Category: Notes

“What is Multiculturalism?” by: Bhikhu Parekh

1.      “A culture cannot be at ease with differences outside it unless it is at ease with its own internal differences.” Considering this statement, can it be said that those who immigrate are not completely at ease with their own culture? If true, then how do these people manage to become at ease and settle with outside cultures, in which they must live among?

2.      The article mentions political doctrines and how just like culture, there are always attempts to homogenize it and declare only one correct when really not all are completely coherent. Considering that political doctrines can also be a part of culture, which do you feel is imposed on you most in Canada? And considering Canada’s claim to a “multicultural” state do you think this is correct? Is it also necessary to be “multi-political” in order to be multicultural?

3.      “A multicultural society should not repeat the mistake of its monocultural counterpart by requiring that all its communities should become multicultural.” Do you agree with this statement? Or do you think imposing and requiring the acceptance of multiculturalism-for the sake of having a multicultural society in perfect harmony- should be an exception to this rule?

Summary (provided by Morvarid Rohani Eftekhari)

This short and rather informative piece of writing tackles the importance of multiculturalism not merely from a social point of view, but also from a political doctrine point of view as well, which I found especially interesting. The author begins by explaining a multiculturalists’ perspective, which is composed of the interplay of three complimentary insights: the inescapability and desirability of cultural plurality, the cultural embeddedness of human beings, and the plural and multicultural constitution of each culture. Understanding these three important elements is crucial to understanding why one particular institution, culture, or way of thinking/living cannot possibly be perfect or correct for everyone. This article does not only tackle the dangers of a monocultural society, but also the dangers of the potentials of a multicultural society in making the same mistakes as a monocultural society as well. Indeed, forcing someone to be multicultural is rather hypocritical and monocultural; in these circumstances the multicultural society is imposing monoculturalism itself.

The article also mentions countries such as U.S.A., U.K., India, and France in their failures of developing a common sense of belonging among its citizens, and emphasizes the importance in doing this in a multicultural society. It explains that while providing equal economic opportunities for minorities, there still exists a rather justified negative attitude toward certain minority groups in these countries that leave them alienated from any social opportunities, which can potentially also alienate them economically.

As mentioned before, what I found most interesting was the discussion of political doctrines. As a Political Science student, it is surprising that I have rarely come across a piece of writing that advocates the harmony and the need for the existence of many different political doctrines. There has always been the tendency to believe there is only one correct doctrine, and this article disproves this assertion. The article mentions that every doctrine is not wholly correct, and just like there is a need for different cultures (although political ideas derive from culture in some sense) in order to efficiently grow, learn, and move forward while enriching our lives, there is a need for differing political opinions and ideas.

Another important aspect that stood out to me was the fact that the author mentions that no culture in itself is purely sui generis, and that every culture itself derives from a mixture of differing historical cultures depending on its history and geography. Overall, the author tackles some ideas and issues that have rarely come up before. People have the tendency to think of multiculturalism as a last solution to an immigration and globalization problem. Nationalist attitudes have always tended to override any ideas that multiculturalism is a necessity to human life rather than a last resort.

‘Too Asian’  by S. Findlay & N. Kohle

1.      Do you feel that there is a cultural clash at UBC? If so, what, if anything, should be done about it?

2.      Why is there low Asian involvement in extracurriculars like student govt or campus newspapers? E.g. At UBC, less than 20% of the 47 student councillors are Asian, compared to 43% of Asians in the student body.

3.      The article has undeniably caused much backlash. Do you believe that, in Canada, racial issues can be discussed in a rational and objective manner? For example, in the last 5 years, UBC has dramatically relaxed its English requirements for entrance. Allegedly this is because international Asian students were failing the old requirements. Could this development be discussed rationally?

4.       The article focuses heavily on racial averages. I.e. most Asians do this and don’t do that, most whites are like this and aren’t like that. Though such statements may be true —it is possible to prove that 70% of X race does Y—how useful is it to focus on the qualities of a racial group as a whole, given the exceptions?

‘Promoting Intercultural Understanding’  by Stephen J. Toope

1.      Do you think what the author is suggesting as guidelines can really be helpful? To what extend and what would you add to that list? What do you think of the paper?

2.      If you were the person in charge of facilitating a program to address issues of race and ethnicity, how would you run it? What would be your guideline? How do we deal with issues of race when it is so complicated? What could be your primary concerns?

3.       If you were to hire someone (form outside of Canada) to become a university professor and you are worried about how he/she might react to the cultural diversity of this university, how would you ask your interview questions? How do you evaluate their answers?

Summary (provided by: Sara Baghbannezhad Shishvan)

This paper focuses on the idea of promoting intercultural understanding of different racial and ethnic groups in universities in order to create a better and more suitable environment for learning and education. The author draws attention to the reality of cultural diversity and the complex patterns of societal relations that has occurred in the past half of century in Vancouver and is being reflected in the environments such as UBC. He acknowledges that both the students and the staff are to take necessary steps of gaining better understanding of our today’s society. He represents this idea with an attempt to look at cultural diversity as a challenge which he offers several solutions and guidelines to address:

1.        By encouraging engagement and putting students in positions and situations where they have to interact with cultures outside of their own. ( learn about cross perceptions and different cultural diversities)

2.        Taking a course from departments such as Anthropology, First Nations studies, History, sociology… that UBC offers that are dedicated to addressing and explaining cultural diversity. We must learn from these researches and the works of others as well as experiencing it firsthand.

3.        Not just limiting cultural diversity to UBC, but also see a more generalized and broader picture of both our province and also our country. University is somehow a reflection of our society with its institutions and communities. Still, university environment is a smaller place where we can practice and actually come to terms with issues of diversity and we must use that to our advantage.

4.        Respecting other cultures is somehow respecting our own. There is a value and inherited importance to cultural diversity that tells us even though we are different; we are also the same in many ways.

5.        Being exposed to other cultures opens new doors to look at the world and in terms of education; it gives us new methods to do research, to learn and to think.

6.        Still, understanding and embracing cultural diversity must be more than just few words and on a surface level. It is not an easy task to actually come to accept and understand cultural and racial diversity.

7.        To understand the idea of “cultural equality” we must first, come in terms with the idea of “cultural identity and unity”

8.        Engage in conversations and groups that talk about cultural diversity in class. (get involved)

9.        Take a look at the statistics (WE ARE DIVERSE, EVERYONE IS FROM SOMEWHRE)

– He then offers practical ways to improve the situation in UBC:

Offer more courses related to race and diversity issues, promote interactions that mix students from different backgrounds more, engage students with more language education, promote studying outside of Canada and promote “GO GLOBAL” education more, open up more opportunities for students to get involved locally as well, persuade and push for more research done on cultural diversity, put more effort of hiring faculty members who understand and appreciate cultural diversity and they themselves, can be a good role model for students to follow .

Multiculturalism and the History of Canadian Diversity (by Day)

1) How can the “origin myth of Canadian multiculturalism as an already achieved ideal” be problematic or a possible threat to our society?

2) What is “true multiculturalism”? Do you think Canada can achieve this?

3) Day states that “the ‘social identity’ approach does not bring into question the enabling constraints that make ethnocultural identifications possible in the first place.” Would you agree with this statement? Why or why not?

4) Why are war and bad economy convenient in terms of regulating immigration? Are these excuses still effective or justifiable?

White man’s Law: native People in Nineteenth-Century Canadian Jurisprudence (by Harring & Wiebe)

1) Calling a Native Canadian “Indian” is deemed politically incorrect, and yet the “Indian Law” still incorporates the term, and many writers adopt it, stating that “Native Canadian” or “First Nations” is an apologetic term used by European colonizers. What are your thoughts on this matter?

2) Discuss British Columbia’s resistance in recognizing the Indigenous legal rights. Why was BC different from the rest of Canada?

3) How are the dispute over land rights and fishing rights in British Columbia interrelated?

4) During the nineteenth century the Native Peoples in BC have either refused to acknowledge the British law or appealed to the Crown that the British law acknowledges their claim on land. What might be the reasons behind these separate approaches?

5) Should the Native Peoples take a more active role in the affairs of immigrants, considering the land originally belonged to them?

6) What would be the crux of rejecting the Native Peoples’ legal title? What may be the political/economic motivations behind such a decision?

Here’s a list of rules and guidelines that we came up today for classroom discussions:

• Be open and share your feelings and opinions
• Honesty with courtesy
• Give each other the benefit of the doubt
• Don’t get offended too easily
• When you disagree, state your reasons
• Be culturally aware
• Be punctual
• Don’t make generalizations
• Respect others when they are speaking in class (i.e. no interruptions)
• Try to speak only English in class
• Be understanding of others’ experience
• Use the safety word if discussions become too heated
• Avoid absolute statements
• Use modifiers such as “I believe,” “In my view,” etc.
• Clarify the terms you use in class
• Don’t be afraid to discuss stereotypes and prejudice