How to Effectively Reconcile Contending Loyalties: Amreen Abdul – Majid Many of the issues that the world faces today are a result of conflict created between contending loyalties. If these conflicts are ignored the results can be extreme, like ultra-nationalism. Fear not there are many actions that an individual can take to resolve conflict between two loyalties. The most effective actions an individual could take to reconcile contending loyalties are reasonable accommodation, reconciliation, and bringing about change into the nation state. Reasonably accommodating different races is one of the quickest methods of resolving conflict between two nations. In Canada, all cultures and religions are to be promoted and respected. With many immigrants …show more content…
In 1988, Balltej Singh Dhillion had to choose one loyalty over another; to serve his country or to serve his religion. However, Dhillion decided to challenge the RCMP policy in court and won his right to serve both his religion and country by wearing a turban and become a successful RCMP officer. The importance of reasonable accommodation is explained by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, “It is in building a peaceful, harmonious society that diversity plays its most dynamic role. It challenges (Canadians) to adapt and relate to one another desire our differences, which encourages understanding, flexibility, and compromise. This makes us resilient – able to accommodate different points of view and see different ways to solve the problem.” Reconciliation is another effective method of settling out issues. This method is important because it makes both nations come to terms with the past and mend issues with mutual feelings. In 1990, the Mohawk’s held a violent protest to stop the expansion of a golf course onto their already limited land. Once the protest had ended, this left the Aboriginals very bitter and the federal government attempted to amend issues between them by purchasing land and giving ownership to the Mohawks. This event is significant because it shows how land settlements can
Multiculturalism policy was first adopted in Canada in 1971, which reaffirms the dignity and value of all its citizens regardless of ethnic origins, race, religious affiliations, or language. Part of this policy, Canada confirms the rights of all the aboriginals along with the recognition of two official languages. Indeed, multiculturalism has great importance since its main purpose is to give equal treatment to all the citizens (Daniel, 2010). It ensures that all individual citizens could still maintain their identities, and have pride with their ancestry. Through this initiative, the Canadian government was able to give their citizens a feeling of self-confidence, making them more open to their diverse cultures. The multiculturalism policy
Glen Coulthard’s “Resentment and Indigenous Politics” discusses the politics of recognition that are currently utilized within Canada’s current framework of rectifying its colonial relationship with Indigenous peoples. Coulthard continues a discussion on reconciliation between Indigenous peoples and the state that recognizes the three main methods of reconciliation: the diversity of individual and collective practices to re-establish a positive self relation, the act of restoring damaged social and political relationships and the process in which things are brought to agreement and made consistent.
Canada is an ethnically diverse country. The notion of "multiculturalism" began circulating in Canada in 1971 and is a word that is now commonly used to define this country, unlike the word "melting-pot" which is used to describe Americans' loss of ethnic identity. The broadcasting system in Canada is pressured by the government to acknowledge the culturally diverse society by broadcasting a fair representation of the population in terms of ethnicity. This is achieved through the many acts that have been passed through parliament: the multiculturalism policy of 1971, the Canadian Multiculturalism Act of 1988, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1982, the Ethnic Broadcasting Policy of 1985, and most recent, the Broadcasting Act of 1991. These legislative and policy frameworks have provided guidelines for the management of Canadia...
Canada’s immigration wasn’t fair at the start of the century. Immigrants and refugees weren’t allowed in Canada. Many restrictions were placed to prevent immigrants to come to Canada. Starting from when the immigration policy of Canada was made “colour-blind” in 1967, Canada’s immigrants started to come from all over the world, especially from Asia. The allowance of more immigrants as a result of the change of immigration policy in 1967 caused Canada’s immigration policy to get fairer.
Today in Canada it is not uncommon to see people of various races, ethnic backgrounds or cultural groups living within a mutual society; commonly known as multiculturalism. Multiculturalism refers to the presence of, or support for the presence of several distinct cultural or ethnic groups within a society. As the topic becomes more more popular due to news events and social media debates, multiculturalism gets twisted and misunderstood. In essence, multiculturalism is not about dwelling on about our differences, it is about emphasizing our commonality. Diversity of the human race has the power to unify society and make it stronger. Firstly, innovation
It is the belief of first nations that the healing process and renewal of relationships are the essential ingredients for the building of healthy First Nations communities. First nations realize that the current justice process does not address the real issues at hand nor does it fit into their traditional forms of achieving justice. In fact, the current justice process systematically removes the offenders from their people and communities effectively severing all ties and ...
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
Despite the overwhelming use in political rhetoric, it is difficult to establish the Government of Canada’s precise definition of reconciliation. It is equally unclear as to what reconciliation entails substantively— as either a process or an outcome —in reconceiving the colonial relationship between Indigenous peoples, Settlers, and the Canadian government. For my Reconciliation Essay, I intend to problematize the very term of reconciliation as used in Canadian politics by drawing primarily on its use in the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s 2008 Residential Schools Apology. I will argue that the concept reconciliation as exercised in the political discourse of federal government is neither a meaningful gesture, nor consistent with Indigenous conceptions of same term. In fact, reconciliation as presented by the Government of Canada serves only as a tool to recolonize Indigenous peoples, in that its connotations leave the colonial relationship largely
Immigration is of great economic and social benefit to Canada. It’s an important role in developing our economy, and it shapes the nation into a multicultural nation. Immigration is a significant role in building our economy, providing growth in the labor force, making a strong economy, and becoming a multicultural nation.
More immigration lead to racism and fear among both English Canadians who believed immigrants were taking away their jobs and French Canadians who feared that immigrants may potentially dominate their culture. These misconceptions and fears lead the Canadian government to declare new regulations that restricted the immigration of Asian and eastern, and southern European descents as well as Jewish immigrants. Canada gave more preference to descendants of both Britain and Western Europe. Policies were then developed to grant access to the best immigrants (as it was called) who were mainly whites that possessed a wealth of skills and benefits but to exclude the non whites who we...
Every year, over 250,000 people make Canada their new home. Attracted by its education system, economy and universal healthcare system, there are few other places in the world like it. All Canadians are guaranteed equality before the law and equality of opportunity, regardless of where they are from. However, some might argue that Canadian policy has not been put into practice as well as it should be. Is the concept of true equality a far-fetched idea? It seems that Canada has taken great measures to promote the integration of immigrants socially, but can the same be said for their integration economically? Politically? To judge whether or not Canada has been successful at promoting the integration of immigrants in these realms, a deeper understanding of Canadian policy must be considered.
...to identity with at least one of the countries predominate languages, English or French, dictated the degree in which they could participate in Canadian life. According to the Commission, this participation was real under two conditions: “that both societies, the French-speaking as well as the English-speaking, accept[ed] newcomers much more rapidly than they have done in the past; and that the two societies willingly allow other groups to preserve and enrich, if they so desire, the cultural values they prize[d]” (RCBB Book 1 xxv). It creates an interesting take on the acceptance of those “othered” groups, as change was necessary not only on the part of the minorities but also from Canada’s French and English-speakers. The Commissions work remains focused on language and culture, more so than ethnicity amongst a bilingual, bicultural and “othered” Canadian society.
Canada is internationally renowned for its commitment to multiculturalism. In fact, Canada was the first nation to officially adopt a multicultural policy. However, while the Canadian government has developed a broad-based multicultural mandate that includes a national human rights code and increased penalties for hate-motivated crimes, and most Canadians oppose overt forms of discrimination and hate, racism continues to exist in Canadian society, albeit in a subtle fashion.
Canada's immigration policies changed many times after the end of WWII. Before WWII the immigration policies were "picky" on the people who wanted to come to Canada, but after, it was fair and equal to everyone. Canada's immigration policies changed drastically from being discriminative to being fair and equal to everyone, every country and race after WWII. This act to eliminating discrimination was successful because of; the introduction of the Point System, the introduction of New Immigration acts/policies, and finally the changes made in accepting Refugees. These action completely changed the immigration policies.
Multiculturalism is a significant fabric of Canadian society that defines its unique identity among the rest of the world. Enactment of the Canadian multicultural policy (1971) affirmed government position and recognition of multiculturalism as a vital element of Canada. It is imperative to understand that multiculturalism is a static concept that keeps changing overtime and has a multidimensional entity. Canadians have always and will continue to revise the concept of multiculturalism to suit the ever expanding needs of Canadian society. In this paper, I will evaluate the reasons behind Canada’s adoption of multicultural policy and assess whether the policy should be maintained or not. I will defend the thesis that Canada’s multiculturalism