Immigrants’ children find multiculturalism obsolete

[puckstopshere]

“I think it’s a bit unfair that I have to be multicultural, while you get to be whatever you want to be.” That was said to me a few days ago, with an ironic smile and no trace of anger, by a young, dark-skinned woman in a hijab who spoke with a more pronounced Canadian accent than mine.

I mention this not because her words surprised me, but because they have become so familiar. Over the past couple of years, when I have found myself hearing sharp criticism of multiculturalism in this country, it is very often coming from a Canadian-born child of religious-minority immigrants. “Multiculturalism was fine for my parents’ generation,” a Bangladeshi-Canadian radio producer told me, “but I have no use for it – it just makes me feel like a second-class Canadian.”

The generation born after the M-word entered the Canadian vocabulary – the putative beneficiary of it – appears to find the concept obsolete. There don’t appear to be any data on this, but ask around: Those who are the most “multicultural” often like the word the least.

How can this be, when Canada is just about the only country where the M-word is almost universally popular? Surveys taken over the past decade show that as many as 85 per cent of Canadians believe multiculturalism is good for the country. While leaders in Germany, Britain and France have gained political traction by blasting “multi-kulti,” in Canada there is no major political party, left or right, that opposes the concept.

Why mess with a good thing, then? You have to understand the distinction. When people like me – a sixth-generation Anglo-Canadian – hear people criticizing multiculturalism, we think they’re attacking the “multi” part. A good part of those unhappy 15 per cent would probably prefer the old Canada of British and French immigrants and natives. Add to that a few who don’t care for darker skin colours and some who harbour a dark distrust of religious minorities.

But what bothers these children of immigrants is the second half of the word – not the “multi,” but the “culturalism.” They have no problem with ethnic, racial, religious or linguistic diversity – just not as defined, from the outside, by the neat categories preferred by people like me and by the government policies that enforce these categories.

This distinction is made sharply by British scholar Kenan Malik, who is part of a wave of British and European figures on the “ethnic” centre-left (he is of Indian-Muslim descent) who are outspokenly opposed to multiculturalism.

In his Milton K. Wong lecture in Vancouver last year, he identified the two chief ways we understand the word multiculturalism. The first is what he calls “the lived experience of diversity.” That’s how I enjoy multiculturalism – the Eritrean guy across my street who makes good coffee, the bowl of pork bone soup down the street in Koreatown.

The second he calls “multiculturalism as a political process, the aim of which is to manage that diversity.” For immigrants, and especially their children, this is the face of multiculturalism – not an experience, but something that is done to them.

It is, to quote Mr. Malik, “a set of policies, the aim of which is to manage and institutionalize diversity by putting people into ethnic and cultural boxes, defining individual needs and rights by virtue of the boxes into which people are put, and using those boxes to shape public policy.” The policies have created “communities,” united by associations and generally self-appointed leaders, often through the temple or the mosque.

It only looks diverse from the outside. Inside those “communities,” it is more like what economist Amartya Sen calls “plural monoculturalism” – a diversity of isolated islands.

How would I respond if I were subject to such policies? Imagine the creation of a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant policy, with celebrations organized by the WASP Council of Canada – whose leaders were typically older men from the Church of England – and everything I read about me was written through the lens of such councils and their spokespeople. Yes, it does sound like Toronto in the 1950s. I’m also certain I would rebel against it.

This is the post-immigrant shift: For the first generation, multiculturalism was a way to feel part of the national whole; for the second, it often feels like a barrier to such inclusion. For this new, comfortably inclusive Canada, we need a new vocabulary: More “multi,” less “culturalism.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/doug-saunders-immigrants-children-find-multiculturalism-ob...

[pigdog47]

Thrilled to read that this was not published in one of the Sun newspapers, because that  unfortunate pedigree would automatically relegate it to the dust bin.   In the minds of some.

I have previously posted a thread or two re. Kenam Malik, and they gained no traction amongst the readership here.  It may be difficult for the CTS critics to contemptuously dismiss Malik with ad hominen attacks, because he is a highly educated atheist, lol.   So, he is to be considered an aberration perhaps?o

[art-in-the-making]

95% of newspapers in Canada support the Cons largely because most of them, Globe included, are owned by large corporations that benefit from the Cons' generous treatment of corporations.

So the Sun is only the worst of a terrible lot.

This anti-multiculturalism movement has been rampant now in Conservative circles now for a few years and I have seen numerous similar articles - what is the reason for it, I wonder?

Is it just because m-c is perceived as Liberal/liberal? Is it just simply latent racism randomly coming through? Is it because of some weird aversion to ethnic cultures as the author awkwardly attempts to express? Or is there some other force at work?  I would say all of the above but moreso the latter.

Is it advantageous to corporations if everyone behaves the same, without the ethnic flourishes here and there? Yeah but why launch such a campaign over such a trifle? Perhaps ethnic media, groceries, real estate and other commercial manifestations of multi-culturalism are more of a concern to the corporates than we think?

[bb_cool_stuff]

Well put Art.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Sun or no Sun….the article has it’s points.

However I think what often happens in this world is that at times things get too ……what shall I call it…..intellectual. Not that that doesn’t have it’s place in thoughts and perspectives, but also it can confuse and cloud the ‘basics’.

What really happens in our society, and that of some others, is we have to understand who and what we are..... just another animal on the planet. We have, shall we call them ‘traits’ that go way back to our beginnings and like all animals we subconsciously revert back to those traits.

We are pack or herd animals. We have an inbred distrust for those who are not like us, be it that they have a different colour skin, or language, or religious beliefs. Also because we are ‘visually based’ we immedietly have a subconscious distrust for anyone, even our own, who look ……..different.

We are territorial and protective of our own and we live in…… fear.

This is particularly prevalent with those who have never strayed too far from home. Of the many people I have met in this world, the most unprejudiced people, those with open minds, are those who have gone to other countries and have met and mingled with the real people. I don’t mean those who have mixed with the kings and queens of other societies that live in their own little caverns….but instead the average person. What they have found is in the end……we are all really the same. We feel pain, hurt, anger, love. These people who have really mingled and learned  have through lessons in life shed their human DNA of fear and they have finally walked away from the tree of the past that we originally crawled down from.

The problem with most people is, they have no idea who or what they are. They have no idea why they do things, think things, or view others as they do. But don’t ever tell them that or they will dig their heels in up to their knees and defend their right to be who they are…..even if it is prejudiced or bigoted. And they will come up with a myriad of excuses and rationalizations for staying that way.

I often say to people in real life or other areas….go down to for instance the Mosque and talk to the people, or go to the Reservation and talk to the people….or go to a gay club in their area and talk to the people….or go to…..etc etc etc. But they never do. Why? Because of that ‘fear’ thing again. No not necessarily fear of the people…..but I believe more the fear that they will find out they are …….wrong in their judgements of others. They know that if they find out they are wrong, what conscience they have left they now ‘really’ have to live with. Along with that they know that they cannot hang out with the same herd they belonged to before. They know that if they are with fellow racists and bigots and something is said about other people …..if they go along…..deep down inside they know they are lying to not only these so-called friends…..but even worse…..they are lying to themselves. That’s real….fear. But they won’t admit it.  

A good part of those unhappy 15 per cent would probably prefer the old Canada of British and French immigrants and natives. Add to that a few who don’t care for darker skin colours and some who harbour a dark distrust of religious minorities.

I think you will find the % is a ‘lot’ higher than that if people were honest with themselves, or you could become a fly on the wall during private conversations in homes and offices and bars and many other places.

As someone once said.....the world would be a better place if we were all blind.

[cumos55]

Perhaps it is more important to  say that the concept of multiculturalism  changes with each generation.

The great-great grandparents came here in the early 1900's  or any time after..

It is a transition from then to today..

There was a time when we were hyphenated Canadians.....Polish-Canadians, German-Canadians  and so forth with each ethnic group...

That has changed...  I remember the ethnic difference as stated openly... My children do not ... It relates to the fact that intermarriage among groups  has cut down our differences...

Very few groups currently say... marry within your group....

Each new generation has to understand who they are...   Each new generation makes an adjustment...

With new immigrants  that change occurs almost over night....Thesecond generation  finds it must fit in quickly.... while those whose ancestors came here decades ago... adjusted with each generation...

The second generation  of the new immigrants does not want to be told to keep the old views handy... They want to be like everyone else.

That high percentage that is happy with multiculturalism  are the old established groups in Canada. The old groups  have learned how to be together and celebrate their differences...

The newer immigrants have to adjust quickly ...  They want to be the same as all Canadians... and not separate from everyone else....

The Canadian-born second generation will one day wake up and say who they are....  It will take time... but for Canadians  the fact is we understand who we are based on where our ancestors came from....

It is our way of celebrating our standing as Canadians.....  It is acceptance....

How to be different and the same at the same time.....

[pjcdn2005]

This anti-multiculturalism movement has been rampant now in Conservative circles now for a few years and I have seen numerous similar articles - what is the reason for it, I wonder?

Perhaps the reason is as simple as those people believing that it is not working, that it is causing alienation.

Is it just because m-c is perceived as Liberal/liberal? Is it just simply latent racism randomly coming through? Is it because of some weird aversion to ethnic cultures as the author awkwardly attempts to express? Or is there some other force at work?  I would say all of the above but moreso the latter.

If it is any of those reasons, why is the criticism "very often coming from a Canadian-born child of religious-minority immigrants" ?

[pjcdn2005]

Well said cumos!

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

I think that you may find cosmos that not all immigrants want to be totally …..absorbed. I’ve been to Greek, Polish, German, Irish, Chinese, Korean, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, East Indian and many other celebrations and associations and although they realize that they live in a country where they have to ‘do as the Romans do’………they have not disavowed their heritage and most of their traditions. If anything I have noticed that lately their strength in holding on to their history has grown.

[pjcdn2005]

We have an inbred distrust for those who are not like us, be it that they have a different colour skin, or language, or religious beliefs. Also because we are ‘visually based’ we immedietly have a subconscious distrust for anyone, even our own, who look ……..different.

We are territorial and protective of our own and we live in…… fear.

I don't believe that at all. Some may have a distrust or be uncomfortable about the unknown but many have a curiosity about that which is different. and want to know more. To say that we have some sort of inbred fear is wrong imo.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

Speak to psychologists and anthropologists.

[pjcdn2005]

they have not disavowed their heritage and most of their traditions. If anything I have noticed that lately their strength in holding on to their history has grown.

I tend to agree more with cumos that more want to let go than to hold on. However, when people talk about multiculturalism in a negative sense, I don't see is as meaning that they want people to let go of their heritage and traditions. They don't like the political part of multiculturalism...", “a set of policies, the aim of which is to manage and institutionalize diversity by putting people into ethnic and cultural boxes, defining individual needs and rights by virtue of the boxes into which people are put, and using those boxes to shape public policy.”

[puckstopshere]

The term racist is thrown around without much concern for its meanung.  Wikipedia has a great definition and I won't quote it here.

I believe that there are people who, for whatever reason, don't recognize racial differences.  I think it has a lot to do with their upbringing and the influence of parents.  It also has a lot to do with their environment.

I grew up in Vancouver.  As a kid, I often took long trips downtown on the bus.  In Vancouver, when you got on the bus, you started a conversation with the person next to you.  Often, by the time you got off the bus, there might be ten people involved in the conversation.  On the bus, I talked to people of all races, nationalities, sexual orientation, age.  It never mattered to me.  I never "didn't talk" to somone because they were black, or Asian, or gay or whatever.  You just didn't think about it.  And, I think, after a while, you didn't even notice the differences.  If I noticed anyhting, it was accents.  People spoke with a variety of accents and I loved to hear them. 

When I came to Ontario, I got a shock.  I rode the bus and the subway in Toronto.  Of course, I tried to talk to people  Well, I think I was perceived a mental case, a rapist or worse.  People didn't talk to each other.  When I came to London, I found it a little better, but not much.  And, in over 30 years of being here, it hasn't changed.   Maybe it is just a big city thing.  But, Vancouver was a city, too.

I still do not think of people in terms of visible differences.  I find each human being I encounter has the ability to teach me something and maybe I might be able to teach them something.  I find everyone interesting.  I hope that attitude never changes.  I am glad that it seems to have rubbed off on my sons.  Oldest son had a relationship with a native woman and is now living with an older black woman.  If he is happy, then I am happy.

[prior-of-verity*shake-hands-with-your-devil]

I think it has a lot to do with their upbringing and the influence of parents. It also has a lot to do with their environment.

True. Racism and bigotry can be as generational as poverty. Many dedicated racists and bigots, including those who admit it openly, I can pretty much bet how many of their children think.

Also those people who in their younger years or even later years decide to experience the rest of the world and it's people....can change what they were taught if they approach it with an open mind.

The same applies to things like religion. Even if we later remove ourselves from a religion, the beliefs are still engrained in us.

I know it's a far fetched idea, but I think it would be good if all children instead of learning for years in and environment of their own small area and their own larger society and amongst their own people.........instead had a chance to experience other places in the world......then the world would be a better place.