MULTI MEETS POLY: Multiculturalism and Polyculturalism Go On a First Date – Lake Forester

2015/02/05 Leave a comment

Another example of the plasticity of words, and how definitions can be ‘twisted’ to suit the arguments of the writer, with the introduction of  a new term, polyculturalism.

However, the play Multiculturalism and Polyculturalism Go On a First Date (34 minutes), seems like a good vehicle to explore identities and relationships:

What is multiculturalism? Multiculturalism refers to the cultural diversity of communities. As an idea, it promotes the understanding that society is comprised of distinct cultural communities that should be afforded agency, sometimes even self-determination or autonomy, typically within an institutionalized framework – the state, the corporation, the university, the organization, etc.

What is polyculturalism? Polyculturalism refers to the interchange between cultures. As an idea, it promotes the understanding that society is comprised of fluid cultural communities that continuously intersect and redefine themselves through processes of dynamic interchange. Unlike multiculturalism, polyculturalism is less adaptable to public policy and organizational rubrics, and more rooted in voluntary, often times spontaneous, engagements.

MULTI MEETS POLY: Multiculturalism and Polyculturalism Go On a First Date – Lake Forester.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

ICYMI: Moving past diversity: RBC’s journey to rid its upper ranks of ‘unconscious bias’

2015/02/04 Leave a comment

Good interview with outgoing RBC CEO Gord Nixon and taking diversity and inclusion to the next level and making people aware of unconscious bias. Well worth reading:

Diversity is about mix. Inclusion is really putting that mix to work for you. This unconscious-bias work, when we started last year, we had (esteemed scholar and co-author of Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People) Dr. Mahzarin Binaji come and speak with our senior leadership team and other employees. We really felt it was the next frontier of this work — trying to get to the more subtle issues and the more politically incorrect or more difficult to speak about (because bias is not an easy thing to talk about). We are working to really get people to become self-aware. And I think along with that it’s also realizing that having a bias doesn’t make you a bad person. We all have them. What’s important is recognizing them and then looking for ways to actually mitigate those biases. We’re doing this in a number of different ways. One is just for individuals — influential individuals (people who make important decision in the company). We really had a lot of our senior people go through this awareness building. I hear leaders say, “I was putting together a team to be working with this important client and as I was looking at people I was going to select, I realized that I was actually looking for somebody like me.” That’s often what your natural bias is.

I think maybe to provide a very practical example. Sometimes you find people assuming that a woman with young children won’t accept a promotion that involves travel because you heard about some woman who did it. The answer there is, don’t assume that. Ask the woman if she is interested in being a candidate for a role that involves travel. Our assumptions and our biases get us there automatically. Or, you think, “This is a new immigrant and why is it relevant to understand how they do banking in a different country?”. Actually, it’s very relevant because we have new immigrants coming to this country and understanding how they do banking allows us to serve them better. So, those are the practical aspects, practical issues that we try to address when they actually happen by having good processes.

You need somebody else to be there and stop you and say, “Hey, I think we might have a bias here” and by making this a more common language in our organization — by talking about it and by having the sessions — it gives you permission to have those conversations and it just makes it easier to go there where sometimes you’re not sure or you don’t want to offend people. This just makes it part of how we do business.

Moving past diversity: RBC’s journey to rid its upper ranks of ‘unconscious bias’ | Financial Post.

The report, by RBC and EY, also well worth reading:

Outsmarting our brains: Overcoming hidden biases to harness diversity’s true potential 

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

New Atheists are wrong about Islam. Here’s how data proves it – Salon.com

2015/02/04 2 Comments

Interesting study by Steven Fish of Berkeley on his study and book, Are Muslims Distinctive?: A Look at the Evidence, finding less difference between Muslims and others than commonly believed:

I [Fish] found that Muslims in general are less distinctive than many of us think. In many ways there is really very little difference between Muslims and everybody else. Sometimes I use “everybody else” as the reference category, and sometimes I use Christians in particular, because Christianity and Islam are by far the world’s biggest faith traditions…

Even in some areas in which we expect … I didn’t find a great deal of difference. For example, many people think that Muslims are really intent on fusing religious and political authority, that there’s really no room in Islamic thinking for independent civic sphere that is not run by religious authorities, and in which religious authority and doctrine predominate, meaning there’s little room for an independent civil society and public sphere. Well, I found in this survey data that … Muslims and Christians don’t differ very much on this question, and that most Muslims, once one controls for everything that needs to be controlled for in these statistical analyses, actually do not want to fuse religious and political authority…

Some, of course, do. Some absolutely do. But some Christians do as well … There are many American Christians who are skeptical about dividing church and state rigorously. That’s true for many Muslims as well. But a majority of both Christians and Muslims seem to embrace at least some separation of sacred and secular in politics. That’s one finding that was perhaps surprising and also showed that Muslims are less distinctive than we might think.

Another finding that showed that Muslims were less distinctive than we might think looked at … membership in organizations, all kinds of things that we would use to actually measure social capital — interpersonal trust, for example. We find there that there really is little or no difference between those Muslims and everyone else.

There’s some questions by which I did find evidence of Muslim distinctiveness. For example, gender inequality; I find in the data that there are big problems in the Muslim world relative to other regions, and among Muslims relative to people of other faiths when it comes to gender inequality. It seems that there are lower workforce participation ratios — that is, female-to-male and earned-income ratios — among Muslims than among non-Muslims, generally speaking, which means that women tend to work less and earn less than men do in Muslim countries to a greater extent than they do elsewhere. I also find other evidence of gender discrimination …

Generally speaking, women should outlive men by several years. I found that that gap is somewhat smaller in predominantly Muslim societies, which is a red flag and shows that perhaps there are gender discrimination problems that run more deeply than in predominantly non-Muslim societies.

New Atheists are wrong about Islam. Here’s how data proves it – Salon.com.

Filed under Religion Tagged with , ,

The perils of counterterror overreach – Yakabuski

2015/02/03 Leave a comment

Valid points by Konrad Yakabuski:

Since the attacks, there have been more than 200 similar outbursts among students, mostly Muslim teenagers protesting during a new mandatory moment of silence in public schools in memory of the January terror victims. The French government’s response to this backlash from minority students is a 250-million-euro plan to enhance the teaching of “the values of the Republic” in public schools.

The measures also include designating Dec. 9 as a new official “Day of Secularism” in honour of the 1905 law enshrining the separation of church and state. The same law guarantees freedom of religion, but that aspect gets short shrift from the French establishment and opinion-makers, for whom the law is primarily a guarantee of freedom from religion.

If France was really being true to its republican values, however, it would be celebrating its pluralism after the attacks. The reason French law bans the collection of census data on race, ethnicity and religion is not because the state is supposed to be officially blind to such distinctions; at its origin, the law was meant to shield minorities from discrimination.

Faced with a growing Muslim minority and what Prime Minister Manuel Valls recently called a “territorial, social, ethnic apartheid,” France’s adherence to its own values is being challenged. Many French believe Islam and republicanism are incompatible. But what’s really incompatible are republicanism and anti-terror laws that criminalize unrepublican opinions.

Canada is facing largely the same challenge as France. Let’s hope we strike a better balance.

The perils of counterterror overreach – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Radicalization, Security Tagged with , ,

World Hijab Day: Multiculturalism in practice | Fort McMurray Today

2015/02/03 Leave a comment

Another example of multiculturalism in practice, encouraging greater awareness of the identities and practices of others.

But one note of caution, the assertion by Malik-Khan that its ‘mandatory for practising Muslim women.’ If the hijab is a matter of choice, it is not also a choice to be a practicing Muslim without wearing the hijab while following the  five pillars of Islam?

Locally, women are encouraged to try on a hijab — a display was set up in celebration of World Hijab Day, Sunday at Peter Pond Mall — and experience it before judging it.

“When you try it, you can speak intelligently to it,” said Kiran Malik-Khan, Word Hijab Day YMM president and organizer. “You can say, ‘I tried it and this is how I felt.’”

While Malik-Khan say it’s mandatory for practising Muslim women, she says it’s done with honour and not a symbol of oppression.

“My hijab is not for discussion. This is not something you discuss; not in government, not in lunch rooms,” Malik-Khan said of her personal decision to wear the hijab. “Oppression is really a stereotype, (that) somebody’s forcing us. Is it the father, is it the husband, is it the brother? The answer is, nobody should be forcing it on us. It is by choice and it is with heart in mind.”

The head scarf is an important aspect of a Muslim woman’s modesty, completely covering her hair and neck. When paired with full sleeves and covered legs, only the face, hands and feet are visible.

World Hijab Day: Multiculturalism in practice | Fort McMurray Today.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Multiculturalism Is Not Dead

2015/02/02 Leave a comment

Rumours of the death of multiculturalism and related policies are exaggerated according to this recent European study:

Countries will create formal policies for citizenship and declare the issue resolved, but that does not mean citizenship is really possible. The authors found that, even in countries such as Denmark and Germany where multiculturalism was never formally adopted, some public policies were being developed to recognize minority communities and facilitate their participation in the labor market, educational systems and other key social sectors at local and national levels.  Europeans love to insist that Americans should just give amnesty to people who got into the United States illegally but they won’t even give citizenship to their legal residents.

In countries where some multiculturalism has formally been adopted, such as the UK and the Netherlands, the picture was more mixed but showed that newer approaches, such as civic integration – including citizenship education, naturalization ceremonies and language classes – also built on and developed multiculturalism rather than erasing it. National identities have been remade in light of it – players of Indian descent can even get on the British cricket team now.

Dr. Nasar Meer, a Reader in Comparative Social Policy and Citizenship at the University of Strathclyde, lead author of the paper, said, “As European societies have become more diverse, the task of developing an inclusive citizenship has become increasingly important. In recent years, however, there has been a backlash against multiculturalism as path to achieving this.

“The reasons for this include the way that, in some countries, multiculturalism is seen to have facilitated social fragmentation and entrenched social divisions, while for others, it has distracted attention away from socio-economic disparities or encouraged a moral hesitancy amongst ‘native’ populations. Some have even blamed it for incidents of international terrorism.”

Dr. Daniel Faas, of Trinity College Dublin’s Department of Sociology, a co-author of the research, said, “Legislations have become more inclusive of diversity, and the large anti-far right demonstrations highlight the solidarity with migrants, but also show that multiculturalism is a fragile concept there.”

Meer added, “Our study clearly shows that, where there have been advances in policies of multiculturalism, these have not been repealed uniformly, or on occasion not at all, but may equally have been supplemented by being ‘balanced out’ in, or thickened by, civic integrationist approaches.”

Reinforces the Kymlicka analysis of the ongoing multicultural integration policies being implemented.

Multiculturalism Is Not Dead.

Filed under Integration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , , ,

For the Parti Québécois, bad habit dies hard

2015/02/02 Leave a comment

Martin Patriquin on the PQ internal politics regarding the resurrection of the Values Charter and related positioning:

The introduction of Drainville’s charter proposal in the fall of 2014 unleashed one of the more divisive chapters in recent Quebec political history. In one example, Quebec actress and pro-charter spokesperson Janette Bertrand said the province needed such a thing because Muslim doctors allowed women to “die faster.” It was all for naught for the PQ, pollster Claire Durand notes. “The charter was never strong enough to drive votes to the PQ. What drives votes in the Gaspé is the price of lobster, not whether a woman wears a hijab at the licence bureau.”

The charter’s lack of electoral oomph suggests the PQ’s return to identity politics is something bigger than crass politicking; perhaps the party has truly realized the limitations of its appeal to immigrants and non-francophones. At any rate, Drainville’s foray has the support of several sovereignist tenors, including Gilles Duceppe. The former Bloc Québécois leader criticized Drainville’s original charter during the last election campaign. He has since changed his mind.

“I think we need a charter,” Duceppe says. And because the Liberal government relies on the votes of religious minorities, Duceppe says only the PQ is poised to pursue the goal of state secularism. “Already, the ethnic vote isn’t very strong with the PQ. They come here from troubled countries, and they don’t want further problems,” he says. “They didn’t come to Canada for the weather.”

For the Parti Québécois, bad habit dies hard – Macleans.ca.

Filed under Charte des valeurs québécoise, Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Are you a jihadist? France’s checklist includes questions about diet, wardrobe and not listening to music

2015/02/02 Leave a comment

Stop jihadism - French

France’s latest effort to counter radicalization:

The chart presents a series of behavioural changes that supposedly ought to lead to concern. They range, it has to be said, from the obvious (frequently visiting extremist web sites) to the rather vague (not listening to music, for example). Other warning signs include a significant shift in one’s diet, the abandoning of sporting activities, a change in wardrobe toward more traditional garments, falling out with old friends and quitting school or one’s job.

This all makes sense, though it hardly presents a foolproof guide to spot the radicalization of a would-be jihadist. I’ve recently succumbed to a number of these behaviours myself — I’ve been lousy at going to the gym and often lose my headphones — but I don’t think you need to report me to the French government. And terrorists are often far more clever about concealing their agenda.

The chart risks the sort of mockery we’ve already seen leveled at the U.S. State Department’s “Think Again, Turn Away” campaign, which trolls jihadists and jihadist sympathizers online. Some analysts have called the effort “embarrassing” and “ineffective.”

The State Department, so far, seems undeterred. On Wednesday, it welcomed France’s campaign into the fold.

Are you a jihadist? France’s checklist includes questions about diet, wardrobe and not listening to music

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with ,

C-51 Commentary

2015/02/02 Leave a comment

Three of the most interesting commentaries on C-51, thankfully given the relatively neutral title of The Anti-Terrorism Act, 2015 rather than the usual ‘bumper-sticker’ slogan titles.

Starting with John Ivison in The National Post:

The CSIS changes are sweeping, handing the spy agency many functions that previously had to be carried out by the police. The briefing documents provided by the government offered up an example of a 21-year-old Canadian citizen, who has become disenchanted with his home life, has been viewing Youtube videos of radical imams and acquired al-Qaeda literature. Individuals in his local mosque have advised CSIS he is planning to travel abroad to engage in terrorist activity. Currently, CSIS can investigate but it is forced to hand on its findings to the RCMP for the Mounties to launch their own investigation. Under the new bill, CSIS could meet with the individual to advise him they know what he is planning to do and advise him on the consequences of further action.

This sounds fair enough – the agency is authorized only to take “proportional” measures to disrupt threats and would need a court warrant whenever threat disruption measures contravene Charter rights. But who is watching the spies to make sure they comply with their mandate? The Security Intelligence Review Committee is charged with examining the performance of CSIS but SIRC is not without its own critics. This, remember, is the organization that used to be headed by alleged fraudster, Arthur Porter.

There have been calls in the past to have CSIS policed by an all-party parliamentary committee of MPs to allay fears of sinister behaviour. A beefed up oversight function should have accompanied the expansion of CSIS’s powers.

Canada remains remarkably resilient to terrorism, largely because the fairness of its justice system and the robustness of its institutions mean its citizens are less likely to become disaffected to the point of armed insurrection.

The security services are the last line in our defences. Whether handing them enhanced powers will strengthen our democracy, as the Prime Minister maintains, will depend entirely on how they are utilized.

John Ivison: Harper terror legislation has possibility to disrupt a balance that has served Canadians remarkably well

And Andrew MacDougall, former PM spokesman:

Returning to reality, the Conservatives have the most popular position on terror (get tough), and Harper the most credibility, but the issue will tempt them into the kind of behaviour that irks Canadians. Canadians want something done on this file, but they don’t want their prime minister to lead a jihad on his political opponents.

The temptation to haul Justin Trudeau to the rhetorical woodshed will be strong. No one in Conservative circles has forgotten Trudeau’s “root causes” talk in the immediate aftermath of the Boston bombing, or when he whipped out his puerile remarks during the debate over Canada’s mission to combat ISIL. If past is prologue, the anti-terror debate has “bimbo eruption” written all over it.

Perhaps seeking to avoid these attacks, early indications are that the Liberals are thinking of supporting the government’s plans. The Liberals should, however, think twice about ducking the debate entirely.

For Trudeau, this debate represents a chance to put on his big boy pants and offer an opinion — and maybe even a policy — on a serious subject. Canadians have every right to know what a prospective Liberal government would do to dismantle jihadi networks. Punting to a critic, like he did for most of the Iraq war debate after getting singed for his wiener joke, won’t cut it.

Of course, another reason for Trudeau to support the government is to put some distance between himself and Tom Mulcair’s New Democrats. It will be in Mulcair’s political interest to go full kumbaya in this debate, and consolidate support on the left, but he should also consider putting his considerable prosecutorial skills to the service of crafting an effective bill.

It is up to the government to set the tone and early indications are not good. The prime minister would do well to be guided by the two inconvenient facts, and discard the political truth. Bending your opponents over a political barrel can be good sport, but the outcome of the terror game is too important to cave in to partisanship.

Protecting citizens is a core duty of a government. Harper is the government, and so the benefits of a solid bill, even one that incorporates constructive suggestions from his political opponents, will accrue to him, and will serve him well in his bid for re-election.

  MacDougall: Let’s avoid pantomime in the terror debate

Kent Roach and Craig Forcese offer one of the better analysis I have seen on the Bill:

All this will be ironed out with time and court proceedings. But until then, the risk is a widespread perception that CSIS can act beyond the law if a judge is onside.

Another concern is how to read this new law alongside earlier CSIS changes that are still before Parliament. The new powers to disrupt will fuse with the earlier bill’s broad power to shelter informants from identification before the courts. Sweeping source privilege was a bad idea before. Then, we feared it would impede Canada’s ability to secure convictions, especially in foreign terrorist fighter cases. Now, we imagine source privileges for agents provocateurs, as CSIS becomes more than an intelligence collection agency.

The most striking omission in this law project is the stubborn failure to streamline the review bodies for CSIS and other security services so they can work together and reach more government conduct. The government keeps pressing “go” on more powers while mouthing unpersuasive speaking points about how our tattered review process is state of the art. The changes to preventive-arrest and peace-bond provisions sit better with us, but many will seem them as extraordinary. Preventive arrest will not be easier to justify and can be extended with judicial approval for an additional four days, for a total of seven. This is mild by international standards, but detention without charge is controversial. There is nothing that regulates what happens during the seven days. Expect its use to fuel a constitutional challenge.

A new peace-bond provision is included, changing the standard from reasonable grounds to fear a person “will” commit a terrorism offence to the slightly more permissive “may.” This lowers the standard, but it was already low. The change may or may not have made a difference when a prosecutor told police they didn’t have enough evidence for a peace bond against Martin Couture-Roleau, who later carried out the Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu attack. No one is saying much about that case.

In sum, the bill could have done much more to square security with liberty.

 Red, yellow lights for security measures 

Filed under Multiculturalism

Corrections Canada reverses course on chaplains

2015/02/02 Leave a comment

Good. And trust that a mix of religions, reflecting the diversity of the prisoner population, will be the result:

After three years of cuts, the Correctional Service of Canada says it is now looking for new community chaplains to work with former inmates.

The department told the Star this week it will be hiring 27 part-time positions in 21 cities across Canada. The one-year contract positions have the option of being renewed until 2020.

The surprise decision comes a week after the Star wrote about how federal government cuts to community chaplains resulted in the loss of dozens of part-time positions, with many chaplains opting to work for free so that they could continue helping parolees who needed guidance.

In explaining the hires, CSC spokesperson Sharon Pieris said in an email that chaplains contribute to “spiritual and religious growth and provide an essential link between the re-integrating offender and their community.”

Corrections Canada reverses course on chaplains | Toronto Star.

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →