CANZUK International - "merger" of UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by lio45

So you were dissatisfied with how open your GTA suburbia generally was culturally...? Seems like one could hardly wish for a better blank slate to immigrate to; you must be setting your bar impossibly high, no?

I think there are other problems. It's not about wishing for a blank slate.

Especially for visible minorities, there's a sense of never being seen as a 'real' Canadian.

I think Canada's national mythology is basically the English (UK generally), the French and a few token indigenous peoples who somehow survived. Immigration from Europe stagnated for a while and, rather recently, the government decided to use immigration from developing countries as a tool to address specific labor shortages. While they may pay lip service to concepts like multiculturalism (concepts which of course are not universally accepted or uniformly interpreted by Canadians), the underlying points system of immigration shows the reality. That's not a very compelling narrative to latch on to.

While the US has a million issues, including electing a White nationalist as President, at least about 25-50% of the country (those on the left) view immigration as a pillar of the country's national mythology. And the respective immigration systems reflect these realities to some extent. The majority of immigrants to Canada arrive based on the points system, a system designed to address specific labor needs. Conversely, the majority of immigrants in the US come through other programs, much of it through family sponsorship. As hated and mocked as it is by a majority of the country, there's still a not insignificant percentage on the left that fight for amnesty for people unlawfully present and want the country to live up to the 'bring me your huddled masses' mantra.

And that general feeling of alienation is heightened by political policies that understandably are viewed through a lens of otherization by visible minorities, including things like the Barbaric Practices Hotline, Harper's efforts to make the citizenship of certain categories of citizens revocable, and other policies and regulations that seem to drive a wedge between newcomer Canadians (particularly of color) and multigenerational European communities in Canada by asserting the superiority of the claims of the latter over the former.

This is of course in addition to other systemic issues, including for example racial discrimination in employment. Given Canada's tiny population, we don't really have the institutions to facilitate meaningful public discourse on topics that affect us, so many of us may think it doesn't exist. But the numbers and studies don't lie. Interesting that you bring up the GTA, where this kind of racial discrimination in employment most acutely affects South Asians.

It's easy to propagate an exclusionary national identity and then blame immigrants for failing to assimilate and generalize them as seeking a blank slate. And then of course it's just as easy to put up a resistance against them on the grounds that history may repeat itself.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

But when some locals complain about not wanting the newcomers around, and other locals do want them around, then it becomes a matter of who speaks for the "us who were here before".



Actually it seems like it's quite common for certain immigrants (even if the term nativism isn't used) themselves to make arguments that they don't want further immigrants to arrive because they already feel settled and assimilated versus the later newcomers, and if they've worked hard to earn their position in the country, they might even feel like a new crop of newcomers, if perceived as low in socio-economic or cultural status, make them and their community "look bad".

In fact, it's common to see this attitude criticized as "slamming the door behind them".

To be honest, I've seen the view that existing legal immigrants are opposed to a certain group of other immigrants most loudly asserted by native nativists as a way to preemptively innoculate themselves from accusations of general xenophobia. But you're right, the 'slam the door behind you' mentality exists among some immigrants, but I don't think it exists in the same proportions or with the same degree of conviction between the two groups (immigrants and natives).

I kind of agree with lio that, as a general matter, that:

Originally Posted by lio45

By definition, the people who are complaining that the neighborhood "isn't what it used to" are always going to be the locals, not the newcomers. It's normal and is always the case everywhere.

I wouldn't go as far to say that it's always the case everywhere, but this kind of behavior is a very basic behavior exhibited by humans in many different habitats in many different contexts. Certain nonhuman animals exhibit these behaviors, too, in various contexts.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Especially for visible minorities, there's a sense of never being seen as a 'real' Canadian.

(...)

But the numbers and studies don't lie. Interesting that you bring up the GTA, where this kind of racial discrimination in employment most acutely affects South Asians.

I wouldn't have thought it a major problem, though thinking about it it's almost inevitable that being like the majority would give one a bit of an edge over rivals who aren't when it comes to getting hired. Say, you want to get hired in an average job in Japan, your chances are slightly better if you're an ethnic Japanese fluent in Japanese, than if you're not.

However I wouldn't have expected these barriers would be high enough to be more than a very minor inconvenience, forcing minorities to work slightly harder in ways that aren't that unreasonable (which is something they pretty much always had to do, everywhere.)

I found that post of yours interesting and it can spark more discussion for sure; I have to go so I have to stop there for today, but may add more later.

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I wasn't making a normative statement, although if we want to go there obviously I don't think it's fair and in an ideal world I would like to see humans break down barriers and create a more just world for all humans and the other sentient beings with whom we share this planet.

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one.

• Video Link

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

To be honest, I've seen the view that existing legal immigrants are opposed to a certain group of other immigrants most loudly asserted by native nativists as a way to preemptively innoculate themselves from accusations of general xenophobia. But you're right, the 'slam the door behind you' mentality exists among some immigrants, but I don't think it exists in the same proportions or with the same degree of conviction between the two groups (immigrants and natives).
.

I think it's naive, absurd, incorrect and even dishonest to suggest that a 57-year-old Russian-born guy who works at an auto plant in SW Ontario is significantly more likely to be enthusiastic about a large influx of Afghans or Congolese, simply because technically they're "immigrants" like him.

If there is any difference in views on this between the random Russian-born guy (or some other similar foreign-born demographic) and people born in Canada of long-standing United Empire Loyalist or New France stock, it must be infinitesimal.

The idea of a strong over-arching commonality of interests among foreign-born people of varying origins settled in Canada simply by virtue of them being immigrants goes against human nature.

Lots of Middle Eastern Christians aren't too keen on seeing lots of Middle Eastern Muslims entering Canada - even if the latter are from the same countries as the former.

Lots of Slavic peoples from central and eastern aren't too crazy about Russians.

Lots of immigrants to Canada from Europe and East Asia aren't too keen on seeing a huge influx of black and brown people.

The prejudices people have or had in the old country or "inherited" from their roots there don't magically disappear once they set foot on Canadian soil.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

It's easy to propagate an exclusionary national identity and then blame immigrants for failing to assimilate and generalize them as seeking a blank slate. .

I can't speak for others but I don't think immigrants generally come to Canada seeking or pushing for a blank slate. That said, Canada does kind of sell itself as that to immigrants, and this does create that type of expectation on the part of some of them. It may also draw certain types of immigrants for whom the blank slate (e.g. living pretty much as in the old country but with western comforts and safety) to Canada more than to other countries.

But fundamentally, if Canada is seen as a blank slate by many of its immigrants, it's primarily Canada's fault - not that of the immigrants.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think it's naive, absurd, incorrect and even dishonest to suggest that a 57-year-old Russian-born guy who works at an auto plant in SW Ontario is significantly more likely to be enthusiastic about a large influx of Afghans or Congolese, simply because technically they're "immigrants" like him.

If there is any difference in views on this between the random Russian-born guy (or some other similar foreign-born demographic) and people born in Canada of long-standing United Empire Loyalist or New France stock, it must be infinitesimal.

The idea of a strong over-arching commonality of interests among foreign-born people of varying origins settled in Canada simply by virtue of them being immigrants goes against human nature.

Lots of Middle Eastern Christians aren't too keen on seeing lots of Middle Eastern Muslims entering Canada - even if the latter are from the same countries as the former.

Lots of Slavic peoples from central and eastern aren't too crazy about Russians.

Lots of immigrants to Canada from Europe and East Asia aren't too keen on seeing a huge influx of black and brown people.

The prejudices people have or had in the old country or "inherited" from their roots there don't magically disappear once they set foot on Canadian soil.

Well said, there is a bizarre assumption floating around recently that diluting the white population in western countries with immigrants will solve all such problems and everything will become rainbows (even though the vast majority of immigrants come from far more conservative / religious / divided regions than most western countries).

It is just as silly and ridiculous and potentially damaging as the ultra conservative views regarding immigration coming from the far right.

[Metro-One]

Originally Posted by lio45

I wouldn't have thought it a major problem, though thinking about it it's almost inevitable that being like the majority would give one a bit of an edge over rivals who aren't when it comes to getting hired. Say, you want to get hired in an average job in Japan, your chances are slightly better if you're an ethnic Japanese fluent in Japanese, than if you're not.

However I wouldn't have expected these barriers would be high enough to be more than a very minor inconvenience, forcing minorities to work slightly harder in ways that aren't that unreasonable (which is something they pretty much always had to do, everywhere.)

I found that post of yours interesting and it can spark more discussion for sure; I have to go so I have to stop there for today, but may add more later.

Haha, slightly better? I love Japan and living here is great but under the venire of smiles and curiosity in foreigners, there is a very strong and very deep protectionism in all Japanese institutions.

Yes, you can walk into any bar and be rock star, yes you will have people bend over backward to help you if you are lost, but they all view you as a temporary visitor. Once you start living in Japan you see how deep the prejudice is.

Most obvious example is renting. As a foreigner (especially if you are not married to a Japanese national) finding a decent place to rent is excruciatingly difficult. Many many rental buildings and companies outright say that they do not rent to foreigners. Other try to hide it by saying they don't offer services in English (but then whenever a foreigner who can speak Japanese fluently comes along, they find another excuse). Even a shade of this in Canada would be the racist story of the year. (one of the most entertaining things is watching SJW types in Japan who go through amazing mental gymnastics to justify these situation because they don't want to dare admit that something regarding racism / prejudice in a foreign country may be worse than it is in Canada/ US / Australia...) This is why most rental units for foreigners are organized through the companies that they work for (my first apartment was found this way). to impossible to find one yourself, but there are a lot of prejudice roadblocks in doing so.

Then there is work, outside of a few select industries (teaching English, modelling to a degree, working in nigh clubs) it is extremely hard to get a job with a Japanese company (most foreigners are all temporary workers, such as the Philippine guys and Peruvians working in the ship building industry near where I live). Even if you do speak fluent Japanese your best bet is to apply with a branch company from a western country. Even then you will always be low on the pecking order, despite your experience you will always start at the lowest salary, while a Japanese guy in the exact same situation will make a couple thousand more a year. Sometimes they even like it less if you can speak Japanese. I noticed at one of my places of work when i first came to Japan 5 years ago (couldn't speak anything) they always just let my stay in the office during their meetings, now that my language skills are getting much better they actually ask me to leave during some meetings, as if I would be a freaking spy, haha! Could never marine that flying in Canada!

Don't take this the wrong way, many great things and great people in Japan and I would recommend coming to Japan in a heartbeat if you are looking for a great international living experience, but if you are looking for a colour blind society, don't come to Asia.

I also find it funny that it seems to be the duty of western nations to accept refugees, but never see anyone pressuring Japan, Korea, China, etc... the same way as Europe to open the flood gates...

Also in Japan if you get divorced / lose your job you have 2 weeks to tell immigration, if you don't deported (and you have only 90 days to find a new sponsor even if you do tell immigration)

Living in a foreign country (actually living) has given me some new perspectives on immigration and other social issues.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Haha, slightly better? I love Japan and living here is great but under the venire of smiles and curiosity in foreigners, there is a very strong and very deep protectionism in all Japanese institutions.

Yes, you can walk into any bar and be rock star, yes you will have people bend over backward to help you if you are lost, but they all view you as a temporary visitor. Once you start living in Japan you see how deep the prejudice is.

Most obvious example is renting. As a foreigner (especially if you are not married to a Japanese national) finding a decent place to rent is excruciatingly difficult. Many many rental buildings and companies outright say that they do not rent to foreigners. Other try to hide it by saying they don't offer services in English (but then whenever a foreigner who can speak Japanese fluently comes along, they find another excuse). Even a shade of this in Canada would be the racist story of the year. (one of the most entertaining things is watching SJW types in Japan who go through amazing mental gymnastics to justify these situation because they don't want to dare admit that something regarding racism / prejudice in a foreign country may be worse than it is in Canada/ US / Australia...) This is why most rental units for foreigners are organized through the companies that they work for (my first apartment was found this way). to impossible to find one yourself, but there are a lot of prejudice roadblocks in doing so.

Then there is work, outside of a few select industries (teaching English, modelling to a degree, working in nigh clubs) it is extremely hard to get a job with a Japanese company (most foreigners are all temporary workers, such as the Philippine guys and Peruvians working in the ship building industry near where I live). Even if you do speak fluent Japanese your best bet is to apply with a branch company from a western country. Even then you will always be low on the pecking order, despite your experience you will always start at the lowest salary, while a Japanese guy in the exact same situation will make a couple thousand more a year. Sometimes they even like it less if you can speak Japanese. I noticed at one of my places of work when i first came to Japan 5 years ago (couldn't speak anything) they always just let my stay in the office during their meetings, now that my language skills are getting much better they actually ask me to leave during some meetings, as if I would be a freaking spy, haha! Could never marine that flying in Canada!

Don't take this the wrong way, many great things and great people in Japan and I would recommend coming to Japan in a heartbeat if you are looking for a great international living experience, but if you are looking for a colour blind society, don't come to Asia.

I also find it funny that it seems to be the duty of western nations to accept refugees, but never see anyone pressuring Japan, Korea, China, etc... the same way as Europe to open the flood gates...

Also in Japan if you get divorced / lose your job you have 2 weeks to tell immigration, if you don't deported (and you have only 90 days to find a new sponsor even if you do tell immigration)

Living in a foreign country (actually living) has given me some new perspectives on immigration and other social issues.

Yep. And similarly good luck immigrating or getting permanent residency in China, just not done.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by lio45

I wouldn't have thought it a major problem, though thinking about it it's almost inevitable that being like the majority would give one a bit of an edge over rivals who aren't when it comes to getting hired. Say, you want to get hired in an average job in Japan, your chances are slightly better if you're an ethnic Japanese fluent in Japanese, than if you're not.

However I wouldn't have expected these barriers would be high enough to be more than a very minor inconvenience, forcing minorities to work slightly harder in ways that aren't that unreasonable (which is something they pretty much always had to do, everywhere.)

I found that post of yours interesting and it can spark more discussion for sure; I have to go so I have to stop there for today, but may add more later.

This might be another area where natives and immigrants of color, on average, tend to have divergent views. Meaning that natives and immigrants of color may have divergent views regarding the acceptable level of racial discrimination in employment.

I'm not sure if you are condoning Japan, which is well known for xenophobia, stemming in part from a history of isolation, but I think most immigrants of color wouldn't consider that level of racial discrimination in employment to be acceptable.

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think it's naive, absurd, incorrect and even dishonest to suggest that a 57-year-old Russian-born guy who works at an auto plant in SW Ontario is significantly more likely to be enthusiastic about a large influx of Afghans or Congolese, simply because technically they're "immigrants" like him.

If there is any difference in views on this between the random Russian-born guy (or some other similar foreign-born demographic) and people born in Canada of long-standing United Empire Loyalist or New France stock, it must be infinitesimal.

The idea of a strong over-arching commonality of interests among foreign-born people of varying origins settled in Canada simply by virtue of them being immigrants goes against human nature.

Lots of Middle Eastern Christians aren't too keen on seeing lots of Middle Eastern Muslims entering Canada - even if the latter are from the same countries as the former.

Lots of Slavic peoples from central and eastern aren't too crazy about Russians.

Lots of immigrants to Canada from Europe and East Asia aren't too keen on seeing a huge influx of black and brown people.

The prejudices people have or had in the old country or "inherited" from their roots there don't magically disappear once they set foot on Canadian soil.

This is actually interestingly different from my own experiences living in Canadian cities of different sizes.

For second generation immigrants of color (people who were born in Canada to immigrant parents or people who immigrated to Canada before grade school), I've noticed that they tend to hang out with one another. This is in a variety of social situations. Most of my friends and their friends growing up fit in this category.

The main difference I noticed depends on the size of the immigrant communities. So in places like Brampton, which has a very large South Asian community, the South Asian second generation immigrants tend to hang out together while all of the other second generation immigrants of color hang out separately.

For first generation immigrants, I think largely the same things happen. In Calgary, my parents have a rather diverse friends group consisting of first generation immigrants of color. In Toronto, their friends group mainly consisted of first generation South Asian immigrants.

The diverse immigrants of color friend groups are forged from a feeling of familiarity with one another, as well as shared experiences, including shared experiences of racial discrimination in employment, views on immigration policy and continued hurdles related to immigration (such as bringing over grandparents to live with you), and a sense of alienation and otherization. And these shared experiences can inform views on social and political issues.

I can't really speak to White immigrants because, in the same way that people of color are always viewed as immigrants, White immigrants are often assumed to be natives.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Well said, there is a bizarre assumption floating around recently that diluting the white population in western countries with immigrants will solve all such problems and everything will become rainbows (even though the vast majority of immigrants come from far more conservative / religious / divided regions than most western countries).

It is just as silly and ridiculous and potentially damaging as the ultra conservative views regarding immigration coming from the far right.

I agree, I don't think diluting the racial purity of the White communities of Canada will solve all problems.

This is why I was advocating migration from poor EU countries. That way, the pro-immigration camp is satisfied, and the pro-maintaining racial purity camp is also satisfied. That would ensure harmony and more people to help build up our institutions and markets.

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Even a shade of this in Canada would be the racist story of the year. (one of the most entertaining things is watching SJW types in Japan who go through amazing mental gymnastics to justify these situation because they don't want to dare admit that something regarding racism / prejudice in a foreign country may be worse than it is in Canada/ US / Australia...)

Well, there's no doubt racism and prejudice is worse in other places in the world. But we should strive for equality and fairness as an ideal in and of itself, not because "oh, well, we're at least better than (insert country with less equality and fairness)".

Originally Posted by whatnext

Yep. And similarly good luck immigrating or getting permanent residency in China, just not done.

I don't think that many people want to immigrate to China to begin with. Far more people are emigrating away from China than to it.

A rich, developed country like Canada with lots of space to grow, a long history of immigration, being more tolerant and less xenophobic than a over-one-billion-person, crowded country, that just recently made it a generation or two away from destitute poverty, that has very little history of immigration to it, and plus which isn't democratic anyways is a pretty low bar.

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

This might be another area where natives and immigrants of color, on average, tend to have divergent views. Meaning that natives and immigrants of color may have divergent views regarding the acceptable level of racial discrimination in employment.

I'm not sure if you are condoning Japan, which is well known for xenophobia, stemming in part from a history of isolation, but I think most immigrants of color wouldn't consider that level of racial discrimination in employment to be acceptable.



This is actually interestingly different from my own experiences living in Canadian cities of different sizes.

For second generation immigrants of color (people who were born in Canada to immigrant parents or people who immigrated to Canada before grade school), I've noticed that they tend to hang out with one another. This is in a variety of social situations. Most of my friends and their friends growing up fit in this category.

The main difference I noticed depends on the size of the immigrant communities. So in places like Brampton, which has a very large South Asian community, the South Asian second generation immigrants tend to hang out together while all of the other second generation immigrants of color hang out separately.

For first generation immigrants, I think largely the same things happen. In Calgary, my parents have a rather diverse friends group consisting of first generation immigrants of color. In Toronto, their friends group mainly consisted of first generation South Asian immigrants.

The diverse immigrants of color friend groups are forged from a feeling of familiarity with one another, as well as shared experiences, including shared experiences of racial discrimination in employment, views on immigration policy and continued hurdles related to immigration (such as bringing over grandparents to live with you), and a sense of alienation and otherization. And these shared experiences can inform views on social and political issues.

I can't really speak to White immigrants because, in the same way that people of color are always viewed as immigrants, White immigrants are often assumed to be natives.

To be fair, how are what people who are first generation immigrants doing in Brampton or Markham or wherever any different than say, what happened with the bloc settlements out west back in the late 19th and 20th century? Ukrainians lived with Ukrainians, German groups like the Mennonites also lived with one another. The enclaves were just rural rather than urban, but they were just as eager to live among their fellow co-ethnics as today's immigrants. If anything today's immigrants in a big city are probably more integrated than the rural homesteaders of the past who could spend their lives in a town dominated by settlers of the same stock. Today's immigrants see a greater variety of people making up their social circle -- they go to school together as kids, work together, mingle together. Sure, the first or maybe, sometimes the second generation might be a bit cliquish for reasons common to all humans of wanting comfort and familiarity with others who shared common customs and upbringing, but as you mention I see no evidence that failure to assimilate lingers long afterwards -- the only reason places like Brampton, Richmond, Markham etc. seem that way is because of lots of first generation immigrants continuing to arrive, not second or third generation Canadians failing to integrate.

Oh yeah, and people of colour have just as long of a history as some white Canadians, not even including aboriginals. Black Canadians have a recorded history going back to the 1600s -- Mathieu da Costa accompanied Samuel de Champlain in exploration. Records of African slaves existed in New France. There's of course the 1700s and 1800s stories of Black American loyalists and refugee African Americans and even Caribbean people, going towards today with the 20th and 21st century Caribbean and African immigrants.

On the Asian side of things, there's records of Chinese people as carpenters who built and accompanied John Meares' ship who sailed to Vancouver Island, back when it was a remote outpost and they became caught up in the conflict between Spain and Britain, back in the late 1700s. South Asians go back to the 1800s in Canada with the Sikhs in BC too.

So, yeah, I'm sure that while some Canadians might still think "British and French Canadians, aside from aboriginals, if they are not forgotten, are the real Canadians, the others are "immigrants" and those other johnny-come-lately's are somehow less Canadian", I think an increasing number of Canadians reject the idea that (non-aboriginal) people of colour are any more interlopers and foreigners than white Canadians. They helped built Canada too. That's one thing I think at least the US does well (for all our comparisons with our supposed tolerance and diversity) in that it doesn't downplay people of colour in its history as much. Black and Asian Canadians get a little less acknowledgement than American people of colour, but I think as Canada gets more diverse, we will start to recognize more and more their contributions (both in the past, and now).

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I agree, I don't think diluting the racial purity of the White communities of Canada will solve all problems.

This is why I was advocating migration from poor EU countries. That way, the pro-immigration camp is satisfied, and the pro-maintaining racial purity camp is also satisfied. That would ensure harmony and more people to help build up our institutions and markets.

Sorry, I will have to disagree with any ideas about this so-called purity. We can discuss qualifications for immigration and selectivity for immigration but no favors should be granted to any race of people. If a person would make a good citizen, we should let him or her immigrate. If they would not be a good fit, then not. We can also collectively agree to change and modify immigration policy without letting race or racial preferences come into play. I personally think kowtowing to the demands of people who care about racial purity is total bullshit, if you'll excuse my language. Why should our country go out of its way to please people hung up on such anti-social ideas as "purity" of blood. If you yourself don't want to socialize with certain groups of people, fine, as long as you leave others alone. But don't tell other people who they can't and can mingle with. European-descent and non-European descent Canadians alike can mingle with, work with, play with, socialize with, befriend, date, marry, have kids with and have their kids play with, anyone they want.

If you go out of your way to elevate or favor one group of Canadians above another, that's not going to help societal harmony. You already mentioned racial minorities having a hard time in Canada. Whether people like it or not (and the people who don't like it are probably a small but vocal minority, but not representative of Canadians as a whole), racial minorities already are a part of Canada, have been and will continue to be. They're not interlopers or guests who are going to be kicked out any time soon. We as Canadians must learn to respect one another and all get along.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

Sorry, I will have to disagree with any ideas about this so-called purity. We can discuss qualifications for immigration and selectivity for immigration but no favors should be granted to any race of people. If a person would make a good citizen, we should let him or her immigrate. If they would not be a good fit, then not. We can also collectively agree to change and modify immigration policy without letting race or racial preferences come into play. I personally think kowtowing to the demands of people who care about racial purity is total bullshit, if you'll excuse my language. Why should our country go out of its way to please people hung up on such anti-social ideas as "purity" of blood. European-descent and non-European descent Canadians alike can mingle with, work with, play with, socialize with, befriend, date, marry, have kids with and have their kids play with, anyone they want.

If you go out of your way to elevate or favor one group of Canadians above another, that's not going to help societal harmony. You already mentioned racial minorities having a hard time in Canada. Whether people like it or not (and the people who don't like it are probably a small but vocal minority, but not representative of Canadians as a whole), racial minorities already are a part of Canada, have been and will continue to be. They're not interlopers or guests who are going to be kicked out any time soon. We must learn to respect one another and all get along.

I agree 100%.

Just trying to placate the concerns some have expressed regarding racial dilution, but I'm with you completely on how it I think it ought to be.

[Capsicum]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I think there are other problems. It's not about wishing for a blank slate.

Especially for visible minorities, there's a sense of never being seen as a 'real' Canadian.

I think Canada's national mythology is basically the English (UK generally), the French and a few token indigenous peoples who somehow survived. Immigration from Europe stagnated for a while and, rather recently, the government decided to use immigration from developing countries as a tool to address specific labor shortages. While they may pay lip service to concepts like multiculturalism (concepts which of course are not universally accepted or uniformly interpreted by Canadians), the underlying points system of immigration shows the reality. That's not a very compelling narrative to latch on to.

While the US has a million issues, including electing a White nationalist as President, at least about 25-50% of the country (those on the left) view immigration as a pillar of the country's national mythology. And the respective immigration systems reflect these realities to some extent. The majority of immigrants to Canada arrive based on the points system, a system designed to address specific labor needs. Conversely, the majority of immigrants in the US come through other programs, much of it through family sponsorship. As hated and mocked as it is by a majority of the country, there's still a not insignificant percentage on the left that fight for amnesty for people unlawfully present and want the country to live up to the 'bring me your huddled masses' mantra.

And that general feeling of alienation is heightened by political policies that understandably are viewed through a lens of otherization by visible minorities, including things like the Barbaric Practices Hotline, Harper's efforts to make the citizenship of certain categories of citizens revocable, and other policies and regulations that seem to drive a wedge between newcomer Canadians (particularly of color) and multigenerational European communities in Canada by asserting the superiority of the claims of the latter over the former.

This is of course in addition to other systemic issues, including for example racial discrimination in employment. Given Canada's tiny population, we don't really have the institutions to facilitate meaningful public discourse on topics that affect us, so many of us may think it doesn't exist. But the numbers and studies don't lie. Interesting that you bring up the GTA, where this kind of racial discrimination in employment most acutely affects South Asians.

It's easy to propagate an exclusionary national identity and then blame immigrants for failing to assimilate and generalize them as seeking a blank slate. And then of course it's just as easy to put up a resistance against them on the grounds that history may repeat itself.

Rabindranath Tagore, (the first Nobel prize winner of non-European descent, and a South Asian) wrote this about Canada during his visit in 1929.

"However, I may indulge in a generality and say with
conviction that Canada being a young country is full of
possibilities that are incalculable. She has neither exhausted
her material resources nor those of her mind and character.
She has not yet produced in her psychology the self-toxin of
fatigue that old civilizations suffer from in the shape of
cynicism and spiritual insensitiveness. Her creative youth is
still before her, and the faith needed for building up a new
world is still fresh and strong...

...Canada is too young to fall a
victim to the malady of disillusionment and scepticism, and
she must believe in great ideals in the face of contradiction —
for she has the great gift of youth, she has the direct conscious-
ness of the stir of growth within, which should make her trust
her own self which is the only sure way of trusting the world.
Let her feel in the sacred dawn of her life that the expectation of
the human destiny is upon her as upon other young sister
countries of hers, which have just entered into the cycle of
their promise. She will have to solve, for the salvation of man,
the most difficult of all problems, the race problem, which has
become insistent with the close contact of communities that had
their isolation for centuries in their geographical and cultural exclusiveness...

...She must dream
of the introduction of honesty even in politics which is the self-
interest of the nation, knowing that such interest can only have
its sure foundation in truth, justice, and sympathy in inter-
national relationships. She must ever hope to be able to win
the heart of the world not by material force or cunning diplo-
macy but by offering the best that she produces — even like what
occurred in the golden age of India when her messengers reached
far distant alien lands, carrying the gifts of love and wisdom,
the message of emancipation, acknowledging common human
fellowship at the risk of danger and death."

Rabindranath Tagore, in part of his "Message of Farewell to Canada"

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Capsicum

So, yeah, I'm sure that while some Canadians might still think "British and French Canadians, aside from aboriginals, if they are not forgotten, are the real Canadians, the others are "immigrants" and those other johnny-come-lately's are somehow less Canadian", I think an increasing number of Canadians reject the idea that (non-aboriginal) people of colour are any more interlopers and foreigners than white Canadians. They helped built Canada too. That's one thing I think at least the US does well (for all our comparisons with our supposed tolerance and diversity) in that it doesn't downplay people of colour in its history as much. Black and Asian Canadians get a little less acknowledgement than American people of colour, but I think as Canada gets more diverse, we will start to recognize more and more their contributions (both in the past, and now).

That's beautifully put and I agree.

But there are many Canadians who get angered by the rejection of "the idea that people of colour are any more interlopers and foreigners than white Canadians." I don't think it's as racial as it is community-specific.

It may not be conveyed in those terms, but some of the descendants of the foundational European communities of Canada (the Quebecois de souche or old-stock Canadians or what have you) sometimes feel that their culture and values and traditions hold some higher position within Canadian culture. Recently naturalized immigrants are expected to assimilate into the culture of the descendants of the foundational European communities of Canada. Things like multiculturalism often just get lip service -- it's very much one-way assimilation.

Any variance from the one-way assimilation expected is met with great concern. Like Richmond or Brampton. With sufficient population, sometimes signage is in a different language or customer facing workers struggle to communicate in one of the languages of the foundational European communities. This failure to obey the norms of the foundational European communities to a satisfactory degree draws significant ire. It is deemed to be a failure to integrate.

It might just be more practical and realistic to reassure those who need reassurance regarding the hegemonic position of the culture of the foundational European communities in Canada instead of suggesting to them that other cultures are also Canadian. And given some similarities across Western societies, maybe poor EU migrants could fit the bill if you wanted higher immigration while reassuring those who need reassurance.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

This might be another area where natives and immigrants of color, on average, tend to have divergent views. Meaning that natives and immigrants of color may have divergent views regarding the acceptable level of racial discrimination in employment.

I'm not sure if you are condoning Japan, which is well known for xenophobia, stemming in part from a history of isolation, but I think most immigrants of color wouldn't consider that level of racial discrimination in employment to be acceptable.



This is actually interestingly different from my own experiences living in Canadian cities of different sizes.

For second generation immigrants of color (people who were born in Canada to immigrant parents or people who immigrated to Canada before grade school), I've noticed that they tend to hang out with one another. This is in a variety of social situations. Most of my friends and their friends growing up fit in this category.

The main difference I noticed depends on the size of the immigrant communities. So in places like Brampton, which has a very large South Asian community, the South Asian second generation immigrants tend to hang out together while all of the other second generation immigrants of color hang out separately.

For first generation immigrants, I think largely the same things happen. In Calgary, my parents have a rather diverse friends group consisting of first generation immigrants of color. In Toronto, their friends group mainly consisted of first generation South Asian immigrants.

The diverse immigrants of color friend groups are forged from a feeling of familiarity with one another, as well as shared experiences, including shared experiences of racial discrimination in employment, views on immigration policy and continued hurdles related to immigration (such as bringing over grandparents to live with you), and a sense of alienation and otherization. And these shared experiences can inform views on social and political issues.

I can't really speak to White immigrants because, in the same way that people of color are always viewed as immigrants, White immigrants are often assumed to be natives.

I wasn't disputing that what you just described doesn't happen. I think we're mostly in agreement, though I am not sure about "people of colour" as an effective grouping. I can understand that South Asians may hang out together more even if they are from different regions of India, ethnicities or regions of India, or even different countries like Sri Lanka, Pakistan or Bangladesh. I see this too where I live as African kids when there are enough them often hang out together more regardless of their parents' country of origin. And the same thing with Arab kids or Latin American kids.

That said, my point is more that I don't see (and also don't see why) Latin American mestizo kids, Jamaican kids or Sikh kids will necessarily hang out with each other a lot more than with "white" kids, simply because of the darker skin pigmentation they have in common.

That wouldn't make much sense in the Canadian context, and to be frank it has never really happened either in countries that had much higher degrees of racial discrimination and even strict segregation between a favoured race and everyone else who was seen of lesser value (usually of diverse, darker shades of "colour").

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

It might just be more practical and realistic to reassure those who need reassurance regarding the hegemonic position of the culture of the foundational European communities in Canada instead of suggesting to them that other cultures are also Canadian. And given some similarities across Western societies, maybe poor EU migrants could fit the bill if you wanted higher immigration while reassuring those who need reassurance.

Do you honestly think race-based immigration quotas to placate a tiny minority of white supremacists is actually a good idea?

Kellie Leitch's "Canadian values" immigration thing has thus far been the most nativist proposal that has been put to the test with regards to our immigration system - and that got her what, 7% of the conservative vote and widespread condemnation from across the political spectrum?

Any government in Canada bold enough to institute some sort of white-favouring immigration policy would not survive to see another term.

With sufficient population, sometimes signage is in a different language or customer facing workers struggle to communicate in one of the languages of the foundational European communities. This failure to obey the norms of the foundational European communities to a satisfactory degree draws significant ire. It is deemed to be a failure to integrate.

You mean one of our official languages? I don't think it's a particularly onerous expectation that immigrants be able to communicate in at least one of the two common languages of the place; and that therefore preference be given to applicants that are more fluent in one of these languages than those who are not.

Though since you bring it up, knowledge of English or French is certainly a lot less widespread in Eastern Europe than it is in the Caribbean, Africa, and South Asia. The colour of their skin doesn't help much there.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

You mean one of our official languages? I don't think it's a particularly onerous expectation that immigrants be able to communicate in at least one of the two common languages of the place; and that therefore preference be given to applicants that are more fluent in one of these languages than those who are not.

Though since you bring it up, knowledge of English or French is certainly a lot less widespread in Eastern Europe than it is in the Caribbean, Africa, and South Asia. The colour of their skin doesn't help much there.

I find that that saffronleaf's posts seem to express a subtle sympathy for what I like to refer to as ''Multiculti 2.0''.

He's not the only one hinting at this, and the idea seems to be that it's acceptable or even desirable to have various immigrant groups to set up what amounts to quasi-parallel societies within Canada. Even within cities where these groups rub shoulders with people of all origins. The onus is on the wider Canada (both citizens and authorities) to not only be accepting of this, but maybe even to be supportive of it. And of course to occasionally even grant exemptions to entrenched Canadian ways (even those regulatory in nature) to these parallel realities.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

I agree 100%.

Just trying to placate the concerns some have expressed regarding racial dilution, but I'm with you completely on how it I think it ought to be.

Who's expressed concerns about racial dilution and purity?

I think you're making a mistake in equating matters of race with matters of culture. It's like you're imposing an American frame of reference on Canada.

I understand that in the U.S. for historical reasons there is a perception on the part of many that even non-British "Europeans" meld in very easily into the anglo-normative dominant culture, and this is often viewed in opposition to other groups whose integration is not so smooth.

I don't think this applies to Canada at all, and when I have a few more minutes I'll explain why.

[Acajack]

The reason that, contrary to the U.S., there is little conflation between the racial purity/dilution crowd and the “culturally concerned” crowd in Anglo-Canada, is because one the two concerns are largely siloed due to the cultural landscape of Anglo-Canada.

“Culturally concerned” types in Anglo-Canada are generally members of the chattering classes. They listen to CBC Radio and read the Globe and Mail. They bought tickets to go see Stuart McLean and read his books. If they are concerned about Canada’s cultural uniqueness relative to the U.S. juggernaut, they also tend to view multiculturalism and diversity in a positive light. In their eyes, it’s actually one of the great things that makes Canada different from the U.S. So notions of racial purity and dilution are non-starters for them. They abhor them and actually would associate them with the undesirable aspects of American society that they don’t want to see take root here in Canada.

As for the racial purity/dilution crowd, they also exist in Anglo-Canada but they’re as far as you can get from the group above. They may be culturally concerned or think they are, but the culture they want to protect and the way they go about it has little in common with the chattering classes. Sure both groups likely have an appreciation for hockey and The Tragically Hip and a few other icons of Canada, but this crowd also emulates a lot of the redneck or anti-diversity mindset from our neighbours to the south.

(A lot of their influences actually come from American right-wing commentators which are often easily accessible in Canada.) I have some of these people who are friends of my friends on Facebook, and the memes they post are more often than not American in origin, or obviously American-originated rhetoric repurposed with a Canadian twist.

This latter group is most definitely proud to be Canadian, but their identity and cultural focus is definitely continental (North) American – whether they realize it or not.