UNI320Y: Canadian Questions: Issues and Debates

Week 9: Recognizing and Negotiating Citizenship

Professor Emily Gilberthttp://individual.utoronto.ca/emilygilbert/

Recognizing and Negotiating Citizenship

I. Limits to Multiculturalism

II. Recognizing Citizenship

III. Negotiating Citizenship

I: Limits to Multiculturalism

Neil Bissoondath b. 1955, Amira, Trinidad Moved to Canada 1973

Novelist Infamous for Selling Illusions, and

discomfort with multiculturalism

Multiculturalism Act Recognizes “the existence of communities whose

members share a common origin and their historic contribution to Canadian society”

Promises to “enhance their development” Aims to “promote the understanding and

creativity that arise from the interaction between individuals and communities of different origins”

Commits the federal government to the promotion of “policies and practices that enhance the understanding of and respect for the diversity of the members of Canadian society”

But what is a multicultural society, what does it mean?

Multiculturalism As political tool: ‘divide and conquer’ Simplifies culture, freezes identities, fixes

traditions Establishes no limits to accommodation Enables scapegoating at times of hardship (eg

economic)

“Divided loyalties reveal a divided psyche, and a divided psyche, a divided country” (376)

Leads to “suspicion, estrangement, vandalism, physical attack, and death threats” (377)

“diminishing value of Canadian citizenship”; only as a guarantee for safe return

Acceptance vs. tolerance Multiculturalism fosters tolerance and ignores

acceptance

“Despite the varying pasts that have formed us, we are all in the final analysis Canadians, with a common country and common interest that can lead to a common future” (386)

Need to emphasize the “I” and de-emphasize the “we”: “A nation of cultural hybrids—where every individual in unique, every individual distinct. And every individual is Canadian, undiluted and undivided” (387)

II: Recognizing Citizenship b. 1931 to francophone mother and

anglophone father

Internationally recognized political philosopher

“what makes democracy inclusive is that it is the government of all the people; what makes for exclusion is that it is the government of all the people” (265)

“What is the feature of our ‘imagined communities’ by which people accept that they are free under a democratic regime, even when their will is overriden on important issues?” (267)

Democracy needs a common identity Legitimacy of self-government rests on

ability to secure consent, a freedom of self-rule

Legitimacy ensured through common allegiance; ability of subgroups to be heard, trusted

National state as expression of common cultural identity

Common identity generates exclusion when 1) Those who cannot be assimilated are

eliminated: eg ethnic cleansing2) Differences classified in terms of an “us

and them” politics 3) Only one way of living, being is cast as

patriotic

How to address the dilemma of inclusion/exclusion?

Need to recognize the dilemma Examine appeals to fundamental cultural

origins that deny history Commit to sharing identity space

The procedural republic Shift away from good life to shared rights, status Individual freedoms emphasized Utilitarian in that does not espouse the wishes of

one group against others

Problems Refuses to recognize importance of cultural

identity Supposition that can uncontroversially

distinguish neutral procedures from substantive goals

Sharing identity space “This means negotiating a commonly acceptable

political identity between the different personal or group identities that want to or have to live in the polity” (286)

Some things non-negotiable Basic principles of republican constitutions Democracy Human rights

III: Negotiating Citizenship

David Ley

Urban, social and cultural geographer Was Director of Vancouver Metropolis

project on migration, diversity and changing cities

First diaspora British colonialism Resource development From West End to Kerrisdale and

Shaughnessy Importing English tudor and elegant

pastoral

Second diaspora 1980s: business immigration and wealthy

overseas China Heterogeneous Asian population in Vancouver Influx into wealthy neighbourhoods Housing style: ‘monster home,’ feng shui,

extended families “Vancouver is a modern progressive city. The

world is changing all the time, so will this city”

Questions arise with Vancouver ‘specials’ of 1960s SHPOA gets involved in 1985 1992 hearings

“My sense of beauty is assaulted by those stark, tasteless monster houses, built right in the middle of our neighbourhoods, on clear cut lots without landscaping”

“The face of Vancouver is changing far too quickly” “The house across the lane was bought by Orientals. Soon

after they moved in, two 200 year old Douglas firs were cut down. It felt to me like one of my children was dying…”

“Why do I have to be inconvenienced by so many regulations? This infringes my freedom”

“Is it right to deny the rights of these people? Is it right for government to force rights? Canada is a free country”

June Matheson arrested October 2004 Poisoned trees in front of her condo to improve

the view "At the time I did this, I thought only selfishly about my

view and the thousands of dollars spent on waterfront taxes to enjoy the beautiful ocean… What I now realize is how wrong it was to take away something that wasn't mine

to take. For that I apologize.'' Vancouverites outraged: public humiliation Sold condo for $1.695 million Matheson given absolute discharge in Jan 2006

How do we share identity space?

How do we accommodate differences?

Does the model of a ‘procedural republic’ work? Or do we need to have forms of differentiated citizenship?

Who gets to decide the shape of the city?

Who gets to decide the norms that we live by?