Teviah Pimlatt the Invention of an Identity

Teviah PIMLATT

CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES

Tackling Tensions in Canadian Identity Narratives

Volume 6, Number 1, Spring 2020.

Managing Editor

Dr. Anne Trépanier

Desktop publishing

Sarah Pledge Dickson Editorial Board

Nathaniel Bruni, Martha Attridge Bufton, Miranda Leibel, Ryan Lux, Jack Mallon, Melissa Pole, Daria Sleiman, Dr. Anne Trépanier, Lindy Van Vliet

Revision

Claire Dignard

All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy, or transmission of this publication, or part thereof in excess of one paragraph (other than as a PDF file at the discretion of School of Indigenous and Canadian Studies at Carleton University) may be made without the written permission of the author. To quote this article refer to: ―, Teviah Pimlatt "The Invention of an Identity: A Comparison of Trudeaus’ Multiculturalisms", Tackling Tensions in Canadian Identity Narratives, Capstone Seminar Series Volume 6, number 1, Spring 2020, page number and date of accession to this website: http://capstoneseminarseries.wordpress.com

2 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

The Invention of an Identity: A Comparison of Trudeaus’ Multiculturalisms

Abstract Despite the contemporary acceptance of multicultural policy amongst the majority of Canadians, the ideology of multiculturalism in Canada is not a piece of national identity that has appeared overnight. In fact, multiculturalism has experienced significant changes since its initial creation in the 1960s. The present comparative research works to identify and compare key aspects in presentations of multiculturalism, notably statements by Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Justin Trudeau, and ultimately argues that the presentation of multiculturalism has changed from an alternative to biculturalism which must be strictly pursued to a core, natural, and celebratory piece of Canadian national identity. The purpose of the research is to situate the results into the academic body of Canadian studies to further explore alternative methods of analyzing national identity in Canada. The paper reveals the inventive and tightly controlled nature of multiculturalism as a large piece of Canada’s contemporary national identity.

Keywords Multiculturalism; Canadian national identity; nationalism; Trudeau; biculturalism; Pierre Elliott Trudeau; Justin Trudeau; Collective Rights; Individual Rights; Indigenous Rights; Colonial Multiculturalism; Settler Colonialism; Interculturalism

3 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

The Invention of an Identity: A Comparison of Trudeaus’ Multiculturalisms

Multiculturalism can be defined in a number of different ways. According to the Canadian Library of Parliament’s background paper on multiculturalism, multiculturalism has three distinct interpretations. The website states that multiculturalism as a sociological fact, multiculturalism as federal public policy, and multiculturalism as ideology are the three lenses through which the subject can be analyzed (Brosseau & Dewing 1). Although multiculturalism here is separated into three distinct categories, these groupings intersect with each other to determine how multiculturalism is defined, presented, and received. This paper seeks to address the development of the ideology of multiculturalism in Canada through comparative research. By comparing definitions of multiculturalism between two Prime Ministers, Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Justin Trudeau, the changing presentation of multiculturalism becomes evident. Through analyzing a difference in key words and phrases between the two eras, it becomes clear how the framing and presentation of multiculturalism has been carefully constructed to become a core piece of Canada’s national heritage and identity, as multiculturalism has always acted as a tool to settle political tensions or address sociological changes in Canada. To add, critiques of multiculturalism which unsettle the solidity of the widely accepted national identity further reveal the inventive and flexible nature of the ideology of multiculturalism. However, to begin, it is first necessary to contextualize the creation of multiculturalism in its relevant political era.

Setting the stage: the initial introductions of multiculturalism According to Eve Haque, ethnic minority groups and Indigenous peoples within Canada were voicing disdain towards the commission’s idea of “two founding races” during the preliminary and public hearing stages of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, as these different groups sought recognition for their distinct contributions in the history of the nation (Haque 14). Senator Paul Yuzyk and his leadership during the Thinkers’ Conference of 1968 can be used to exemplify this resistance, as during this conference, the idea of a multi-cultural nation is introduced as a refusal to accept the Royal Commission’s notion of biculturalism. The Thinkers’ Conference was held from December 13th to 15th in 1968, where the cultural rights and responsibilities of ethnic minorities and Indigenous peoples were 4 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

discussed between cultural and ethnic association leaders, ministers, senators, and researchers; topics of discussion included the rights of “Indians and Eskimos,” the preservation of minority cultures in Canada, and how public policy could be developed to promote this preservation (“Program: Thinkers’ Conference on Cultural Rights”). As the Chairman of the Conference Committee, Senator Paul Yuzyk ensured that the results of the Thinkers’ Conference pertaining to “Canada’s multi-cultural tradition” were transformed into recommendations and subsequently communicated to the appropriate government levels (“Thinkers’ Conference on Cultural Rights Purpose and Committee Outline”). On December 13th, 1968 Senator Yuzyk led the conference with a speech titled, The Emerging New Force in the Emerging New Canada. Using his professional and academic background knowledge in Canadian history, Yuzyk proposed the term “multiculturalism” to define Canada’s sociological reality and history, in place of the Royal Commission’s “biculturalism” which emphasized the notion that the nation of Canada was built solely by the British and French “races” (“About Paul Yuzyk”). With pride in his Ukrainian-Canadian heritage, Yuzyk offered the contributions of Ukrainian settlers to illustrate how various ethnic groups, not only the British and French, participated in the creation of the Canadian nation. Through many sectors such as agriculture, music, culture, law, and medicine, Yuzyk claimed that Ukrainian integration into everyday society is proof that Ukrainians are “builders of Canada and qualifying partners with the British and the French” (Yuzyk 3-4). Furthermore, Yuzyk cited demographic statistics as another justification for a multicultural Canada. Using the term, “the Third element,” to refer to Canadians with heritage other than British or French, Yuzyk claimed that the demographic proportion of the Third element had changed significantly between 1868 and 1968. Skimming briefly through the history of settlement in the Canadian West, Yuzyk’s speech touched upon immigration and settlement after the entrance of Manitoba into Confederation in 1870, the creation of Saskatchewan and Alberta, and the influx of immigration seen in the 1920s and post-World War II (Yuzyk 2). Yuzyk concluded that while the proportion of the French population remained at around 30% from 1868 to 1968, the British population had declined from 57% to 44%, and the Third element population had increased significantly from 12% to 26% (Yuzyk 2). According to Yuzyk, this emergence of the Third element was extraordinary and “indicative of the emerging new factor in Canadian life” (Yuzyk 3), worthy of official recognition in the form of multiculturalism. 5 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

In order to officially create policies of multiculturalism in Canada, Yuzyk recommended a number of government-assisted initiatives to increase the representation of the Third element in daily life. These included the teaching of non-official languages and culture in Canadian schools (public, secondary, and university levels), the broadcasting of national radio and television programmes on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that would “[present] the contribution of [minority] ethnic groups which would promote better understanding of … cultural heritage,” and an increased representation in “government bodies and rational institutions” (Yuzyk 5-6). Three years later, Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau would agree with the idea of a multicultural Canada and announced a series of government initiatives to support a policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework in the House of Commons. Notably during this era, federal leadership was committed to bringing together Canadians through policy and ideology in hopes of establishing a collective national identity. As the 15th Prime Minister of Canada, Pierre Elliott Trudeau was a Liberal Party leader from 1968-1984 who led the country with this “philosophy of one Canada and a strong federal government” (“Pierre Elliott Trudeau”). Dubbed “Trudeaumania” by the press during his election campaign in 1968 and in the subsequent years of a successful Liberal government, the era of Pierre Elliott Trudeau leadership saw multiple political accomplishments, including the success of the Official Languages Act of 1969, which implemented the policy of mandatory bilingualism in the Canadian civil service (“Pierre Elliott Trudeau”). However, creating a collective identity for an increasingly diverse Canada was one of his biggest challenges. A sense of national unity and equality amongst Canadians was an important idea to present during this era, and multiculturalism within a bilingual framework was introduced to do just this. The Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism highlighted the lack of national unity as a “crisis” which the commission sought to resolve; during the preliminary stage of the commission, it was concluded that “Canada, without being fully conscious of the fact, [was] passing through the greatest crisis in its history” (Canada 17). According to the commission, Canada was bound to break apart politically, culturally, and economically if new rules were not implemented to ensure a collective existence (Canada 17). Evidently, the commission was referring to the unrest occurring at the time in relation to Québec’s changing atmosphere. The Quiet Revolution that took place in the 1960s marked an era of disruption and subsequent change in Québec, which worked to “redefine the role of francophone society in Canada.” (Durocher). Changes which stemmed from the state’s 6 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

increased involvement in daily life included the growth for Francophone Québécois prosperity and a more widely spread “nationalist consciousness” (Durocher). These new adjustments to Québec’s identity inevitably resulted in a larger identity problem for the entirety of Canada as the growing intensity of Québec nationalism and separatism threatened the country. In order to create a harmony between the governments, the federal solution led firstly by Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson attempted to more intensely pursue the integration of Francophones into the federal government (Durocher). Bilingualism proved to be a successful measure in this endeavor. In 1971, Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s House of Commons speech titled, the “Announcement of Implementation of Policy of Multiculturalism Within Bilingual Framework” gave a brief description of a “multicultural Canada” and outlined the responsibilities of the federal government in implementing this new policy. Support from the government would come in four broad ways; assisting all cultural groups in Canada to “develop a capacity to grow and contribute to Canada,” helping cultural groups to “overcome cultural barriers to full participation in Canadian society,” “promot[ing] creative encounters … among all Canadian cultural groups in the interest of national unity,” and creating more ways for newcomers to learn either English or French (Trudeau 8546). Both Senator Paul Yuzyk and Pierre Elliott Trudeau were successful in recommending or announcing government initiatives to support multiculturalism in Canada; however, their speeches reveal more than just these practical measures. In order for these proposed policies to be upheld, the existence of underlying ideology is necessary to hold their weight. Together, these ideologies and policies work to create a definition of multiculturalism. In Senator Yuzyk’s and prime minister Trudeau’s ideas of multiculturalism, the definition of multiculturalism is the sense of national unity and equality in Canada that is a result of the individual freedom of choice to participate in, and preserve, one’s own culture, which is then supported by government mandated policy. This research has identified three distinct characteristics within Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s speech on multicultural policy within the House of Commons; multiculturalism as an alternative to biculturalism; multiculturalism as an aspiration which must be pursued and controlled actively; and multiculturalism as an overarching method of controlling the Canadian population and the relationships found within. The rationale behind the rejection of biculturalism can be seen in both Yuzyk and P.E. Trudeau’s speeches. As stated earlier in the paper, Yuzyk cites demographics and 7 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

contributions to Canadian society to justify the necessity of an actively multicultural nation. P.E. Trudeau follows a similar line of thought, where biculturalism is dismissed in favor of multiculturalism to promote a more inclusive sense of ethnic and cultural equality: … there cannot be one cultural policy for Canadians of British and French origin, another for the original peoples and yet a third for all others. For although there are two official languages, there is no official culture, nor does any ethnic group take precedence over any other. No citizen or group of citizens is other than Canadians, and all should be treated fairly. (Trudeau 8545)

This explicit rejection of biculturalism boldly presents multiculturalism as the only practical, and logical option which must be followed rigorously. P.E. Trudeau also introduces a positive set of values that are intended to accompany the sense of national unity that derives from multiculturalism, which includes respect, freedom, and relationality through the “shar[ing of] ideas, attitudes, and assumptions” (Trudeau 8545). In order for these positive values to become “Canadian values,” Canada must be accepting of the new policy of multiculturalism and the enforcement of this policy must be strict, as Trudeau states “… a policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework is basically the conscious support of individual freedom of choice. We are free to be ourselves. But this cannot be left to chance. It must be fostered and pursued actively” (8546). P.E. Trudeau’s speech successfully frames multiculturalism as an invented and actively controlled ideology and policy that relies heavily on the leadership of the Canadian government. It is presented that multiculturalism, and the positive values such as respect, freedom, and relationality which would eventually be adopted from the practice of multiculturalism, would cease to exist in an organized manner without the overarching guidance and support of these institutional authorities. Explicitly, P.E. Trudeau’s speech focuses on how the policy of multiculturalism ensures equality between all cultures and ethnicities in Canada, while implicitly stating that multiculturalism is a tool which can be invented, employed and utilized by the Canadian government in order to control the relationships between groups of people within Canada.

From a political solution to a national identity During the 1960s and 1970s, the creation of national unity was urgently needed during this time of unrest and uncertainty. From a federal perspective, multiculturalism within a bilingual framework needed to be carried out immediately to relieve the political 8 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

tension felt from all sides. However, multiculturalism has survived throughout the decades since and currently exists in the contemporary era as a presentation of Canada’s moral accomplishments and aspirations. According to the official website of the Prime Minister of Canada, as the 23rd Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau has led Canada with his progressive ideologies which intend to expand the inclusion of all people into Canadian society; multiculturalism is included in this. Throughout his leadership, Justin Trudeau has encouraged equal access to the abundance of opportunities available in Canada, ongoing “respect for and promotion of freedom and diversity,” and since winning with a majority government in 2015 and being re-elected in 2019, Justin Trudeau’s leadership has continued to acknowledge a number of social issues and movements, including reconciliation with Indigenous peoples and nations, and feminism (“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau”). This explicit focus on bettering relationships between the Canadian government and different demographics within Canada has helped in building Canada’s positive identity and reputation. The subject of immigration in Canada and the everchanging demographics relating to culture and ethnicity are included in these topics. A notable example includes Justin Trudeau’s dedication to welcoming Syrian refugees. In 2015, the federal government officially announced that a goal had been set – to welcome 25,000 Syrian refugees into Canada. This goal was eventually surpassed, as a total of 29,125 Syrian refugees had settled in Canada by May 2016, according to a report by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (Houle). In general, immigration in Canada continues to remain as a large demographic, as according to Statistics Canada, 1.2 million people in Canada are recent immigrants and immigrants as a whole represent over 1/5 of the total population of Canada. According to the same report, the percentage of immigrants in Canada has consistently remained over 12% of the population since 1991 (“Immigrant Population in Canada”). The value of inclusivity which derives from multicultural ideology is important to uphold in an increasingly diverse society. These values of welcoming and tolerance in Canada are explicitly presented by Justin Trudeau and his government in a variety of public statements, speeches, and appearances. The most notable of quotes often come from Justin Trudeau’s casual conversations with Canadians. An example of this is from 2019, where Justin Trudeau proudly defends Canada’s immigration policy against a critic, stating clearly that “Canada’s a country that was built by 9 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

immigration” which is followed by an enthusiastic round of applause (“Justin Trudeau: ‘Canada’s a country that was built by immigration’”). Another example of federal encouragement of these positive values are Justin Trudeau’s annual statements which have been released on Canadian Multiculturalism Day from 2016 to 2019 to remind the public of the importance of national unity. Since the creation of Canadian Multiculturalism Day in 2002 under the Liberal Jean Chrétien government, the continuing celebratory day signifies Canada’s ongoing acknowledgment and support of its multicultural nature within politics, ideology, and sociological fact. Furthermore, multiculturalism is described as a foundational piece of Canadian life and history, as the official Proclamation of Canadian Multiculturalism Day argues that “multiculturalism is a fundamental characteristic of the Canadian heritage” (Minister of Justice). Justin Trudeau’s short statements on Multiculturalism Day highlight this picture of multiculturalism, as the statements ultimately summarize the ideology behind contemporary multiculturalism. This research has identified three core aspects which define Justin Trudeau’s presentations of multiculturalism within his annual statements; the naturalization of multiculturalism, the claim that multiculturalism is a fundamental piece of national Canadian identity, and the celebratory nature of multiculturalism. In addition, the statements can be read in an alternative fashion, as they unintentionally reveal how the presentation of multiculturalism has changed since its initial defining moments in the 1960s. In comparison to P.E. Trudeau’s speech on multiculturalism which emphasizes the necessity of “foster[ing] and pursu[ing]” (Trudeau 8546) the ideology of multiculturalism through policies, Justin Trudeau’s statements present multiculturalism as an element of Canadian history that goes back to time immemorial, as he states in 2016, “our roots reach out to every corner of the globe … Our national fabric is vibrant and varied, woven together by many cultures and heritages, and underlined by a core value of respect” (“Statement by the Prime Minister “[2016]). The “roots” to which Justin Trudeau refers to may signify the sociological fact of multiculturalism in Canada which make up the contemporary population of the nation, but these “roots” may also refer to the historical notion of “two founding races” as discussed in the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism (Canada 22). In discussing the latter, it is evident that in this statement, Justin Trudeau explicitly rejects the notion of the “two founding races” and instead attempts to frame multicultural ideology as the founding ideology of Canada. Therefore, the positive set of values, such as “respect, openness, courage, and compassion” (“Statement by the Prime Minister” [2019]), which are 10 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

claimed to accompany multicultural ideology are also intrinsic to the Canadian spirit, both in historical and contemporary times. In contrast, P.E. Trudeau’s speech in the House of Commons focuses on the development of these values as they are not presented as natural to Canada. P.E. Trudeau states that “national unity … must be founded on confidence in one’s own individual identity; out of this can grow respect for that of others and a willingness to share ideas, attitudes and assumptions” (Trudeau 8545). Here, the value of respect is framed as a characteristic that must be learned from multiculturalism – it is not framed as natural to the Canadian spirit. Inevitably, this naturalization of multiculturalism in Canada in the contemporary era has led to claiming the ideology as a core aspect of national identity. Explicitly, Justin Trudeau states in 2016 that “multiculturalism is our strength, as synonymous with Canada as the Maple Leaf ” (“Statement by the Prime Minister” [2016]) and echoes the Proclamation of Canadian Multiculturalism Day by claiming that “multiculturalism is at the heart of Canada’s heritage and identity” (“Statement by the Prime Minister” [2017]). An opinion article from the Globe and Mail takes this idea further, asserting that “multiculturalism is [Canadian] identity,” as it has worked to avoid promoting one dominant culture and instead encourages cultural harmony amongst all Canadians (Paris). This opinion article demonstrates one public opinion which is accepting of multiculturalism as a characteristic of Canadian identity; however, this is not the sole opinion and critiques of multiculturalism will be discussed further in another section of this paper. Regardless of public reception, the framing of multiculturalism as a part of Canadian national identity did not appear overnight. While this sentiment is seen in Paul Yuzyk’s speech from the Thinkers’ Conference 48 years prior, where he states that “the concept of a “bilingual, multicultural Canadian nation” is realistic and the very essence of a dynamic “Canadianism” (Yuzyk 6), it is not explicit in P.E. Trudeau’s speech. P.E. Trudeau’s statement frames multiculturalism as an aspiration, rather than a fundamental, natural piece of Canadian identity. As a leading politician treading on thin ice due to the political tension so apparent in the 1960s and into the 1970s, P.E. Trudeau’s introductory statement on multiculturalism needed to be cautious of the ongoing conflicts relating to nationhood, identity, and recognition. However, the political climate surrounding Justin Trudeau is different. With the world watching how Canada manages immigration, reconciliation with Indigenous nations, and the development of pipelines in Western Canada, it is required that the mirage of a collective national identity, through 11 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

multiculturalism, be strong. As seen through media created by the federal government, such as the video, The Canada We Dream Of, multiculturalism is presented as a collectively accepted ideology among all Canadians. In fact, multiculturalism itself is presented as the leading national identity, as the video states, “[Canada is] a bunch of different cultures get[ting] together and that’s what creates the beauty of Canada,” while displaying a visual of faces of Canadians of different ages, genders, and races (“The Canada We Dream Of ”). The 40-year period of multicultural development has succeeded in convincing many Canadians that multiculturalism is the ideal ideology and policy, as a study by the Mosaic Institute from 2012 shows that 58% of respondents have a positive view of multicultural policy, and 64% believe that “Canada’s multicultural model should be exported to other countries” (Association for Canadian Studies 1). This apparent success of multiculturalism in Canada allows the Prime Minister to present multiculturalism as a celebratory aspect, as it is deeply ingrained in both the heritage of Canada and the national identity. The celebration of Canada in Justin Trudeau’s annual Canadian Multicultural Day statements is recognition of multiculturalism as the unique characteristic that defines Canada. As stated in 2019, Canadian Multiculturalism Day is held to “celebrate the values which set Canada apart and make [the] country one of the best places in the world to live” (“Statement by the Prime Minister” [2019]). This framing of multiculturalism demonstrates that P.E. Trudeau’s initial aspiration of establishing a set of positive values alongside multicultural ideology and policy and spreading this message throughout the nation has succeeded in Canada, and that the reaching of this goal allows Canada and Canadians to celebrate. However, while a comparison of federal presentations of multiculturalism demonstrate the dominant rhetoric of multiculturalism, critiques and problems which arise from this ideology and policy remain adjacent. Although the presentation of multiculturalism has changed throughout time, the definition consistently emphasizes the benefits of multiculturalism for freedom of choice and identity. Yet despite the statistics showing that many Canadians are accepting of this identity, critiques from Indigenous groups and Québec populations demonstrate a different response to these presentations.

The impossibility of nationhood(s) within multiculturalism? There are a wide range of multiculturalism critiques in existence, from criticizing the foundation of the policy and ideology to condemning the methods of implementation. 12 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

However, the ones discussed in this paper deal specifically with the former; these critiques question the legitimacy of multiculturalism as it does not acknowledge or approach notions of sovereignty and nationhood. In analyzing these critiques in conjunction with the given comparison of multiculturalism, it makes clear the unreliable nature of Canada’s national identity and opens doors that allow for the unsettling of common beliefs to occur. The Indigenous critiques of multiculturalism do just this. These critiques of multiculturalism seek to evaluate the entire settler-colonial nation-state in a critical way. As concluded through this research, multiculturalism is a method of control that has been invented and implemented by the Canadian government despite the naturalization of the ideology, and in his article which discusses the idea of multicultural reform through the lens of Indigenous critiques, David Bruce Macdonald states that these critiques agree that multiculturalism is simply a governing tool which enforces the settler-colonial state’s legitimacy (80). Since the initial introduction of multiculturalism in 1971, presentations of multiculturalism have actively suppressed any doubt relating to the legitimacy of the nation- state through its inclusionary rhetoric and celebratory nature; it is difficult to critique the head of the nation when it is believed that everyone is granted equal rights and equal opportunities. Additionally, the subject of collective rights is also dismissed through multicultural ideology, in favour of individual rights. Macdonald states that “any good theory of justice has to be couched in the language of individual freedom and equality” that is common in liberal ideas of nationhood and belonging (75). Evidently, the language of individual rights and freedoms found in the definition of multiculturalism does not recognize the specific rights of Indigenous people, nor does the definition or practice of multiculturalism attempt to tackle issues of land and resources. This relationship between Indigenous rights and land is outlined on page two of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples from 2008, which Canada announced its full support for in 2016 (“United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” [Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada]): [The General Assembly] Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories, and resources. (“United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” [United Nations] 2)

13 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

As Macdonald explains, advocates for multiculturalism insist that Indigenous rights are relevant only if there is an inequality to gaining cultural membership through citizenship, and that the rights in question can solve this issue; however, this defense fails to acknowledge that Indigenous rights were not “given” but were in existence before colonialism (Macdonald 78-79). Although multiculturalism is presented as a governing system for all people inside of Canada, Indigenous peoples and relevant issues are essentially removed from this governed group while being simultaneously treated in a similar manner as newcomers to Canada who must be integrated into the multicultural society (Macdonald 82). This confusing relationship between Indigenous peoples and multiculturalism produces the term, “colonial multiculturalism” (Macdonald 70). Macdonald explains that Canada’s colonial multiculturalism can only exist within a settler-colonial structure and it functions by telling the narrative of a tolerant and welcoming society where everyone is treated equally, and ethnic minority groups are celebrated for their heritage (70). Evidently, this conflicts directly with the interests of Indigenous rights which seek to establish nationhood and sovereignty on the land. Furthermore, this definition of colonial multiculturalism reveals how the Canadian government controls the narrative of the nation’s identity through rhetoric. As multiculturalism has been naturalized in popular discourse, retelling Canada’s settlement history as a time of tolerance and welcoming actively disregards the complex Indigenous-settler relationships which are continuously complicated today. Québec’s rejection of multiculturalism is also rooted in a struggle for recognition of identity and nationhood. Amy Nugent in “Demography, National Myths, and Political Origins” discusses how multiculturalism is perceived and rejected in Québec, and how the alternative of interculturalism is preferred (22). Québec’s nationalism is a collective identity, and multiculturalism is rejected as it “over-emphasizes [minority] group rights at the expense of both individual equality and social cohesion;” multiculturalism is perceived as socially fragmenting and would not appropriately acknowledge the strength of Québec nationalism (Nugent 23). Québec’s rejection of multiculturalism leads to the alternative ideology of interculturalism. According to Nugent, interculturalism ideology in Québec implies “between, among, [and] amid” (21), while multiculturalism leads towards “many” yet separate (22). There are a number of documents which create interculturalism in Québec, such as La Charte des droits et libertés de la personne du Québec (1975), Autant de façons d’être Québécois (1984), and Au Québec pour bâtir ensemble (1990) (Nugent 27). Together, these 14 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

documents are quite similar to Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Justin Trudeau’s definition of multiculturalism. The Québec documents on interculturalism outline the inclusivity of Québec culture, solidify the intolerance for discrimination, and establish French as the dominant language (Nugent 27). However, Nugent identifies one particular demand that differs from federal multiculturalism – the requirement that newcomers pursue “la connaissance de la société québécoise” (28). In the written sense, multiculturalism and interculturalism seem rather similar. Charles Taylor critically discusses the differences in the article, “Interculturalism or multiculturalism?” where it is stated that interculturalism was created in response to the creation of multiculturalism in the 1960s and 1970s, as multiculturalism has been viewed as an avoidant strategy by the federal government in dealing with the previously discussed political tensions between Canada and Québec (Taylor 414). If this is true, it is evident that the rejection of multiculturalism may be caused by a preestablished relationship between the federal Canadian government and Québec as it is viewed that the federal government did not appropriately address Québec’s concerns, and multiculturalism has been used as a tool of federal power. As Québec has been seeking acknowledgment for its contributions to the development of the nation and its special, unique relationship with Canada, the rejection of biculturalism was also seen as a rejection of Québec’s demands for recognition. Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s stark rejection of biculturalism was a great offense (Taylor 415). Again, multiculturalism is perceived as a method of strengthening federal power. In considering both Indigenous and Québec critiques of multiculturalism, it can be said that multiculturalism is criticized as a tool which is used to solidify settler-colonial, federal power. These critiques support the conclusion of the given comparison, in which it is stated that multiculturalism is an ideology that is invented, pursued, and controlled by the Canadian federal government, despite its contemporary naturalized nature. There are certain rationales for the creation of multiculturalism that are outside of the sunny “welcoming” and “inclusive” rhetoric. The critiques of multiculturalism also reveal alternatives, such as interculturalism. Another undiscussed alternative is described by Macdonald as “syncretic multiculturalism,” which positions Indigenous rights alongside settler processes of integration and immigration, ultimately allowing for an equal, respectful, and interconnected relationship between Indigenous nations and settler nations (Macdonald 71). However, this form of multiculturalism which categorizes all settler nations and forms of governance into one group would face critiques from both the Québec and Canadian nations, as the current 15 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

form of federal multiculturalism continues to instill a notion of collective identity and Québec critiques demand official recognition; the splitting of Indigenous and settler nations would perhaps undermine Québec’s struggle for recognition and Canada’s nation-building project in favour of a system that works outside of settler-colonialism.

Conclusion The given research has drawn multiple findings. Most notably, this paper has identified three main points of emphasis for both the historic speech of Pierre Elliott Trudeau and the contemporary statements of Justin Trudeau. Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s introduction of multiculturalism was presented as an alternative to biculturalism which must be actively pursued as an overarching ideology supported by policy. In contrast, Justin Trudeau’s statements on multiculturalism present it as a natural and fundamental piece of Canadian identity which deserves to be acknowledged and celebrated. The evolving nature of the presentation of multiculturalism reveals the fragility of Canada’s collective identity, as the base ideology which forms multicultural policy is highly critiqued from a number of different angles. It can be projected that the presentation of multiculturalism may continue to change as Canada evolves. As a country that is only 153 years past Confederation, the struggle to establish an identity within Canada continues to be fought from all sides, as evident from the discussed critiques of multiculturalism. Yet despite these issues and proposed alternatives, multiculturalism, for now, remains a strong contender in defining “Canadianism.” It is with the hope that this comparative research will situate itself within the academic realm of Canadian Studies, and that it will act as support to the ongoing study of Canadian national identity and nationalism. By analyzing multiculturalism from a comparative perspective and identifying key concepts in the presentations of multiculturalism, this essay intends to address the broader topic of the presentation of national identity and nationalism in Canada. While this subject matter is currently well- established in academia, this particular research hopes to be pertinent to future conversations about the ongoing changes in contemporary Canadian national identity. As it is evident that the demography in Canada is everchanging and evolving, it is useful to look back at the past to establish a more critical analysis of the present Canadian national identity.

16 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

Bibliography of works cited

Primary sources

Canada. Report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. General introduction, Book 1 : the official languages / A. Davidson Dunton and André Laurendeau, co-chairmen. (Online). Ottawa: Privy Council Office, 1967. (Cat. No. Z1- 1963/1-5/1E- PDF). http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2014/bcp- pco/Z1-1963-1-5-1-1- eng.pdf.

“Justin Trudeau: ‘Canada’s a country that was built by immigration’.” YouTube, uploaded by CTV News, 11 Jan. 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTIlANhprOk

Minister of Justice. Proclamation Declaring June 27 of each year as “Canadian Multiculturalism Day.” Minister of Justice, 2002. Web. https://laws- lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/ SI-2002-160.pdf.

Program: Thinkers’ Conference on Cultural Rights/Conférence sur les Droits Culturels. 13, 14, and 15 Dec. 1968. Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism [textual record] (R5366-2-4-E, Box 9, Folder 12[1]). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, ON.

“Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on Multiculturalism Day.” Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, 27 June 2016 https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2016/06/27/ statement-prime-minister-canada- multiculturalism-day.

“Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on Multiculturalism Day.” Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, 27 June 2017, https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2017/06/27/ statement-prime-minister-canadian-multiculturalism-day

“Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on Multiculturalism Day.” Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, 27 June 2018, https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2018/06/27/ statement-prime-minister-canadian-multiculturalism-day.

“Statement by the Prime Minister of Canada on Multiculturalism Day.” Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, 27 June 2019, https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2019/06/27/ statement-prime-minister-canadian-multiculturalism-day.

Thinkers’ Conference on Cultural Rights Purpose and Committee Outline. 1968. Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism [textual record] (R5366-2-4-E, Box 9, Folder 12[1]). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, ON.

Trudeau, Pierre Elliott. Announcement of Implementation of Policy of Multiculturalism Within Bilingual Framework. 8 Oct. 1971. Parliament of Canada, House of Commons. Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism [textual record] (R5366-2-4-E, Box 8, Folder 27). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, ON.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. United Nations, Mar. 2008, https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf. 17 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

Yuzyk, Paul. The Emerging New Force in the Emerging New Canada: Thinkers’ Conference on Cultural Rights. 13, 14, and 15 Dec. 1968. Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism [textual record] (R5366-2-4-E, Box 9, Folder 12[1]). Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa, ON.

Governmental sources consulted

“About Paul Yuzyk (1913-1986) – Paul Yuzyk Youth Initiative for Multiculturalism.” Government of Canada, 12 Sept. 2018, https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian- heritage/ services/funding/community-multiculturalism-anti-racism/paul-yuzyk- initiative/about- paul-yuzyk.html.

Association for Canadian Studies. Younger Canadians Believe Multiculturalism Works; Older Canadians, Not So Sure. April 24, 2012, www.acs-aec.ca/old/img/nouvelles/ACS-CIIM- 2012EN-R207.pdf.

Brosseau, Laurence and Michael Dewing. Canadian Multiculturalism (Background Paper). [Ottawa, ON] [Library of Parliament], 2009. Library of Parliament Research Publications. www.lop.parl.ca/staticfiles/PublicWebsite/Home/ResearchPublications/BackgroundPap ers/PDF/2009-20-e.pdf.

Houle, René. Results from the 2016 Census: Syrian refugees who settled in Canada in 2015 and 2016. 2019. Statistics Canada. Insights on Canadian Society. Web. https:// www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/pub/75-006-x/2019001/article/00001- eng.pdf? st=wmZZerlb.

Immigrant population in Canada. Statistics Canada, 2016, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/ n1/en/pub/11-627-m/11-627-m2017028- eng.pdf?st=TE0omn-A.

Secondary sources

Durocher, René. “Quiet Revolution.” The Canadian Encyclopedia, 30 July 2013, https:// www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/quiet-revolution

Haque, Eve. Multiculturalism within a Bilingual Framework: Language, Race, and Belonging in Canada. University of Toronto Press, 2012.

MacDonald, David Bruce. “Aboriginal Peoples and Multicultural Reform in Canada: Prospects for a new binational society.” The Canadian Journal of Sociology, vol. 39, no. 1, 2014, pp. 65-86.

Nugent, Amy. "Demography, National Myths, and Political Origins: Perceiving Official Multiculturalism in Quebec." Canadian Ethnic Studies, vol. 38, no. 3, 2006, pp. 21-36.

Paris, Erna. “Canada’s multiculturalism is our identity.” The Globe and Mail, 27 April 2018, .

18 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives Teviah PIMLATT

“Pierre Elliott Trudeau – Canada’s 15th Prime Minister.” Library and Archives Canada, 26 April 2016.

“Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.” Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, https:// pm.gc.ca/en/prime-minister-justin-trudeau.

Taylor, Charles. “Interculturalism or multiculturalism?” Philosophy and Social Criticism, vol. 38, no. 4-5, 2012, pp. 413-423.

“The Canada We Dream Of.” YouTube, uploaded by Canadian Heritage, 7 Feb. 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=Q2puswYC1tQ&feature=emb_title

“United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.” Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, 03 Aug. 2017, https://www.aadnc- aandc.gc.ca/eng/ 1309374407406/1309374458958.

19 CAPSTONE SEMINAR SERIES Tackling tensions in Canadian Identity narratives