Janice Gross Stein et al., Uneasy Partners: Multiculturalism and Rights in Canada.

Janice Gross Stein et al., Uneasy Partners: Multiculturalism and Rights in Canada. JANICE GROSS STEIN et al., Uneasy Partners: Multiculturalism andRights in Canada. Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2007,xiii+ 165 p., index. CATHERINE DAUVERGNE, Humanitarianism, Identity, and Nation:Migration Laws in Canada and Australia. Vancouver: University of BritishColumbia Press The University of British Columbia Press is a university press that is part of the University of British Columbia. It was established in 1971. External linksUniversity of British Columbia Press , 2005, 241 p., index. AVAGAIL EISENBERG (Ed.) Diversity and Equality: The ChangingFramework of Freedom in Canada. Vancouver: University of BritishColumbia Press, 2006, 207 p., index. STEPHEN TIERNEY (Ed.) Multiculturalism and the CanadianConstitution. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2007, 256p., index. GERALD KERNERMAN, Multicultural Nationalism: Civilizing Difference,Constituting Community. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press,2005, 144 p., index. Multiculturalism looms large in Canadian public discourse, but thepicture that emerges is far from consistent. On the one hand, it appearsto have a high level of popular support. According to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. the polls, mostCanadians not only approve of our official endorsement of diversity, butthink it makes the country a better place to live (Jebwad, 2006:19;n.d.:/passim/). The impression we get from the media, on the other hand,is that it's a festering threat to the social fabric. Presumably pre��sum��a��ble?adj.That can be presumed or taken for granted; reasonable as a supposition: presumable causes of the disaster. atleast some of this discrepancy may be attributed to the fact that whenmulticulturalism hits the headlines, it is usually in connection withsome kind of disturbance. The Shariah law Noun 1. shariah law - the code of law derived from the Koran and from the teachings and example of Mohammed; "sharia is only applicable to Muslims"; "under Islamic law there is no separation of church and state"Islamic law, sharia, sharia law, shariah debates in Ontario. Theairlift of 15,000 nonresident "Canadians" from Lebanon. TheHerouxville anti-immigrant code of conduct. The Canadian IslamicCongress The Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) is Canada's largest national non-profit and wholly independent Islamic organization. It presents itself as an exclusively Canadian non-governmental organization, with no affiliation to any group, body, ideology or government. complaint against Maclean's for hatemongering.Exacerbating matters, the news is generally delivered in the mostsensational manner possible. An on-line search of Maclean'sarchives in August 2008 turned up 94 headlines, of which the vastmajority was cautionary, pessimistic, or downright alarming. But this isjust media hype--right? Perhaps. Certainly if we move up the ladder to more upscalepublications, the picture is considerably less hysterical. Both Walrus walrus,marine mammal, Odobenus rosmarus, found in Arctic seas. Largest of the fin-footed mammals, or pinnipeds (see seal), the walrus is also distinguished by its long tusks and by cheek pads bearing quill-like bristles. Magazine and the Literary Review of Canada, for instance, seem to havegone out of their way over the last couple of years to maintain acareful balance between positive and negative perspectives. Even morereassuring, it's the most negative articles that tend to stimulatethe most reader protest. Canadians, it would seem, don't want tohear bad things about their multi-culti nation. Lest one assume fromthis that the bad press is nothing but attention grabbing, however, itshould be noted that the highbrow authors focus on much the same hotspots hot spotsacute moist dermatitis. as the popular ones. True, they tend to be more moderate in theircriticisms, and to offset their discussions of problems with assurancesthat multiculturalism is, at root, a "good thing," and to goout of their way to reject the simplistic sim��plism?n.The tendency to oversimplify an issue or a problem by ignoring complexities or complications.[French simplisme, from simple, simple, from Old French; see simple views of the naysayers.Notwithstanding, the fact remains that it's the problems, not thesuccesses, that they dwell on. We find an interesting demonstration of this ambivalence in theaptly titled Uneasy Partners: Multiculturalism and Rights in Canada.Although published by an academic press, this anthology was a directproduct of the public debate. In September 2006, Janice Stein Janice Gross Stein, CM, FRSC is a Canadian academic. She currently serves as director of the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Trinity College, University of Toronto, as well as Professor of Conflict Management and Negotiation within the University of , Directorof the Munk Centre for International Studies The Munk Centre for International Studies, part of the University of Trinity College, a federated college of the University of Toronto, is devoted to the study of numerous issues of international significance. at the University ofToronto Research at the University of Toronto has been responsible for the world's first electronic heart pacemaker, artificial larynx, single-lung transplant, nerve transplant, artificial pancreas, chemical laser, G-suit, the first practical electron microscope, the first cloning of T-cells, , published an essay in the Literary Review of Canada on theconflict between religious and secular rights, as manifestedparticularly in debates over the religiously justified subordination ofwomen, which stimulated (among other things) columns by John Ibbitson John Ibbitson (born 1955 in Gravenhurst, Ontario) is a Canadian writer and journalist. He currently writes on American politics and society for The Globe and Mail. and Haroon Siddiqui Haroon Siddiqui, C.M., O.Ont., (born June 1, 1942) is an Indian-Canadian newspaper journalist, columnist and a former editor. Early life and careerBorn in Hyderabad, India, the oldest of six children, to a construction company proprietor and a homemaker, Siddiqui enjoyed in The Globe and Mail and The Toronto Star The Toronto Star is Canada's highest-circulation newspaper, though its print edition is distributed almost entirely within Ontario. It is owned by Toronto Star Newspapers Ltd., a division of Star Media Group, a subsidiary of Torstar Corporation. . At theurging of Wilfred Laurier University Press, these three pieces, suitablyexpanded and augmented with invited responses from a variety ofwell-known journalists and scholars, were turned into a book. Does itmake an interesting read? Yes. Does it add nuance and balance to themedia-stoked controversy? At least on the surface. Does it paint anaccurate picture of multiculturalism in Canada? In my view, not so much. Stein's own stance on multiculturalism could best be describedas apprehensive. While acknowledging the extent to which diaspora hasenriched Canadian culture, she suggests that both the government and thecourts have gone too far to accommodate religious sensitivities at theprice of eroding the equality rights that Canadians hold so dear. Thisimbalance, she says, has triggered a range of negative developments,from localized battles over hijabs and kirpaans, through resistance tothe use of public funds See Fund, 3.See also: Public for separate schools or facilities, to theincreased ghettoization of Canadian cities. The responses of her colleagues to these concerns are mostlyreassuring. Siddiqui thinks the disaffection is overblown o��ver��blown?v.Past participle of overblow.adj.1. a. Done to excess; overdone: overblown decorations.b. , exacerbatedby media attention and lurking fears of terrorism. Ibbitson suggeststhat whatever frictions may exist, our laws are adequate to deal withthem. David Robertson For other people named David Robertson, see David Robertson (disambiguation).David Robertson (born 19 July 1958) is an American conductor. He is currently the music director of the Saint Louis Symphony Orchestra. Cameron praises Canadian moderateness. Because ourminorities feel less excluded, he says, they are less defensive, whichin turn--media stoking notwithstanding--stimulates less backlash. WillKymlicka cites cases and statistics to show that, whatever our warts,Canadian multiculturalism has been very successful in world terms. Inthis sense, the collection as a whole operates as a counterpoint to theanxiety that Stein evinces on our behalf. Note, though, that I said "as a whole." Despite thegenerally hopeful tone of the book, the optimism is far from seamless.John Meisel worries that our strengths are also our weaknesses. The samevalues that have made Canadian society humane, open, and nonaggressive,he says, also make us a weak player on the world stage. Michael Valpy,even more pessimistically, points out that the current discord is rootedin real problems, like the global rise of religious fundamentalism andthe failure of recent Canadian immigrants to thrive. So-called"multiculturalism-lite"--food, fashion, andfestivals--disguises the fractures, but resolving the underlyingcontradictions will need more than rhetoric. Even among the boosters,there is invariably in��var��i��a��ble?adj.Not changing or subject to change; constant.in��vari��a��bil a "but .... "Multiculturalism has been agenerally positive force, but there are problems--and they are gettingworse. Two themes recur throughout the collection. The first has to dowith the economic disadvantage of visible minorities in general andimmigrants in particular, which has been aggravated in recent years bythe shrinkage of government funding for adjustment programs and socialtransfers. Not much is said about this, beyond noting it as a concern,perhaps because it seems both self-evident and intractable. The secondfocuses on the ideological conflict that multiculturalism mobilizesbetween irreconcilable goals or values: diversity versus cohesion(Valpy), equality versus freedom (Stein). It's the exploration ofthis latter theme that provides the book's most interestingmaterial. Unfortunately, it also illustrates what, for me, is its primaryweakness. Why? Part of it is the reduction of a complex phenomenon to anabstract dichotomy. Diversity or cohesion. Equality or freedom.Oppressing women or violating deeply held religious convictions. Alarger part, though, is the lack of context. Kymlicka notes that what isinteresting about multiculturalism is not the fact--or the problem---ofdiversity, but the different ways it is dealt with at differentlocations. The observation points up the fact that there is little inthese essays to show how our particular version of multiculturalismrelates to the "large cultural system" (to steal a phrase fromBenedict Anderson's book Imagined Communities, 19) that precededand underlies it. Like the media treatments, most of these authors talkabout the phenomenon of multiculturalism as if it were something suddenand new, a byproduct by��prod��uctor by-prod��uct ?n.1. Something produced in the making of something else.2. A secondary result; a side effect.Noun 1. of postmodernism, right up there with globalization globalizationProcess by which the experience of everyday life, marked by the diffusion of commodities and ideas, is becoming standardized around the world. Factors that have contributed to globalization include increasingly sophisticated communications and transportation and the internet. Apart from a few token nods to the role of theCharter, and the "French fact," and the weak identity thatsupposedly makes us more accepting of difference, there is little senseof "place" in these accounts, and even less of history. Noticing this gap clarified for me what I had been finding soirritating about recent constructions of the so-called multiculturalismquestion. Even for those authors who rise above current events, paintingCanadian multiculturalism as a variant or a consequence of globalphenomena is like discussing the American Revolution as an artifact ofEnlightenment thinking without asking what particulars of the Americancolonial experience made it such fertile ground. In order to flesh outour particular context, I thought it would be interesting to look at howthe Canadian version of multiculturalism relates to and emerges from thehistoric interplay between Canadian sentiment and Canadian institutions,between everyday experience and the public arena. For perspectives onthis critical conjunction, I decided to check out what UBCP's Lawand Society series had to offer on the subject. The first book that caught my eye, Catherine Dauvergne'sHumanitarianism, Identity, and Nation, is a comparison of Canadian andAustralian approaches to migration law. While only indirectly related tomy central topic, it seemed a good starting point for two reasons.First, immigration immigration,entrance of a person (an alien) into a new country for the purpose of establishing permanent residence. Motives for immigration, like those for migration generally, are often economic, although religious or political factors may be very important. has become a flashpoint in recent Canadian views ofmulticulturalism. Second, in Dauvergne's treatment, migration lawprovides a privileged perspective on how we construct the categoriesthat determine our intergroup in��ter��group?adj.Being or occurring between two or more social groups: intergroup relations; intergroup violence.relations. The book begins by explaining the rationale for the project. Lawand nation, says Dauvergne, are mutually constitutive--each defines theboundaries of the other. The subset of migration law and nationalidentity extends this function by defining relationships across borders,between inside and outside, us and them. On the surface, migration lawseems to be about the classification of others--worthy or unworthy,useful or burdensome, dangerous or vulnerable--but in making thesedistinctions we also define "self." Beneath the legalverbiage verbiage - When the context involves a software or hardware system, this refers to documentation. This term borrows the connotations of mainstream "verbiage" to suggest that the documentation is of marginal utility and that the motives behind its production have little to do with , migration law expresses national values and priorities.Sometimes the expression is quite direct. When we prioritize certainethnic groups, points of origin, skills, education, financial resources,family relationships, and so on, it reflects how we perceive the needsof insiders. The refugee subset is more elusive. There is a consensusamong Western nations, based on our shared liberal values of freedom andequality, that we have to admit some applicants on the basis of theirneed, not ours. How the choice is made, however, says as much about thehost as the incomers. This is where the study of migration law is mostrevealing. Dauvergne's next step is an explanation of her methodology.Liberal theory seems the most obvious jumping off point for analyzingmigration law, she says, because (1) the two emerged historically fromthe same roots, (2) immigration is most important in settler societieswith liberal roots, and (3) global culture is primarily shaped byliberal values. Counterintuitively coun��ter��in��tu��i��tive?adj.Contrary to what intuition or common sense would indicate: "Scientists made clear what may at first seem counterintuitive, that the capacity to be pleasant toward a fellow creature is ... , however, when it comes tounderstanding national priorities, it has only limited value. Liberalprinciples may dictate some sharing, but they won't tell us who,why, or how to choose. In the absence of a clear justice standard, saysDauvergne, the concept of humanitarianism has become central. It'shere we find the key to the reflective function. While soundingreassuringly altruistic (which is, of course, part of its value),humanitarianism is such a vague and elastic notion that it can bemanipulated to serve political purposes, meet shifting imperatives, senddesired messages, most of all, patch over ambiguities andinconsistencies in both policy and application. We can see this usefulmalleability, says Dauvergne, if we compare the approaches taken toimmigration by two ostensibly os��ten��si��ble?adj.Represented or appearing as such; ostensive: His ostensible purpose was charity, but his real goal was popularity. very similar nations, Canada andAustralia. On the surface, they don't seem all that much different.Humanitarianism plays a major and seemingly very similar role in therhetoric of both countries. When we look at the practice, however, itbecomes clear that there are very different visions at work. A few examples will suffice. In Australia, Dauvergne tells us, mostimmigrants are selected abroad, a process that implies few or noobligations for the potential host. Illegal migrants are detained onentry, and clearly labeled as aliens. There is strict control ofnumbers. The acceptance rate is low--only 10 percent to 13 percent.Hearings are pragmatic rather than legalistic le��gal��ism?n.1. Strict, literal adherence to the law or to a particular code, as of religion or morality.2. A legal word, expression, or rule. , relying heavily on"hard" evidence rather than personal testimony. Decisions areformulaic, detailed, and boring. When anomalies arise, both frontlineand ministerial discretion is narrowly defined and rarely exercised. Theway the process is framed emphasizes host generosity rather than therights or merits of the claimants. What this process bespeaks, saysDauvergne, is a nation that feels vulnerable on numerous levels."Australian migration law sends the message that this nation isdistant from those migrants it has most affinity with and surrounded bythose whose values may threaten its control over its membership"(p. 218). In Canada, the principles at work are clearly quite different."The impulse to control is weaker: targets are more flexible,discretion is more openly used, judicial decision-making is given awider scope" (p. 218). Reflecting this general looseness, the"boundaries" established by the process are significantly moreporous. The overseas program is much smaller relative to the domesticprogram. Numbers are variable because of sponsorship provisions, but theacceptance rate is typically around 50 percent. Hearings put less weighton evidence, more on the ability of claimants to produce a coherentnarrative. Rights discourse plays a highly visible part in the process.Courts talk about a "duty of fairness." Even the officialterms of reference Terms of reference allude to a mutual agreement under which a command, element, or unit exercises authority or undertakes specific missions or tasks relative to another command, element, or unit. Also called TORs. are less rigid. Admission criteria admission criteriathe rules for the establishment of comparable groups in any comparison of differences in the performance or responses of the group. The criteria may be permissible age group, the previous productivity, the freedom from disease and so on. allow for a muchwider range of circumstances, plus there is a catchall category of"compassionate considerations." Clearly, this is a systemwhere there is more room for individual treatment. Why the difference? Obviously it's not just accident. Thedivergence we see here is far too systematic to be written off ascircumstantial. Dauvergne herself speculates that there is less fear ofincursion in��cur��sion?n.1. An aggressive entrance into foreign territory; a raid or invasion.2. The act of entering another's territory or domain.3. in Canada, but reading this text against the background ofCanadian culture casts considerable doubt on this explanation. There aremany who would claim that our fear of being overwhelmed by the elephantto the south is, for good or ill, the central fact of the Canadianexperience. More likely possibilities would be a weaker sense ofidentity, empathy with the vulnerable, or a defensive rejection of theAmerican example. Whatever the explanation, however, Dauvergne'sfindings carry two important lessons for present purposes. One is thatthe choices we make in constructing our social reality are driven asmuch by psychological predispositions as by pragmatic political motives.(One might argue, for instance, that the Canadian immigration system istoo ad hoc For this purpose. Meaning "to this" in Latin, it refers to dealing with special situations as they occur rather than functions that are repeated on a regular basis. See ad hoc query and ad hoc mode. and unpredictable to be practical, but it is very Canadian.)The other is that multiculturalism in these two countries--arguably inany two countries--begins from a very different playing field. Having established a conceptual baseline for my project, my secondchoice was a book whose title seemed to summarize the essence of therecent public debate: Avagail Eisenberg's Diversity and Equality.As described by its editor, this collection had its start in a"conversation among colleagues and students" at the Universityof Victoria that culminated in a symposium. This seemed a promisingbeginning, given that what I was looking for was alternatives to therather monolithic media narrative. Eisenberg's introduction also seemed promising. She begins bynoting that many of the issues around minority rights remain the same asthey were a quarter century ago, but the public debate has a much higherprofile. The Charter and its attendant hype brought about a sea changenot just in the law but in public rights-awareness. A large part of thereason for this, she says, is that minorities and interest groups helpedshape the document, giving them a sense of ownership. Not everyone waspleased, to be sure. The most frequently voiced concern was that therights obsession, and the increased power of the courts, weakenedCanadian democracy. Eisenberg weighs evidence for and against thisclaim, and, noting the growth of public forums on political change,finds it unlikely. Aside from the increase in participation, the other big plus of thepost-Charter era was the development of better legal and political toolsfor rights-seekers and better theoretical tools for scholars. Among thelatter, Eisenberg singles out Charles Taylor's "politics ofrecognition" and Will Kymlicka's concept of"multicultural citizenship" for special mention. Althoughdiffering in their assumptions and focus, she says, these two thinkershelped usher in a general shift of emphasis from sameness to difference.They also brought to the fore many of the quandaries that have come todefine the terms of debate. Taylor highlighted the tension betweenindividual and communalist com��mu��nal��ist?n.1. An advocate of communal living.2. One who is more interested in one's own minority or ethnic group than in society as a whole.3. values; Kymlicka deplored the Americanizednature of postwar liberalism, which made it a poor model for negotiatingCanadian problems. Critics have suggested that putting so much effortinto "recognition" hampers efforts to secure progressiveeconomic redistributions, but if nothing else, the new theory gave riseto a rich, still-ongoing conversation about how to reconcile equalityand diversity. In the last few pages of her introduction, Eisenberg introduces anotion with particular resonance for my own investigation. Understandingthe meaning of rights in Canada, she says, must be grounded in the realhistory of particular groups, the failures as well as the successes.Ideas of religious freedom shaped by Catholic/Protestant relations, forinstance, have been serially challenged by controversies aroundJehovah's Witnesses in the 1950s, Sikhs in the 1990s, and Muslimstoday. The primary value of the book, she says, lies in its ability tocapture such phenomena through its "partiality and localroots." Binding the diverse components together, meanwhile, arefour important cross-cutting themes: the tension between theself-determination of aboriginal people and the mainstream emphasis onindividual rights, which leads to cultural homogenization homogenization(həmŏj'ənəzā`shən), process in which a mixture is made uniform throughout. Generally this procedure involves reducing the size of the particles of one component of the mixture and dispersing them evenly ; the moregeneral tension between protecting rights and protecting cultures; theconflict between the accommodation of minorities and the protection ofvulnerable members of such minorities; and new approaches to freedom ofreligion as something beyond mere cultural differences. As interesting as this sounds in prospect, unfortunately, when itcomes to performance the book fails signally to live up to its, or atleast Eisenberg's, promise. The subject matter, for one thing, ismuch narrower than the lead-in suggests. Five of the nine entries are onreligion or aboriginal issues, one is on feminism, one is onchildren's rights The opportunity for children to participate in political and legal decisions that affect them; in a broad sense, the rights of children to live free from hunger, abuse, neglect, and other inhumane conditions. , two are pure theory. More importantly, while thethemes are as advertised, what isn't as advertised is the shortageof "real history." If I had to characterize this collection,the words that would spring most readily to mind would be abstract, orungrounded. There are exceptions, to be sure. Eisenberg's ownessay, on the development of the Supreme Court's "distinctiveculture test" for assessing aboriginal entitlements, makes good useof particular cases. And John McLaren's piece about theaccommodation of minorities in education is not only rooted firmly in apalpable past (as his main example, McLaren traces the legal treatmentof religious minorities from the 1920s to the present), but provides anadmirably specific Canadian/American comparison. Some of the theoreticalpieces are good, too, of their ilk-like Maneesha Deckha's nuancedcomparison of deconstructionist versus postcolonial treatments ofcultural claims in "Gender, Difference, andAnti-Essentialism." Regrettably, these pieces are anomalies. Mostof the articles in this collection are, to me anyway, dense, finicky fin��ick��y?adj. fin��ick��i��er, fin��ick��i��estInsisting capriciously on getting just what one wants; difficult to please; fastidious: a finicky eater. ,and depressingly academic. Is it legitimate to criticize a book for something it doesn'tclaim to do? Rereading it after the fact, I noted that the back coverblurb blurb?n.A brief publicity notice, as on a book jacket.[Coined by Gelett Burgess (1866-1951), American humorist.]blurb v. is carefully generalized. "Diversity and Equality criticallyexamines the challenge of protecting rights in diverse societies such asCanada." "At stake in these debates about rights and autonomyin multicultural and multinational democracies is the very meaning offreedom." Counter this, though, is Eisenberg's aforementionedobservation that rights can only be understood in the context of theparticular experience of particular groups. Since that's what Ibelieve myself--and not just of rights, but of law in general--I wasnaturally disappointed to find so little sign of such experience in thisbook. After this letdown, I approached my third UBCP book, anotheranthology, with significantly lower expectations. Fortunately I waswrong again--though this time it was my pessimism that provedgroundless. Stephen Tierney's Multiculturalism and the CanadianConstitution turned out to be the book I was looking for; the one Iwould choose as a course text or recommend to a colleague seeking aone-stop primer on multiculturalism. The subject matter of this collection is divided into two parts.The first part provides the context, the second uses case studies tozero in on key issues. Again the editor notes cross-cutting themes (p.3-4): "First, how might we explain in ideological terms theCanadian commitment to both cultural and territorial diversity?"Second, what explanations can we find for the successes ofCanadian constitutional law Canadian constitutional law is the area of Canadian law relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution of Canada by the Courts. All laws of Canada, both provincial and federal, must conform to the Constitution and any laws inconsistent with the Constitution and policy" in the area ofmulticulturalism? Third, is there "a distinctive 'Canadianmodel' that differs from approaches taken elsewhere," or arethe differences in outcome only coincidental? And last, how do we dealwith "the tensions ... between the accommodation of territoriallybased identities through federalism and a multicultural policy thataccentuates the identities of non-territorial groups?" It isalready clear from the wording of these questions that the focus of thebook is specifically and recognizably Canadian. Part 1 opens with what Tierney describes as three "reflectivechapters," each of which examines a different aspect ofCanada's constitutional evolution over the past half century. Thelead essay by Hugh Donald Forbes, predictably but appropriately, talksabout Trudeau's role as the architect of multiculturalism. Ofparticular interest is his rejection of the common view that the policywas a cynical ploy to offset Quebec nationalism by shifting the focus ofcitizen identification. Trudeau's commitment to multiculturalism,says Forbes, was both longstanding and real. From passage of theOfficial Languages Act in 1969 to the entrenchment of the Charter in1982, he devised a variety of complementary strategies--changingimmigration policy, grappling with the Indian Act, establishing culturalsubsidies and exchanges, beefing up the human rights system--to furtherhis vision of "multiculturalism within a bilingual framework." Chapter 2, by Michael Temelini, complements Forbes' account byproviding a less-considered side of the picture. Counter to what heterms as the "juridical Pertaining to the administration of justice or to the office of a judge.A juridical act is one that conforms to the laws and the rules of court. A juridical day is one on which the courts are in session. JURIDICAL. paradigm," Forbes seesmulticulturalism as an outgrowth of 1960s radicalism, both at home andabroad. Using this "alternative" perspective as a point ofentry, he reexamines early political initiatives from Diefenbaker'sBill of Rights to Pearson's "B & B" Commission, andapplies lessons learned to past and current theories about howmulticulturalism arose and how it works. Chapter 3, by Will Kymlicka, looks more directly at Tierney'squestion about Canadian uniqueness. For Kymlicka, the real key toCanada's success in accommodating diversity lies less withpolitical astuteness than with timing (grappling with issues raised inthe early 1960s by the Quiet Revolution made us readier to deal withlater incursions), geography (because we haven't had to face massesof unwanted immigrants from neighboring countries, our intake has beendiversified and thus easier to digest), and luck. This doesn'tdiminish the success, he says, but it does mean that the model isprobably not portable. The next two chapters move beyond the Charter to the ill-fatedamendment initiatives of the late 1980s, early 1990s. Ian Peach'sarticle, titled "The Death of Deference," is the most overtlyideological of the entries. Billing the Charter itself as a triumph ofpopulism populismPolitical program or movement that champions the common person, usually by favourable contrast with an elite. Populism usually combines elements of the left and right, opposing large business and financial interests but also frequently being hostile to established , Peach attributes the failure of the Meech Lake andCharlottetown accords to the government's reversion to its oldelitist e��lit��ismor ����lit��ism ?n.1. The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. tactics. The problem with this approach is that it detaches onephase in the process from what is obviously a much longer and morecomplex evolution. Besides, watershed explanations--X happened, andeverything changed forever--are vulnerable to post factodisconfirmation. If Canadians are no longer deferential deferential/def��er��en��tial/ (-en��shal) pertaining to the ductus deferens. def��er��en��tialadj.Of or relating to the vas deferens.deferentialpertaining to the ductus deferens. , how do weexplain the popularity of such a notable authoritarian as StephenHarper? Absent the assumption of a watershed, one might equally wellclaim that Meech and Charlottetown failed because they weren'telitist enough--that Canadians reacted nervously to the idea of the fedsoffloading their responsibilities to the provinces. From thisstandpoint, I found Marc Chevrier's account of the same events bothmore useful and more compelling. Viewing the subject matter against thehistory of Canadian federalism, Chevrier claims that the failure of theaccords was not unicausal--it resulted from the interplay of numerousfactors, interests, players, and political manoeuvres, some new, somelong-standing, but all contributing to what the author calls "awork in progress." Chevrier's chapter makes a fitting conclusion to the firstsection. It also provides a good example of what I see as the mainstrength of this book-and what I found wanting in Eisenberg. Chevrieracknowledges competing theories and perspectives, but rather thanarguing them in the abstract, he tests the various possibilities againstparticular events. In doing so, he puts multiculturalism in a much moreinteresting light, as one thread in an intricately interwoven in��ter��weave?v. in��ter��wove , in��ter��wo��ven , inter��weav��ing, inter��weavesv.tr.1. To weave together.2. To blend together; intermix.v.intr. tapestry. The backdrop established, Part 2 refocuses the investigation onparticular issues and cases: the political uses of language policy; thechanging role of international treaties; former Chief Justice BrianDickson's contribution to the development of a uniquely Canadianconstitutional jurisprudence; the utility of section 27, theCharter's "multiculturalism clause"; the question ofwhether welfare should be a human right. A critic might claim that someof these articles are too technical to be fully appreciated by anyonebut a legal insider. Difficulty notwithstanding, however, they providean important complement to the broad strokes of Part 1, if only byillustrating the complexity of what has recently come to be viewed as anartifact of "the times." They also play an importantillustrative function. As fiddling and quibbling as these legal analysesmay seem to the layperson lay��per��son?n.A layman or a laywoman.Noun 1. layperson - someone who is not a clergyman or a professional personlayman, secular , they provide a tangible demonstration of how,in practical terms, policy, as an expression of communal values, istranslated into concrete rules and practices (see McGregor 2004). The last book on my list was not just the oddest, but the mostinfuriating. Whatever insights there may be in Gerald Kernerman'sMulticultural Nationalism, unearthing them requires wading through amorass of overblown verbiage. Most annoying is the author's habitof circling back, over and over, to repeat the same points in slightlydifferent terms. In the end, I was left unsure whether the exasperationwas worth it. Well, that's not quite true. In the end,Kernerman's vision was intriguing enough to buy him some patience(though that didn't make it any less exasperating). Let me see if I can capsulize cap��sul��ize?tr.v. cap��sul��ized, cap��sul��iz��ing, cap��sul��iz��esTo capsule: capsulized the news every 30 minutes. the basics. According to Kernerman,because consensus on the constituents of identity eludes us, Canadianshave been obsessed with finding some basis for cohesion. Some claim thatthe quest itself has become the core of Canadian identity. ForKernerman, however, the reality is more complicated. It isn't ourcommonalities that constitute identity, he says, so much as the shapetaken by our disagreements, especially their stubborn resistance toclosure. Attempts to mediate our differences invariably fail becauseevery apparent synthesis contains seeds for further protest. As aresult, no position is stable. The sticking point is that differenceimplies hierarchy, so someone is always left feeling slighted. If we tryto subordinate differences within a common framework, on the other hand,the same someones claim that they are being denied their rightfuldistinctiveness. The genius of the Canadian system is that itaccommodates rather than attempting to resolve this impasse. How? At the risk of oversimplifying, it boils down to a shift fromcontent to form. To explain, Kernerman borrows Foucault's conceptof governmentality, the process by which people and groups areconditioned to regulate themselves. The liberal version of this mustbalance the vision of free individuals with the need for constraints toprotect that freedom. It is therefore necessary to train people toself-express in safe ways. In Canada's case, this involvesdirecting multiculturalism along less-threatening lines to avoid thebacklash that would destroy it. "Canadian nations, as imaginingcommunities, take shape through ... line-drawing" (p. 93), but theCanadian modus when nervous is exploring relation, not underliningdivision. The result, according to Kernerman, is a collective penchantfor mediation through forms of social ritual. "Paradoxically, thecitizen interaction that results from what I call multiculturalpanopticism is a basis for cohesion, even as it aims to define anddifferentiate" (p. 93). Multiculturalism policy doesn't justallow spaces for such interactions to occur, but provides the scriptsand categories that will govern them. The price of tolerance is theexpectation that citizens will perform their prescribed identities."[T]he common act of placing one's diversity on displayconstructs and reinforces a more general basis for cohesion unity"(p. 101). On one level, Kernerman's theory seems both novel andstrained. On another--stripped of the postie postieNounScot, Austral & NZ informal a postman jargon--it sounds veryfamiliar. One of the things that struck me most about this book, infact, is the way Kernerman's analysis, particularly his descriptionof mechanisms for deferring divisive solutions, rehearses key featuresof the Canadian legal landscape. While the trends I am thinking of areubiquitous, the Charter is a perfect case in point. As I have observedelsewhere (McGregor 2003), one of the most distinctive features of thisdocument is something that Carolyn Tuohy, in her 1992 book, Policy andPolitics in Canada calls "institutionalized ambivalence." Whatthis term designates--and Tuohy sees it as a defining characteristic ofCanadian social and political arrangements, not just of theConstitution--is a strategy for dealing with multiple tensions betweenconflicting sets of priorities or allegiances not by compromise but byincorporation. "[W]hat appears distinctive about Canadianinstitutions is their extraordinary capacity to embody conflictingprinciples within structures ambiguous enough to allow for ad hocaccommodations over time" (p. xvii). But note that phrase"allow for." The Charter's ambivalence inheres in anonhierarchical juxtaposition of competing values. Ideally, such anarrangement promotes conciliation conciliation:see mediation. by resisting simple or draconiansolutions. Differences are bridged simply through inclusion. Accordingto Kernerman--and now that he has drawn my attention to it, I have toagree--Canada's version of multiculturalism does the same thing. Read in conjunction with Tierney's more conventionalhistories, it seems to me that this insight, however tortuouslyarticulated, provides an eminently satisfying last piece to the puzzle. References Jedwab, Jack. 2006. "Keep on Tracking: Immigration and PublicOpinion in Canada?" PowerPoint presentation. Retrieved August 14,2008 (http://www.canada.metropolis.net/events/Vancouver_2006/Presentationfiv/WS-032406-1530-Jedwab.ppt pptabbr.1. parts per thousand2. parts per trillion ). Jedwab, Jack. N.d. "Thirty Years of Multiculturalism inCanada, 1971-2001." Association for Canadian Studies. RetrievedAugust 14, 2008 (http://www.acs-aec.ca/oldsite/Polls/Poll2.pdf). McGregor, Gaile. 2003. "A Case Study in the Construction ofPlace: Boundary Management as Theme and Strategy in Canadian Art andLife." Invisible Culture: An Electronic Journal for Visual Culture5. Retrieved February 25, 2009(http://www.rochester.edu/in_visible_culture/Issue_5/issue5title.html). McGregor, Gaile. 2004. "Revisiting the Structure/AgencyDebate: The Special Role of the Instrumental Text." Paper presentedat the Qualitative Analysis Qualitative AnalysisSecurities analysis that uses subjective judgment based on nonquantifiable information, such as management expertise, industry cycles, strength of research and development, and labor relations. Conference, May, Ottawa, ON. RetrievedFebruary 25, 2009 (http://gailemcgregor.ca/content/view/21/41/). GAILE McGRECOR, University of Western Ontario Western is one of Canada's leading universities, ranked #1 in the Globe and Mail University Report Card 2005 for overall quality of education.[2] It ranked #3 among medical-doctoral level universities according to Maclean's Magazine 2005 University Rankings.