Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada

Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada According to the following articles, you shall write the essay. I hope everything is cleared. I need 12 sources in 10 pages for the paper and I have attached it as following: Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada 1) 10 sources are attached 2) 2 sources has link as below: 1- Immigration, Poverty and Income Inequality in Canada – IRPP 2- Discrimination Against Skilled Immigrants in the Canadian Labor Market | The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab Discrimination Against Skilled Immigrants in the Canadian Labor Market |… Immigration, Poverty and Income Inequality in Canada – IRPPIn this chapter, the authors focus on the direct effect of immigration poverty and inequality in Canada during t… _multicultural_citizenship___x_multiculturalism_retained_in_canada.pdf _language_and_dis_citizenship_in_canada.pdf _citizenship_learning_and_political_participation___multiculturism.pdf dilmaghani2018_article_religious_identity_and_health_inequalities____canada.pdf _immigration_poverty_and_income_inequality_in_canada.pdf Article Multicultural citizenship within multination states Will Kymlicka Ethnicities 11(3) 281–302 ! The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1468796811407813 etn.sagepub.com Queen’s University, Canada Abstract In many western democracies today, there are calls to strengthen a sense of common citizenship as a way of building ‘social cohesion’ in increasingly diverse societies. Citizenship is to be promoted by, amongst other things, adding or strengthening citizenship education in schools, providing citizenship classes to immigrants, imposing new citizenship tests for naturalization, and holding citizenship ceremonies. In this article, I will examine this new citizenship agenda in the specific case of ‘multination’ states – that is, in states that have restructured themselves to accommodate significant sub-state nationalist movements, usually through some form of territorial devolution, consociational power-sharing, and/or official language status. What does it mean to promote a sense of common citizenship in multination states, and how does the new immigrationfocused citizenship agenda relate to older debates on multinationalism? I will argue that in the particular context of multination states, these new citizenship agendas must promote a distinctly multinational conception of citizenship if they are to be fair and effective. But equally, we need to adapt familiar models of multinational citizenship to be more inclusive of immigrants. In short, if the citizenship agenda is to be effective, and to be fairly inclusive of both sub-state national groups and of immigrants, we need a more multinational conception of citizenship, and a more multicultural conception of multinationalism. Keywords citizenship, citizenship education, federalism, immigration, integration, multicultural, multination, national minorities, postnational, western democracies Introduction In many western democracies today, there are calls to strengthen a sense of common citizenship as a way of building social cohesion in increasingly diverse societies. Citizenship is to be promoted by, amongst other things, adding or strengthening citizenship education in schools, providing citizenship classes to immigrants, Corresponding author: Will Kymlicka, Philosophy Dept., Watson Hall 313, Kingston, K7L 3N6, Canada Email: [email protected] 282 Ethnicities 11(3) imposing new citizenship tests for naturalization and holding citizenship ceremonies. As this list makes clear, the focus of much of this anxiety is immigrants, and their perceived lack of integration.1 This renewed emphasis on citizenship is sometimes o?ered as an alternative to older ideas of multiculturalism – David Blunkett in the UK repeatedly contrasted a citizenship agenda with a multiculturalism agenda (McGhee, 2009: 48). But it is also found in countries that retain a commitment to multiculturalism, as in Canada or Sweden (Milani, 2008). Accounts of the motives for, and e?ects of, this new ‘citizenship agenda’ vary. Critics argue that it panders to xenophobic sentiments (Wright, 2008), and/or reproduces ideological assumptions about the essential national homogeneity of existing citizens and of the alien otherness of newcomers (Blackledge, 2004; Stevenson, 2006; Milani, 2008). Defenders argue that it is based on a good-faith commitment to enabling integration, re?ected in proactive campaigns to encourage naturalization, and a commitment to providing resources to enable immigrants to meet the new tests (Kiwan, 2008a; Etzioni, 2007).Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada 2 I will not directly address this general debate, but want instead to focus on the challenges involved in promoting citizenship in the speci?c case of ‘multination’ states – that is, in states that have restructured themselves to accommodate significant sub-state nationalist movements, usually through some form of territorial devolution, consociational power-sharing, and/or o?cial language status (e.g. UK, Spain, Belgium, Canada, Switzerland). In such multination states, older ideas of homogenous national citizenship have already been contested and transformed as a result of mobilization by historic regional minorities, resulting in models of what we can call multinational citizenship. These multination states are just as likely as other western states to have signi?cant immigrant populations, and to have witnessed anxieties about the impact of immigration on social cohesion and integration. And so, not surprisingly, these states have also witnessed calls for a renewed emphasis on citizenship. However, if calls to promote a sense of common citizenship are controversial in traditional nation states, they are even more so in multination states where citizenship has already been pluralized to accommodate sub-state national groups. What does it mean to promote a sense of common citizenship in multination states, and how does this new immigration-focused citizenship agenda relate to older debates on multinationalism? Promoting a sense of citizenship amongst their long-term residents, native-born or foreign-born, is a legitimate task of all democratic states. In that sense, some sort of ‘citizenship agenda’ is appropriate. However, I will argue that in the context of multination states, these new citizenship agendas must promote a distinctly multinational conception of citizenship if they are to be fair and e?ective. It is important that immigrants be socialized into the ethos of multinationalism and the practices of ‘negotiating nationalism’ (Norman, 2006).3 But equally, we need to adapt familiar models of multinational citizenship to be more inclusive of immigrants. In short, if the citizenship agenda is to be e?ective, we need a more multinational conception of citizenship, and a more multicultural conception of multinationalism. Kymlicka 283 That may sound vague, but I will argue that it has important and surprising implications. To give one example, consider a pair of recent votes. In the 2003 regional election, 47 per cent of ethnic Pakistanis in Scotland voted for the separatist Scottish National Party (SNP) – that is, they voted for a party committed to breaking up Britain. This was partly due to the SNP’s opposition to the Iraq War, but opinion polls show that about a third of Pakistanis in Scotland do in fact endorse Scottish independence. By contrast, in the 1995 referendum on independence in Quebec, immigrant groups voted almost unanimously against secession, and opinion polls con?rm that this vote re?ects a very high level of identi?cation with Canada amongst immigrants in Quebec. How are we to evaluate these cases in terms of citizenship? On most accounts of the goals of citizenship-promotion, the conclusion is obvious. According to Blunkett, the goal of the new citizenship agenda is to encourage immigrants’ ‘identifying with Britain’ (Home O?ce, 2001, quoted in McGhee, 2009: 45) and their ‘commitment to Britain’ (Home O?ce, 2002: 32).Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada If so, then the high level of Pakistani support for the SNP is evidence of a failure of the citizenship agenda. Conversely, the very high level of immigrant support for Canadian unity in Quebec is evidence of the successful inculcation of ‘identifying with Canada’ and ‘commitment to Canada’. And yet I would argue that we could draw the opposite conclusion. Pakistani support for the SNP may be evidence of successful integration into the ethos and practice of multinational citizenship, whereas the almost total absence of immigrant support for secession in Quebec may be evidence of failed integration into multinational citizenship. Successful integration into an ethos of multinational citizenship involves, at least in part, integration into ambivalent identi?cations and contested commitments. I will return to these cases below, but let me ?rst say more about the nature of substate nationalism, and the sort of multinational citizenship it generates. I will then discuss why the norms of multinational citizenship are relevant to citizenship promotion in the context of growing immigration.4 Multinational citizenship For all of the anxiety about the impact of immigration on social cohesion, it is important to remember that the deepest challenge to social cohesion in many countries comes from their historic national minorities, not their immigrants. This is true, for example, of Spain, Belgium, Canada or indeed the UK. Politicians and pundits endlessly speculate about whether immigrants have a su?ciently strong sense of ‘being Canadian’ or ‘being British’, but if there is a problem with national identity in these countries, it is not in the ?rst instance with immigrants. For example, when the 2003 UK Home O?ce Citizenship Survey asked ‘how strongly you belong to Britain’, 85.95 per cent of Indians, 86.38 per cent of Pakistanis, and 86.85 per cent of Bangladeshis said that they belong either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ strongly to Britain – numbers that are essentially identical to the 86.7 per cent of whites who said they 284 Ethnicities 11(3) either fairly or very strongly belong. As Maxwell says, these results ‘encourage skepticism towards the notion of a national identi?cation crisis among Muslims and South Asians in Britain’ (Maxwell, 2006). By contrast, only 8.5 per cent of Catholics in Northern Ireland identify as British (Coakley, 2007). That may be an exceptional case, but Scots too are less likely than immigrants to identify as British – a seemingly stable 33 per cent of Scots reject even a partial British identity (Bond and Rosie, 2002). Nor is this unique to Britain. In Canada, identi?cation with Canada amongst ?rst- and second-generation immigrants, whatever their race or ethnicity, is as high as amongst the majority native-born white English-speaking population. The only two groups that exhibit signi?cant ambivalence about identifying with Canada are the two national minorities – the Que?be?cois and Aboriginals. As a recent study notes: On the ?eld of identity, the fundamental divisions are not ‘new’ Canadians versus ‘old’ ones but within the ranks of the old. Quebec francophones and Aboriginal Canadians have a weaker sense of pride and belonging in Canada as a whole. These divisions are clearly not fading with time. They are as old as the country and deeply embedded in who we are as a people. It is not surprising that these founding peoples, who have come to see themselves as distinct peoples or nations within a multination state, do not exhibit as unquali?ed an identi?cation or sense of belonging as others do. Indeed, it would be remarkable if Quebec francophones and Aboriginal people ever came to exhibit the degree of these orientations that new Canadians are likely to, for the latter have an a?nity with Canada that is essentially elective. So far, at least, the country seems to be successfully facing the challenges of postmodernity.Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada The bigger challenges stem from its premodern phase. (Soroka et al., 2007: 586) And these cleavages in identity have real political consequences. It is within national minorities, not immigrants, that we ?nd organized political movements and political parties contesting the legitimacy of the state. So if, with Blunkett, we take ‘identifying with’ and ‘commitment to’ Britain or Canada as markers of a sense of common citizenship then it is historic sub-state national groups not immigrants who raise the deeper challenge. While relations between national groups in multination western democracies today are generally peaceful, and while secession is not imminent, these cleavages are unresolved. We have at best provisional settlements of these long-standing cleavages, not permanent resolutions, and these provisional settlements require delicate handling. It is important, therefore, to consider how new policy initiatives around issues of citizenship for immigrants will a?ect the principles and practices of multinationalism. What are these norms of multinationalism? While all countries contain a plurality of identities, the phenomenon of territorially concentrated minority nationalism is a distinctive challenge, and we need to understand its speci?city. In these cases, the members of a regionally concentrated group exhibit a nationalist consciousness – that is, they conceive of themselves as forming a ‘nation’ within a larger state, and Kymlicka 285 mobilize behind nationalist political movements to achieve recognition of their nationhood, either in the form of an independent state or through territorial autonomy within the larger state. To be sure, the depth of nationalist consciousness varies from member to member and over time, and the leaders of nationalist movements often exaggerate the level of support they have amongst group members. Yet when these nationalist parties compete in free and fair elections, they often gain the support of the plurality or majority of the group on a consistent basis (e.g. in Flanders, Quebec, Catalonia, South Tyrol). So we should neither exaggerate nor underestimate the depth of nationalist consciousness. In such cases, we can say that the state is, sociologically speaking, a ‘multi-nation’ state, although states themselves have often been reluctant to acknowledge this. The presence of minority nationalist movements has traditionally been seen as a threat to the state, putting into question its legitimate right to rule all of its territory and population. In a world of ‘nation-states’ where states legitimate themselves by reference to norms of the self-determination of peoples, to have a group that claims that it forms a distinct ‘people’, with its own rights to self-determination, is often perceived as a threat. Indeed, many commentators have argued that democratic stability is impossible in such cases. Democracy is rule by ‘the people’, but this requires an agreement that the citizens of a state do indeed form a single ‘people’ who exercise their popular sovereignty through a common state within agreed borders. Without agreement on the unit of self-determination, democracy becomes unstable (O?e, 2001). As a result, many states in the past have sought to erode any sense of distinct nationhood amongst their territorially concentrated minorities, for example by restricting minority language rights, abolishing traditional forms of regional selfgovernment and encouraging members of the dominant group to settle in the minority group’s homeland in an e?ort to outnumber the minority even in its traditional territory. Where these assimilationist policies failed, as they often have, more radical solutions have been considered, such as partition and/or population transfer, as more realistic alternatives to na??ve hopes of stabilizing multination states. Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada Given this background, it is important to identify ways of accommodating minority nationalism that are consistent with democratic stability, and that replace earlier uncivil relations of animosity and intolerance with relations of democratic citizenship. In my view, we have growing evidence for the success, at least under favourable conditions, of one model of accommodation, which I will call ‘multination federalism’. This model has two key features: (1) it involves creating a federal or quasifederal sub-unit in which the minority group forms a local majority, and can thereby exercise meaningful forms of self-government; and (2) where the minority has a distinct language, its language is typically recognized as an o?cial state language within their sub-unit, if not state-wide.5 At the beginning of the 20th century, only Switzerland and Canada had adopted this combination of territorial autonomy and o?cial language status for sub-state national groups. Since then, virtually all western democracies that contain sizeable sub-state nationalist movements have moved in this direction, 286 Ethnicities 11(3) including the adoption of autonomy for the Swedish-speaking Aland Islands in Finland after the First World War, autonomy for South Tyrol and Puerto Rico after the Second World War, autonomy for Catalonia and the Basque Country in the 1970s, for Flanders in the 1980s, and devolution for Scotland and Wales in the 1990s. In each case, the adoption of territorial autonomy for nationalist groups was initially controversial. But we now have su?cient experience to say that this model can indeed be a vehicle for ‘citizenization’, as Tully calls it (Tully, 2001: 25). Where it has been adopted in the West, the historic relations of animosity between states and national minorities have been reduced and replaced with relations of democratic citizenship. To prove this would require hard data on the quality or resilience of relations of democratic citizenship, which we lack, but consider four relevant indicators of ‘citizenization’: 1. Peace and individual security: the multination federations referred to above are managing to deal with their competing national identities and nationalist projects with an almost complete absence of violence or terrorism by either the state or the minority.6 2. Democracy: ethnic politics is now a matter of ‘ballots not bullets’, operating under normal democratic procedures, with no threat of military coups or authoritarian regimes that take power in the name of national security. Assignment: Integration Multiculturalism & Immigration in Canada 3. Individual freedom: these reforms have been achieved within the framework of liberal constitutionalism, with ?rm respect for individual civil and political rights, including freedom of speech, conscience, political dissent, and, increasingly, gay rights, gender equality and so on. Since sub-state governments are subject to the same constitutional constraints as the central government, they have no capacity to restrict these individual freedoms in the name of maintaining cultural authenticity or cultural purity, and in any event the evidence suggests they have no wish to do so.7 4. Inter-group equality: multination federalism has promoted equality between majority and minority national groups, understood here as non-domination, such that one group is not systematically vulnerable to the domination of another group. Equality in this sense is multidimensional, and can be assessed along economic, political and cultural lines. Multination federalism has helped create (i) greater economic equality between majority and minority; (ii) greater equality of political participation and in?uence, so that minorities are not continually outvoted on all issues; and (iii) greater equality of cultural respect and recognition, re?ected for example in more equitable recognition of the minority’s language and culture in public space, and in reduced levels of prejudice and discrimination between groups. In short, the historic patterns of economic disadvantage, political subordination and cultural marginalization that have characterized national minorities have been reduced. Kymlicka 287 Measured by these criteria, the model of multination federalism emerging in the West seems successful in accommodating minority nationalism in a way that deepens relations of liberal-democratic citizenship, reducing inter-group hierarchies while protecting individual freedom.8 And yet this is a distinctive form of citizenization, which requires us to rethink standard ideas of political community, including the ideas of citizenship that have informed the new citizenship agendas. As I noted earlier, traditional conceptions of democracy presuppose that the state is the embodiment of a single ‘nation’ or ‘people’ that is the bearer of rights of self-determination exercised through popular sovereignty. Democracy requires a consensus that citizens form a singular sovereign people. This presupposition has been implicit even in ‘multicultural’ models of citizenship … Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10

Read more
Enjoy affordable prices and lifetime discounts
Use a coupon FIRST15 and enjoy expert help with any task at the most affordable price.
Order Now Order in Chat

Start off on the right foot this semester. Get expert-written solutions at a 20% discount