Historicizing Multiculturalism and Interculturalism in Richmond
LEE BLANDING LANGARA COLLEGE & XSPACE LEARNING
Personal background
Immigrant to Canada at age 14 BA in Canadian Studies Further studies in Canadian history PhD dissertation on the history of Canadian multiculturalism policy Part time lecturer at Langara College in Interdisciplinary Studies Full time director at an educational startup that serves ELL and International Students Today’s objectives
‘Unpack’ the history of ‘multiculturalism’ Explore the development of terminology Discuss the applicability of concepts and terminology to the Richmond context Group activity
Instructions: Do not use your smartphones or computers (I know it’s tough!) Take one minute to answer the following question in a word, number, phrase, or even a few sentences:
“When did Canada become multicultural?” Expected answers:
Dates: 1971; 1982, 1988….. Immigration: late-19th century, 1960s…. “We’ve always been multicultural….” “We’ve never been multicultural….” “Depends who you talk to….” “When did Canada become multicultural?”
Did he mean “multi-ethnic,” or “many-cultured”? Did he mean “officially multicultural”? Was it a trick question? Is there a right answer? Will I be judged? Am I being insensitive if I give the wrong answer? Answer=Question
The kinds of questions we ask in some ways determine our answers! “Multicultural” is usually not used in the same way as “multiculturalism”: “Immigration and migration patterns continue to evolve, with many former “culturally homogenous” countries becoming increasingly multicultural.” • THE OXFORD HANDBOOK OF MULTICULTURAL IDENTITY Contested terms
The way that we think about words and concepts has a lot to do with which generation we were born in, where we went to school, which country we are originally from, and a myriad of other factors Words and phrases like “multiculturalism,” “multicultural,” “interculturalism,” “diversity,” “unity in diversity,” “third force,” etc. are contested terms An historian’s answer
We should place “multiculturalism” in its historical context “Multiculturalism” arose in the 1960s at the same time as the term “multicultural”; primarily as a reaction to “bilingualism and biculturalism” How we use this term today has evolved dramatically since 1971 “The mosaic”
Before we began to use the term “multiculturalism,” some spoke of Canada as “a mosaic” Likely first used by Victoria Hayward (1922), but popularized by John Murray Gibbon after 1926 Gibbon arranged the first “folk festivals” of song and dance in co-operation with the Canadian Pacific Railway “Multiculturalism”
First recorded uses I could find: The President of the Vancouver (Jewish) Peretz School, Dr. Harry Winrob, spoke of Canada having a “multi-cultural pattern” during an annual concert in 1957 A.J. Arnold wrote in the Jewish Western Bulletin that Jewish Canadians could contribute “to the development of a multi- cultural pattern of Canadian life.” Political change
“In many ways, multiculturalism in Canada is a new name for an old activity, namely the long-standing efforts of the federal Citizenship Branch to encourage harmonious community relations in Canadian cities and to protect and assist ethnic groups.” Citizenship Branch
1942: Creation of the Nationalities Branch of the Department of National War Services 1945: Renamed the “Citizenship Branch” (within the Dept. of the Secretary of State); 1950-1966: Citizenship Branch housed within the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Immigration v. multiculturalism
Immigration Branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration looked after…..immigration Citizenship Branch of the DCI “was devoted to education and liaison” This separation of immigration policy and bureaucracy and what might be termed “multiculturalism” policy and bureaucracy has been the case since the 1950s No direct relationship between immigration and multiculturalism Integration
Made up of a young generation of civil servants trained in the social sciences; wanted to make Canada a better place Concerned with integrating immigrants, ethnic minority communities (second or third-generation Canadians), and even Indigenous Peoples into Canadian society Recent historical work by Will Langford, Franca Iacovetta and Heidi Bohaker, and others has shown that Indigenous Peoples were seen as in need of “integration” “Gatekeepers”
Iacovetta has called this generation of activists, civil servants, etc. “gatekeepers” Concerned that immigrants were bringing “communistic” ideas with them Parallels with modern worries about immigrants “importing” radical ideologies Proto-multiculturalism
Beginning to see Canada as more “diverse”:
“The population of Canada is an assorted package with ingredients of many varieties. Since the war, over a million immigrants have come from some 40 different countries. About 30 per cent have been of British origin; the remainder have come from other lands. Thus, in addition to Canadians of French and British cultural traditions, we have many people with other cultural backgrounds. This calls for understanding and co- operation between the people of the various ethnic groups so that we may live together in harmony, and so that everyone can make his best contribution to the country.” Brussels World Expo, 1958
the first world’s fair of the Cold War an opportunity to emphasize Canada’s newfound commitment to integration, rather than assimilation “Canada stands in the middle way, so as to prevent too great expectations on the part of prospective immigrants.” “Two basic cultures”
Two dominant cultures “A unique characteristic of Canadian life is diversity”
“The “melting pot” concept of complete conformity is not acceptable to Canadians. Instead, individuals and groups are encouraged to contribute from their cultural heritage and traditions to the enrichment of Canadian life” Bicultural and multicultural
Official government position in the late 1950s:
Canada is essentially bicultural
Quebec is the home of French-Canadians, the only place where they can survive
Canada has two major societal cultures, but is enriched by other cultures Quiet Revolution
Election of Premier Jean Lesage in 1960: Seen as the “actual” beginning of the Quiet Revolution Reorients the public discussion toward “biculturalism” and a focus on French Canada Election of Lester Pearson in 1963: Promised a Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism Royal Commission
The Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism (1963-1970) Terms of reference: “…inquire into and report upon the existing state of bilingualism and biculturalism in Canada and to recommend what steps should be taken to develop the Canadian Confederation on the basis of an equal partnership between the two founding races, taking into account the contribution made by the other ethnic groups to the cultural enrichment of Canada and the measures that should be taken to safeguard that contribution.” Biculturalism
Commission wanted to ensure that “the two cultures possessed the required institutions” to preserve their cultures Wanted to see if French Canadians “were adequately represented in public organizations, and whether the members of these organizations have the ability to preserve and express their cultures.” Presupposed that there were two major linguistic and cultural communities that required public institutions in order to reflect and maintain their status. Ethnic minority communities react
Sense of grievance around the idea of “biculturalism” Less complaints about “bilingualism” Formation and mobilization of political organizations “Members of Canadian League for Ukraine’s Liberation at Bi-Bi talks.” Ethnic mobilization
A few attempts made to organize ethnic minority groups Mostly unsuccessful Institute of the Canadian Ethnic Mosaic Confederation Hoped “to become the rallying centre of representatives of all ethnic groups” Briefs to the Commission:
The National Federation of Canadian University Students (NFCUS): “any reference to other cultural groups should be made only with respect to either the French or the English cultural groups as is implicit in the name of this Commission.” Société-Saint-Jean Baptiste de Montréal: “Don’t repeat the unfortunate adventure of the tower of Babel.” Pierre Trudeau (then a law professor): “bilingual [and] multi-ethnic.” Ukrainian Professional and Businessmen’s Club
“Canadian Ukrainian citizens feel that they are too a founding race since to a large extent it was the Ukrainians that did the work of building the railways, and it was the Ukrainians who found these settlements in the most inaccessible parts of Western Canada. Our ancestors did not move into a neatly ploughed prairie but opened up the backwoods. It is largely from their efforts and the efforts of other Canadians that the Canadian wilderness was transformed into the Canadian bread basket of the world.” Take away points
Ukrainian and Polish organizations and individuals formed the largest contingents aside from French Canadians Profound misunderstanding between French Canadians and ethnic minority communities about the meaning of “biculturalism.” French-Canadians: Biculturalism = French-English biculturalism/bilingualism (the reality in Quebec) Ethnic minority communities: Biculturalism = English or French + minority languages/cultures (the reality in Western Canada) Exchange between Manoly Lupul and Pierre Trudeau, 1964
“Trudeau, of course, denied that there was anything artificial about the French and pointed to historical factors like the Manitoba school question that had discouraged westward French-Canadian migration. I replied with instances of Quebec bishops, politicians and journalists deliberately discouraging such migration, resulting in a settlement policy that brought in people like the Ukrainians, many of whom still retained a linguistic base that was just waiting to be tapped. “And how long will they last?” Trudeau snapped. “Longer than you think,” I replied, which pretty well ended the half- hour give and take.” Clarification of Trudeau’s opinion:
Article in Cité Libre from 1966: "If six million persons with Ukrainian as their mother tongue lived in Canada, it is probable that this language would impose itself with as much force as French. In terms of real politik, what makes English and French equal in Canada is that each of the two linguistic groups has the power to break up the country.” Ukrainian Community
Led by the Ukrainian Canadian Committee Excluded the Association of United Ukrainian Canadians (pro- communist) Unofficially led by PC Senator, Paul Yuzyk First speech in the senate (1964) referred to Canada as a “multicultural nation” Said ethnic minority communities were a “third element” in society Linguistic maintenance = cultural maintenance
[t]he third element ethnic or cultural groups should receive the status of co-partners, who would be guaranteed the right to perpetuate their mother tongues and cultures, which should be offered as optional subjects in the public and high school systems and the separate schools of the provinces, and the universities wherever there would be a sufficient number of students to warrant the maintenance of such classes.” Royal Commission’s response
Ethnic minority communities are “scarcely conscious of the fact that they belong to a bilingual and bicultural country.” Citizenship Branch in the mid-1960s
Primarily concerned with promoting “Canadian unity” Subsidized the Ontario Conference on Intergroup Relations, Canada Ethnic Press Federation and the First National Conference on Canadian Slavs, who actively promoted “multiculturalism” Supported youth exchange programs Had been told at a UN conference by other countries’ delegations that Canada was “a bi-national, multi- ethnic state” Citizenship Branch responds to the Commission
“Mr. Laurendeau remarked that “our aim was unity through ethnic groups out west have the diversity” impression that they had been The Branch’s interaction with encouraged to maintain their ethnic groups at the National respective cultures by the Citizenship Conferences had Department of Citizenship and “guided the Branch towards Immigration. There appeared a multi-cultural approach.” to be a conflict, therefore, between the approach of the The notion of assimilation of the Department to this question ethnic groups into one of the two and the appointment by the major cultures was a concept that Government of a had long been out of favour in Commission stressing the Citizenship Branch. biculturalism. He asked what the attitude of the Citizenship Branch was on this matter.” Split understanding of Canada
Royal Commission Citizenship Branch committed to continued to develop bilingualism and “multicultural” programs biculturalism Supported community Wrote a report (Book IV) organizations in creating on the “other ethnic a public ethos of “unity groups” in diversity” Recommended funding Grafted a “French- for French-language English relations” services outside of program onto existing Canada programs Multiculturalism policy
Comes about due to Factors that were not at several factors: play: 1. Protest and advocacy by 1. People of colour or “multicultural movement” visible minorities from 1963-1971 2. Changes in immigration 2. Changes in policy and law (Order-in Council PC practice in the Citizenship 1967-1616; i.e. “the points Branch system”) 3. Generalized changes in 3. Purchasing of ‘ethnic society votes’; was an Trudeau government afterthought in 1972 response to Book IV and election French-Canadian 4. Trudeau’s personal nationalism convictions Multiculturalism policy, 1971
First, the government would “support all of Canada’s cultures and assist their development” so long as they demonstrated a will to exist. Second, the government would “assist members of all cultural groups to overcome barriers to full participation in Canadian society.” Third, the government would “promote creative encounters and interchange among all Canadian cultural groups in the interests of national unity.” Fourth, the government would “continue to assist immigrants to acquire at least one of Canada’s official languages and to become full participants in Canadian society.” Symbolic policy change
Of the sixteen recommendations made by the Royal Commission, only four required new funding and initiatives by the Trudeau government. The remaining recommendations were either the prerogative of the provinces, were already in place in the Citizenship Branch, or were to be “studied” by the Citizenship Branch. Multiculturalism post-1971
Multiculturalism Becomes increasingly Secretariat takes over concerned with racism from the Citizenship against visible minority Branch communities during the Shuttled between 1970s and 1980s different departments for Made a full Department years in 1988 Small budget compared Later transferred to to Official Languages “Heritage” Program Ethnic minority communities
Ukrainian communities push for bilingual schools in Alberta and Saskatchewan Establishment of the Ukrainian-English bilingual program in Alberta schools (1974 Multicultural movement is largely silent; very little movement federally Recognition that change will happen locally Shifting definitions
MULTICULTURALISM AND INTERCULTURALISM Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Adopted in 1982 Section 27 reads: “This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.” Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 1988
“…multiculturalism “…multiculturalism is a reflects the cultural and fundamental racial diversity of characteristic of the Canadian society and Canadian heritage and acknowledges the identity and that it freedom of all members provides an invaluable of Canadian society to resource in the shaping preserve, enhance and of Canada’s future” share their cultural heritage” “Reasonable accommodation”
Modern debate was restarted in 2007 Appointment of the “Consultation Commission on Accommodation Practices Related to Cultural Differences” by the Charest government in Quebec Led by a federalist (Taylor) and a nationalist/separatist (Bouchard) Interculturalism
“as a pluralist model, interculturalism concerns itself with the interests of the majority culture, whose desire to perpetuate and maintain itself is perfectly legitimate, as much as it does with the interests of minorities and immigrants” Gerard Bouchard – historian and co-chair of the commission on ‘reasonable accommodation’ in Quebec Multiculturalism v. Interculturalism
Multiculturalism: Integration into a common civic culture, national languages Presupposes two ‘societal cultures’ Does not ascribe any value or priority to them except by virtue of the sheer weight of numbers and reality Interculturalism: Integration into a common civic culture and national languages that are the expression of common histories and ‘cultures’ What I would call “historicized multiculturalism” Is really about the ‘majority’ cultures and their preservation, while recognizing the value that immigrants and ethnic minorities bring
Richmond Some numbers
Statscan and City of Richmond 70.4% of people in Richmond are visible minorities; Greater Vancouver: 62.2% 2011 National Household Survey 60% are immigrants 38% are Canadian-born 2% non-permanent (refugees, study permits) Nearly 58% are 25 or older at the time of immigration 35% are 5-24 years old at immigration RIAC Vision for Intercultural Life in Richmond
Promote: Pride in and acceptance of Canadian values and laws. Pride in and respect for diverse heritages and traditions. Pride in and participation in community life. Recognize: That ‘culture’ is an integrated pattern of thought, speech, action and behaviour which is passed on from one generation to another, through education and learning. That ‘culture’ evolves, and Richmond’s culture is shaped by historic patterns and traditions, current practices and trends, and future planning. Embrace: The concept of ‘Interculturalism,’ a culturally interactive and vibrant process, as the next step for Canadian multiculturalism. Culture = roots, history, heritage
RIAC: “…Richmond’s Bouchard: “…I would say culture is shaped by that interculturalism historic patterns and intends to connect traditions, current cultures as much through practices and trends, and their roots as through future planning.” encounters.” What is meant by “history”?
In 2008, the Bouchard- Taylor Commission suggested that the crucifix that hangs in the National Assembly in Quebec be placed in a museum “the Liberal government filed a motion for the crucifix to remain, since it was deemed a part of the heritage and history of Quebec” Adopted unanimously by the 100 MNAs who voted How do we talk about ‘multiculturalism’ in Richmond?
Balwant Sanghera, VP of Chak Au, City Councillor RMCS: “In Richmond, we are “The RCCS [Richmond perhaps among the most Chinese Community blessed in Canada because Society] had two we live up to the true spirit objectives for this lunch: of multiculturalism. We to help Chinese-Canadians are a community of many integrate into the peoples and diverse faiths. mainstream and to […] The most symbolic introduce Chinese culture representation of this to the mainstream intercultural harmony is society.” the Highway to Heaven…” “RCCS builds bridges between cultures,” “Richmond’s Highway to Heaven sends a Richmond News, 4 September 2013, A9 message to the world,” Richmond Review, 16 January 2015, 8 Voices from the community
“In the 1960s, I went to school “We only expect immigrants with parties of third to learn the language, generation Chinese descents, integrate, embrace our culture fifth generation Japanese and become proud descents, fourth generation Canadians.” Sikh descent…etc. etc.[…] We Wellington Court Strata all got along just fine…much Council: “The council remains of this due to the fact we all a group that speaks Mandarin grew up in the same basic as its first language, which culture — the now sought- reflects the group of owners after harmony already and the multiculturalism of existed.” Canada.” Re: Shark fin soup incident: “I don’t believe that kind of behaviour is representative of Canadian values.” Problems with application of policies
Multiculturalism policy was created for ‘white ethnics’ Interculturalism policy assumes there is a common ‘culture’ that is more or less agreed upon Do not address structural inequalities Assume that receiving societies are numerically dominant Do not deal with national minorities in a meaningful way Problems with language
Disconnect between language used by politicians, academics, etc., and those used by the broader public Disagreement over meaning of “history,” “culture,” “multiculturalism,” etc. Need to both describe and prescribe A theory of interculturalism for Richmond
Recognition of the uniqueness of this situation (certainly in Canada, and perhaps the world) Recognition that we can’t fit our situation into a neat model Recognition of historical process of integration Deep diversity
Theory developed by “In the context of political philosopher citizenship, deep Charles Taylor diversity implies that it is Later abandoned by him necessary to abandon the because it’s perhaps notion of a uniform impractical and does not citizenship and instead fit his politics grant culturally distinct groups special status and Reflects the reality of life in the Lower Mainland protections that will help preserve their cultures Allows for multi-national over time.” and multi-ethnic • John Erik Fossum diversity