment. The family in the picture consists of blonde hair and blue eyed members, none of which represent the family. Coleman uses this example to set the tone and to show how “ the workings of White normativity shape people’s perceptions of themselves, their families and their relation to social legitimacy” (Coleman 3). His idea of a “fictive ethnicity” as well as the creation of the Canadian national identity is a good summation and in that sense the Multicultural Act is simply another building block that has been part of the construction.
Works Cited
“Aboriginal and Diversity Initiatives.” Government of Canada, Parole Board of Canada, Policy Sector, Clemency and Pardons Sector, Communications Sector. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 July 2016.
“Introduction to Nationalism.” Home. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 July 2016
Hey Navi,
I like your term ‘building block’ to describe the pieces of legislature that have come out of Canada in regards to non-white people. I wrote in my answer to this question that it feels like Canada is really trying to rectify their mistakes of the past, but they just can’t seem to get it right yet. And maybe this is because there will always be a group of people who will be disappointed in the proposed change? I can hardly imagine an instance where new laws are passed that absolutely every citizen is happy with. However, in the case of this Multiculturalism Act, as you describe it, to me it seems like something really valuable and a step in the right direction for the appreciation and inclusion of all ethnic groups. And personally, I disagree with whomever might criticize the act for being frivolous and only encouraging surface-level cultural appreciation. Certainly, that’s a part of it, (having Italian Day on Commercial Drive I’d argue is pretty surface-level) but if this Act is what allowed people to dress according to their culture or pray a certain way, I don’t think that’s superficial at all. Where we might run into trouble is the question of governance that has come up in regards to First Nations people. Nobody would want to give up their power, least of all a government, so I imagine that the discussion of allowing Nations to govern themselves according to their traditional customs, would indeed be a sticky spot that causes the Act to be not quite fitting for everyone.
Hey Julia,
Thank you for the comment, it really had me thinking in an alternate sense. I think I may have tried to take my argument too far to one side and I do agree with you. My own family benefits from the inclusion and open minded ideals of this country. After reading Coleman’s argument, it was the first time I had seen this sort of Act (even though I do not believe it’s intentions to have negative repercussions) as having potential flaws. As well I completely agree with your idea regarding the question of governance. It all may come down to how individuals or groups utilize the tools and information they have.
Hi Navi,
You did a good job of providing examples for the multiculturalism act and critiques of the act which really helped me as a reader understand the main points of the multiculturalism act and interpret the criticism’s of the act through your example of white civility and Bannerji’s short story. My question for you is based on the your research, do you think that this multicultural act discriminates against the First Nations people of Canada? Thanks.
Deepak
Hi Deepak,
Thank you for your comment. I do not think that the sole intentions in any form were meant to discriminate against First Nations people, but the act may not have done enough to create a necessary platform appropriate enough to appeal.
Best,
Navi
Hi Navi,
I wrote on the Multiculturalism Act as well and am blown away by the differences in our posts! Hahaha. I focused really specifically on the rhetoric of the actual Act, whereas you thoroughly researched the history of it’s implementation. Reading your post helped me add so much context to my own thoughts and feelings about the Multiculturalism Act, that I’m embarrassed I didn’t research it myself. Do you think that the Act seems like just that, an act prepared to further construct this “white civility”? The Canadian nice guy?
Hi Laura,
Thank you for you comment and I’m glad you got something out of this post.. To be honest I just felt as if I was rambling too much, haha. This was the first time I saw the act in such a light and when I do think about it I can see how some may view it in a similar manner to Coleman. I don’t think it was initially brought about to be such a thing, and had and still has many positive components to it.
Best,
Navi