|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Multicultural
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
It's Australia Day tomorrow, so there's a fair amount of patriotic tub-thumping about in different forms.
One form I found rather interesting was the notion that we are now a very multicultural nation. Somewhat ironic given our firmly 'White Australia' past.
But there was a statistic cited that particularly got my attention: the number of people in Australia born outside of Australia.
It's 27 per cent. And while I did know this, I hadn't realised how unusual that was until this time around comparisons were given. With the figures being:
Australia 27%
Canada 19.8%
USA 13%
UK 11%
Germany 8.7%
France 5.8%
The article by Malcolm Turnbull (a politician) goes on to describe us as the most successful multicultural society in the world, and it also observes that we do not regard national identity by reference to common race, ethnicity, religion or cultural background - unlike most other countries. He does note the USA as a notable exception.
I'm curious to know what other people think about all this. I suspect the perception of Australia overseas is not especially of a multicultural country, it's of a bunch of vaguely racist colonials.
I also wonder whether people elsewhere see their own countries' national identities as being built around race/ethnicity/religion. I'm certainly of some claims in Europe that multiculturalism has failed - such remarks are often reported here in Australia, including in Turnbull's article, precisely to claim that we're not Europe.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Pure tub-thumping. I see the same articles on Canada Day.
quote:
The article by Malcolm Turnbull (a politician) goes on to describe us as the most successful multicultural society in the world, and it also observes that we do not regard national identity by reference to common race, ethnicity, religion or cultural background - unlike most other countries. He does note the USA as a notable exception.
You forgot Canada. It also depends on how you want to treat Quebec; Australia has no state equivalent to a French-speaking province with a unique and different culture than the rest of the country. Which is why I am carrying a proposal on the bilingualism of Supreme Court of Canada appointees to the NDP Convention in Montreal so that the Tories and the Bloc Quebecois cannot use it as a base identity politics wedge to pry the newly-minted French Quebec NDP away from the English NDP. Because I know it will be as issue in 2015.
It is because of Quebec that Canadian immigration policies were never as restrictive as the White Australia policy was. Quebec's MP's and Quebec votes, always crucial to forming a government, would never allow immigration to be restricted to British-only. Hence we always took Europeans of any sort. We did get very, very nasty with various Asian Exclusion Acts and the Japanese Internment camps in WWII. We just stopped a degree short of you, which isn't being self-complimentary.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Hey, I didn't forget Canada. Malcolm did. In fact, when I was reading the article the first time I literally thought 'what about Canada?' in the middle of that part. Especially as he'd already cited the statistics that showed Canada is well above the proverbial land of immigrant opportunity, the USA, in the percentage of foreign-born.
I actually tend to consider Canada as the nearest thing around to a direct comparator for Australia in a very large number of respects. There are still differences, of course, but we have an enormous number of historical and demographic similarities as well.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
When I first arrived in Australia (1971) I heard an anecdote about an American talking to an Australian:
Australian: "We like our migrants. We call them New Australians."
American: "Oh, we call ours Americans"
Your Pommie Australian
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Well, as a lawyer you should enjoy the fact that Canada beats Australia on one account: civil law.
Quebec uses its own Civil Code, descended from the French law in place in 1763 (NOT a copy of the French Code of 1803). The other provinces use English common law. The Supreme Court of Canada is bijural, it hears appeals both of Quebec Civil Code matters and of common-law matters.
For common-law appeals, the full court of nine sits. For Civil Code appeals, a short bench of the three Quebec justices and two justices from the common-law provinces hears the appeal.
Australia isn't bijural. You also don't have a bilingual national legislature. The age of monolingual federal party leaders is over, it had a fatal wound in the 1960's and died utterly in the 1990's. A federal party leader must be bilingual in order to stump in Quebec and have a realistic shot of being Prime Minister.
Stephen Harper is the first prime minister in Canadian history to form a majority government without Quebec (outside of the Conscription Crisis of 1917). When you can't compete in 65 of 308 seats your campaign is going nowhere.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I will ask this about Australians: Why are all the ski lift attendants in the Canadian Rocky Mountains from Australia? Okay, this is over stated at the level of "all", but the majority certainly appear to be from that fine country. I just don't know why. I have asked repeatedly, and the answers are "dunno" and "we like it here", which seems a little thin on the explanatory power.
The other thing I'd note about Australia is how they almost look like Bavarians, when they wear a suit and tie, but short pants and knee socks. My experience of both Australians and Bavarians is of a predilection for meat, usually barbequed, so maybe there's more in common?
----
On SPK's discussion of bilingual Canada issues: we're not really just a country of French and English bilingualism except when Quebec provides the context. It is a curious thing how we are essentially bicultural in the one sense, and multi in another. Particularly, the bicultural idea is felt as exclusionary in some places with large First Nations (aboriginal) populations.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
Who wears short pants and knee socks? Not in Australia, at least not since about 1975.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Latchkey Kid
Shipmate
# 12444
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
The other thing I'd note about Australia is how they almost look like Bavarians, when they wear a suit and tie, but short pants and knee socks.
Not very multicultural is it. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
They must be trying to look like locals. They don't wear knee socks much in Australia.
--------------------
'You must never give way for an answer. An answer is always the stretch of road that's behind you. Only a question can point the way forward.'
Mika; in Hello? Is Anybody There?, Jostein Gaardner
Posts: 2592 | From: The wizardest little town in Oz | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I will ask this about Australians: Why are all the ski lift attendants in the Canadian Rocky Mountains from Australia?
Because OUR mountains are quite small and crappy.
EDIT: I quite like them, but anyone who gets seriously into skiing or snowboarding is going to move elsewhere. Canada is a very enticing prospect for a young snow-seeking Aussie.
[ 25. January 2013, 02:37: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Canada passed the Citizenship Act in 1947 which separated "Canadian Citizen" from "British Subject". I understand it caused no end of problems in British nationality law.
We went into the "Multiculturalism" thing earlier as it matched up nicely with English/French accommodation agenda, tying immigration neatly into purely domestic politics.
Don't worry if you don't understand it, Quebec is the Bermuda Triangle of Canadian politics: the usual rules of political physics do not apply there and the province's politics defy any rational or coherent explanation. Imagine Queensland and Western Australia mated and produced an unholy offspring with the worst characteristics of both. Joh Bjelke-Petersen meets Western Australia Secession Referendum.
Augustine the Aleut stated earlier that the last traditional round of British immigration to Canada was in 1948. Almost all of the post-war immigration boom here was non-British.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I will ask this about Australians: Why are all the ski lift attendants in the Canadian Rocky Mountains from Australia? Okay, this is over stated at the level of "all", but the majority certainly appear to be from that fine country. I just don't know why. I have asked repeatedly, and the answers are "dunno" and "we like it here", which seems a little thin on the explanatory power.
Australian students love a good gap year after secondary school (the university system allows for most students to take a one year deferral), and getting to combine travel in the winter off-season (cheaper flights) with some work along the way is a good way to make that happen. It comes from a culture of being prepared to work hard and party even harder, working in a crap job is worth it if it funds a trip across Europe or North America.
In winter, Australia does actually have a larger area above the snowline than Switzerland and Austria, but going to the snow in Victoria or New South Wales just isn't the same as going overseas. Crucially, the snow season in the northern hemisphere is during our long summer break.
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
Who wears short pants and knee socks? Not in Australia, at least not since about 1975.
Old bus drivers still hanging around from the government-operated era do in Adelaide, even with a tie!
We did have a large number of German settlers in Adelaide and the surrounding areas during the 19th century, but that's long ago now that they only wear shirts, ties and shorts when the tourists are looking
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I will apologise for the Australian-Bavarian comment, and also knee socks. Though I did hear an Australian speak German once and quite enjoyed the experience. It's actually better than the rather fetching East Indian accented German I heard in Berlin.
There are few multicultural things that are rather worthy of attention. One is Gung Haggis Fat Choy which is an interesting mix of Chinese New Year with Robbie Burns Day. Haggis in wontons for everyone!
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
SPK wrote:
quote:
It is because of Quebec that Canadian immigration policies were never as restrictive as the White Australia policy was. Quebec's MP's and Quebec votes, always crucial to forming a government, would never allow immigration to be restricted to British-only. Hence we always took Europeans of any sort. We did get very, very nasty with various Asian Exclusion Acts and the Japanese Internment camps in WWII. We just stopped a degree short of you, which isn't being self-complimentary.
It should also be read into the record that Quebec was at the forefront of sentiment against Jewish immigration during the interwar period.
This seems to be a whackjob Christian Zionist site, but the book it summarizes is generally considered the standard for its topic.
I don't doubt that Quebecers, in general, would have preferred immigration of eastern European Catholics, such as had settled the prairies during and after the Clifford Sifton era. But I'm gonna speculate that even then, they preferred that most of those immigrants settle in English Canadian areas.
Of course there was widespread anti-semitism and xenophobia in English Canada as well(the aforementioned Clifton was no fan of non-European immigrants, and I'm guessing the Tories were even worse). And the Japanese internment was motivated, at least in part, by west coast racism of the white-anglo variety.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Stetson writes: quote:
I don't doubt that Quebecers, in general, would have preferred immigration of eastern European Catholics, such as had settled the prairies during and after the Clifford Sifton era. But I'm gonna speculate that even then, they preferred that most of those immigrants settle in English Canadian areas.
In Québec, they strongly preferred Belgian and Alsatian immigrants--- they were not keen on immigrants from France as they had imbibed the waters of the godless revolution. Curiously, while the francophone establishment didn't want Jewish immigrants (and F E Blair, the Deputy Minister of Immigration used this as a political key to his opposition to Jewish refugees-- see Irving Abella's "None is Too Many"), those who made it were more accepted by French Canadians than by anglophones. As an example, Jews were readily admited as medical students at the interwar Université de Montréal than at McGill, which maintained a numerus clausus until 1947 (or 1948-- I forget which). In Ottawa of the 1940s and 1950s, Jews were admitted to the Cercle Universitaire, but not easily to the Rideau Club.
The Irish were also warmly welcomed-- fans of effective if maudlin television spots might take note of this, and I have long held that Irish influence on French Canadian culture is not appreciated. Eventually Italians and Portuguese immigrants were accepted.
Québec operates an immigration selection process in concert (sort of) with the feds and in recent years welcomed large numbers of Francophone Africans (which has kept at least one Anglican parish going in Montréal) as well as immigrants from North Africa (now a third of the Jewish community in that province).
I think that, aside from some of the annoyances, the policy has worked well. Like the parallel Australian multiculturalism policy (they took ours and, I think, improved on it in some ways), intermarriage rates are higher, as is the rate of citizenship acquisition, than in the more assimilationist US and French republics. Younger friends of mine, immigrants or the children of recent immigrants, tell me that they believe the policy means that they can be Canadian and not have to abandon their names and identities.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Almost all of the post-war immigration boom here was non-British.
Side-note: Not all of it counts. I have no idea the true percentages, but I know people do use Canada as a way-stop to US immigration. I.E. it is much easier to go from Iran to Canada to the US than straight from Iran to the US.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Almost all of the post-war immigration boom here was non-British.
Side-note: Not all of it counts. I have no idea the true percentages, but I know people do use Canada as a way-stop to US immigration. I.E. it is much easier to go from Iran to Canada to the US than straight from Iran to the US.
An unkind Eritrean friend some time ago expressed herself this topic, saying that after her parents experienced their first winter here, they immediately investigated moving to Texas.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
In Québec, they strongly preferred Belgian and Alsatian immigrants--- they were not keen on immigrants from France as they had imbibed the waters of the godless revolution. Curiously, while the francophone establishment didn't want Jewish immigrants (and F E Blair, the Deputy Minister of Immigration used this as a political key to his opposition to Jewish refugees-- see Irving Abella's "None is Too Many"), those who made it were more accepted by French Canadians than by anglophones. As an example, Jews were readily admited as medical students at the interwar Université de Montréal than at McGill, which maintained a numerus clausus until 1947 (or 1948-- I forget which). In Ottawa of the 1940s and 1950s, Jews were admitted to the Cercle Universitaire, but not easily to the Rideau Club.
I don't doubt that's all true. I wasn't aware of the preference for Belgians and Alsatians, but I suppose it makes sense, given the hostility to French republicanism.
quote:
fans of effective if maudlin television spots might take note of this
An interesting read is The Black Book Of English Canada, by Normand Lester, written as an acerbic, in-your-face response both to the anti-Quebec ramblings of Mordecai Richeler(who hallucinated that the Lower Canada rebels wanted to murder Jews, when in fact they tried to emancipate them), and to what Lester perceives as the self-congratulatory anglo-Canadian narcissism of those TV spots you reference(though I suppose he'd like the one about Quebeckers welcoming the Irish).
Lester's perspective is interesting, given that he writes as a French-speaking Quebec sovereigntist of decidedly non-pur laine descent, his father having been a Jew from Brooklyn.
[ 25. January 2013, 18:23: Message edited by: Stetson ]
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Almost all of the post-war immigration boom here was non-British.
Side-note: Not all of it counts. I have no idea the true percentages, but I know people do use Canada as a way-stop to US immigration. I.E. it is much easier to go from Iran to Canada to the US than straight from Iran to the US.
From memory, that wasn't much of an issue in the 40's, 50's and 60's when all of North America was booming. It had been much more true in the 1890's to 1920's and re-emerged in the 1970's with immigration liberalization.
To celebrate Australia Day, I also have a proposal for the NDP Convention in April that would turn Section 94 of the Constitution Act into our version of the Referral Power in Australia. Reading the Oz Constitution is like constitutional porn for a Canuck.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
In my former Real Life, I was required to do an analysis of Normand Lester's book, which I found to be as bad as Mordecai Richler's article, albeit on the other side. Both were a sad waste of trees.
Normand Lester's comments on the Heritage minutes and their origin and funding were out to lunch with the indicators blinking. As one of the two people who has read the entire funding file -- I know this for a fact-- I found his assertions, at best, outrageous, and better described as badly-written science fiction.
End of rant, barely comprehensible to Canadians, and eminently not-so to anyone else on the planet.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
SPK wrote:
quote:
Stephen Harper is the first prime minister in Canadian history to form a majority government without Quebec (outside of the Conscription Crisis of 1917). When you can't compete in 65 of 308 seats your campaign is going nowhere.
Well, he obviously couldn't compete in those seats in 2011, but his campaign certainly went somewhere, ie. straight to a majority.
I'm no fan of Stephen Harper, but I think the opposition are lulling themselves into a false sense of security if they think that his abysmal standing in Quebec neccessarily means he'll be booted out of office anytime soon. Right now, he's got almost all the seats on the prairies, about 70% of the seats in Ontario, and a little under 60% in BC.
Now, yes, if one of those regions moves out of Harper's column, his off-the-radar status in Quebec could be a problem. But if those regions stay with him, I'm not sure why he need would need to worry about Quebec in the immediate future.
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
In my former Real Life, I was required to do an analysis of Normand Lester's book, which I found to be as bad as Mordecai Richler's article, albeit on the other side. Both were a sad waste of trees.
Normand Lester's comments on the Heritage minutes and their origin and funding were out to lunch with the indicators blinking. As one of the two people who has read the entire funding file -- I know this for a fact-- I found his assertions, at best, outrageous, and better described as badly-written science fiction.
Interesting. I can't quite recall what he said about the funding specifically, though he may very well have been as out-to-lunch as you say. Do you recall what is exact allegations were? I'm guessing he tried to tie it into the sponsorship scandal?
What I found a little off-putting about the book(and this is something Conologue mentioned in his intro) was that Lester seemed to misinterpret various aspects of English Canadian culture as being anti-Quebec. For example, he thought that the Orange Hall is still highly regarded in English Canada, and that the Canadian government has archived anti-Catholic propaganda out of sympathy with it, rather than as historical artifact.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I think Mr Harper is assuming that the 2011 election will repeat itself, with vote-splitting on the centre & left, with Liberal votes sliding his way as well as a little orange NDP bleed.
Where he has changed the landscape is, for the first time in over a century, the Conservatives have the largest single share of the RC vote outside Québec. Mutterings on abortion and SSM trumped the RCC social agenda, but that may not hold forever, given that the Conservatives are unable to deliver anything to that constituency.
Without more than a handful of Québec seats, he must get 170 of the remaining 270 seats to keep his majority. However bitterly the NDP and Liberals dislike each other, I think it safe to say that somehow an arrangement would be made to deny Mr Harper a confidence vote. However, we don't know for certain if: a) he will continue as PM until the next election, or b) how the media will end up treating Justin Trudeau at the next election-- right now they dislike him, but who knows what the flavour du jour will be in two years' time? It will keep the talking heads busy!
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Augustine wrote:
quote:
In my former Real Life, I was required to do an analysis of Normand Lester's book, which I found to be as bad as Mordecai Richler's article, albeit on the other side. Both were a sad waste of trees.
Normand Lester's comments on the Heritage minutes and their origin and funding were out to lunch with the indicators blinking. As one of the two people who has read the entire funding file -- I know this for a fact-- I found his assertions, at best, outrageous, and better described as badly-written science fiction.
Interesting. I can't quite recall what he said about the funding specifically, though he may very well have been as out-to-lunch as you say. Do you recall what is exact allegations were? I'm guessing he tried to tie it into the sponsorship scandal?
What I found a little off-putting about the book(and this is something Conologue mentioned in his intro) was that Lester seemed to misinterpret various aspects of English Canadian culture as being anti-Quebec. For example, he thought that the Orange Hall is still highly regarded in English Canada, and that the Canadian government has archived anti-Catholic propaganda out of sympathy with it, rather than as historical artifact.
Basically, he did try to link it to the sponsorship scandal-- PM me for details, if you wish. The files, in spite of my attempts to put Preserve Forever on them, were trashed with our regular ten-year cull of funding files, so as far as I can figure out, I'm of the very fews sources on this still breathing.
Lester profoundly misunderstood anglophone Canada, as Richler profoundly misunderstood the city and society in which he lived. I recall sitting in my little cubicle drawing up my notes, wishing I were permitted to have a bottle of Lagavulin 16-year old to calm me.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
quote:
Lester profoundly misunderstood anglophone Canada
Yeah. I get the impression that some Quebec nationalists base their idea of anglo-Canadian prejudice on old-school Westmount Rhodesians and their supposed lackeys in Cite Libre. Like, all the rednecks in Alberta are sitting around mocking Quebec for being a priest-ridden peasant backwater that still worships Duplessis.
Whereas the usual "critique" never really gets much more profound than "G*ddam Quebec, taking all our tax money and forcing everyone to speak French!!" But because the talking-heads on CBC get into the occassional discussion about the influence of Abbe Groulx on Quebec society, the Quebec intelligentsia thinks this is what everyone is talking about in donut shops across Canada.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
poileplume
Shipmate
# 16438
|
Posted
Just a few observations as an insider in that much commented upon Quebec.
Augustine the Aleut: the African francophone’s you mention, do you mean Haitian? For reasons I don’t understand there are many Anglicans amongst them. As you mention they are often very active in Anglican churches.
ilBuddha: using Canada as a way onto the US might have been true in the past but not now. The Canadian economy is so strong plus the tolerance of minorities, particularly Muslims, means that they now stay here.
Stetson et al.: the last federal election in Quebec was very strange. It was very much an anti vote, “pox on all your parties” – excluding that nice Mr Layton. They key is that East Quebec is socially conservative so anything could happen. Our riding is typical – our MP federally is NPD but in the later provincial election it voted CAQ – right of centre.
Much of this had to do with local Quebec issues. As SPK said you’ve got to live here for it to make sense.
However the take out is that the next federal election is very much up for grabs in Quebec. The NPD will certainly fall back – it is a question of how much and who will gain.
My advice is don’t get into Quebec politics as you will never get out.
P.S. Stetson I love your expression ‘Westmount Rhodesians’.
--------------------
Please note I am quite severely dyslexic
Posts: 319 | From: Quebec | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I was imprecise, somehow including the Haitians with the Rwandans and Burundians, with the occasional Sudanese and Congolese. Do remember that Haiti is the largest diocese in TEC.
Certainly, there were Westmountfolk in the 1940s and 1950s cheerfully dissing the local majority as priest-ridden peasants (I recall in the late 1960s hearing older cousins told to cool such comments in the presence of French Canadian professionals). Equally certainly, there were none around when I returned to Canada in the 1980s; currently my younger non-francophone friends socialize and work quite fluently in French.
I cannot tell you how many Québécois professionals I have met who have never travelled to any other province. The majority of Québécois I have met in Europe or on the Camino are unilingual francophone and only see English Canada through the lens of French-language media. Unless they are from bilingual regions (Montréal, the Outouais, l'Estrie and Gaspésie), they are visibly startled to run into an anglophone speaking French.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Reading the Oz Constitution is like constitutional porn for a Canuck.
Must you display sentences like this, dear monitor, when I'm trying to have breakfast? ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Maybe. I've got a neat little proposal which takes care a nasty wedge issue against the French and English NDP. The NDP may have benefitted from a miracle but we are trying our best not to ruin our good fortune.
Actually, I am extremely pleased with the crop of NDP MP's from Quebec. Not one said anything during the Quebec student protests. They would have lost whatever they said, the issue was a provincial one and the solution had to come from Quebec City, but they showed great maturity by being discrete. They have not proved to be leaky and gaffe-prone, quite the contrary.
On Justin, whom I believe isn't up to much, the real issue is whether Liberal party members and the public can discern whether they are voting for Justin the man or just somebody named Trudeau who they expect to take them back to the 1970's when everything made sense. But I believe the Liberal Party lost touch with reality when they tried to draft Mark Carney, our (nearly ex-) Central Banker.
The other issue, if the polls are to be believed, is whether the Liberals can stomach supporting an NDP government with the Liberals as the junior partner. That would be a very, very painful pill to swallow for many Liberals.
I've been reading the Quebec media for the past few months; I read La Presse and enjoy "Et Dieu Crea Laflaque". The thing is that I sense many Quebeckers view English Canada as just as culturally uniform as French Canada is whereas it isn't. We have nine provinces and we disagree as much amongst the English provinces as we do with Quebec. The church diversity that is bog-standard in English Canada just doesn't compute in French, Catholic Quebec where no other wannabe ecclesial community need be considered.
English Canada isn't simply the inverse of French Canada with a different language and Orange Halls.
Anyway, back to Oz. Since multi-culturalism worked so well as an export there, how about a clone of the Charter of Rights? Her Maj'll come and sign it herself and everything!
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
A pox on multiculturalism already, at least in the United States.
Pluralism is the secret sauce.
E pluribus unum, baby. It's on the money.
I agree. If a mere colonial may comment, a worrying trend in the US over the last 20 years has been to classify people by their ancestry - Greek-American, Italo-American and so forth, as if that predetermined a whole range of political and social opinions the person would have. It may be 100 years or more since great-great grandparents set foot on Ellis Island
The same trend is starting here, and it's time it was stopped.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
poileplume
Shipmate
# 16438
|
Posted
SPK wrote: "The church diversity that is bog-standard in English Canada just doesn't compute in French, Catholic Quebec where no other wannabe ecclesial community need be considered."
We have four churches in our town: catholic, catholic, catholic and English catholic, 94% of the population is RCC. The Anglicans are the major protestant denomination, there are three of us.
You see 93% of the population are French and can't speak English.
--------------------
Please note I am quite severely dyslexic
Posts: 319 | From: Quebec | Registered: May 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
SPK wrote:
quote:
But I believe the Liberal Party lost touch with reality when they tried to draft Mark Carney, our (nearly ex-) Central Banker.
The other issue, if the polls are to be believed, is whether the Liberals can stomach supporting an NDP government with the Liberals as the junior partner. That would be a very, very painful pill to swallow for many Liberals.
Not so, SPK. First, there were a few individuals around Scott Brison who thought it was a good idea-- some Liberals does not equal the Liberal Party. Before one entirely dismisses the notion, let us recall three and a half individuals recruited from outside politics to be the man on the white horse saving us all: Mackenzie King, Saint Laurent, Pearson (who was the half), and Trudeau. I don't like the strategy much but, until recently, it has proven remarkably succesful.
I think you underestimate the Liberal Party's interest in getting back into power-- half a cabinet beats another four years of an opposition bench. I think it be an open question if the notion of a joint ministry causes more gastric distress to the NDP or to the Liberals. They have long disliked, and disrespected each other. But the prospect of bouncing out Mr Harper is a powerful matchmaker.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Central Bankers are not supposed to cross the street, so to speak, into electoral politics in any country. Any other party in Canada that pulled that stunt would deserve to be called on the mat for being fools and not knowing the rules of the game. For the Liberals not to know or care about the rules of the game is incredulously silly.
The Liberals can have as many white knights as they want, they just can't come directly from the Bank of Canada. It was a vain attempt by Liberals trying to swing to the Centre-Right. It would also mean the Liberals were abandoning the Left entirely. Which as an NDPer I should cheer.
The NDP might stomach a Liberal coalition because according to polls we'd be the senior partner and it would be Prime Minister Mulcair. But as the British Liberals are learning, junior partner in a coalition means you get taken for a ride and its also a good ticket to oblivion.
Is the Liberal Party really going to enable an NDP Prime Ministership and an NDP ministry? With an NDP Minister of Finance (my personal bottom line) where the NDP calls the shots? Are the Grits really that desperate because you wouldn't have your soul left, let alone the family silver.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:
I will ask this about Australians: Why are all the ski lift attendants in the Canadian Rocky Mountains from Australia? Okay, this is over stated at the level of "all", but the majority certainly appear to be from that fine country. I just don't know why. I have asked repeatedly, and the answers are "dunno" and "we like it here", which seems a little thin on the explanatory power.
I always thought it was the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip that did it.
(from an Indonesian born Australian )
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Augustine wrote:
quote:
Certainly, there were Westmountfolk in the 1940s and 1950s cheerfully dissing the local majority as priest-ridden peasants (I recall in the late 1960s hearing older cousins told to cool such comments in the presence of French Canadian professionals).
I have actually met a few Albertans who bring "Duplessis and the Church" into any discussion of Quebec politics. These would be people born in the 1930s, at the earliest.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
re: the statue of Duplessis in that video. The narrator says that Trudeau refused to distinguish between the reactionary, clerical nationalism of Duplessis, and the more cosmopolitan, progressive variety of Levesque.
What doesn't get mentioned is that Levesque as premier actually took that statue out of storage and put it up in Quebec City. In his autobiography, Levesque(who of course hated Duplessis) tried to make it sound as if this was just an off-hand decision, sorta like the statue was just lying around, so they had to do something with it. More cynical observers saw it as a ploy for the geriatric right-wing vote in the forthcoming referendum.
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
@SPK- I thought I had mentioned that it was not the Liberal Party which had approached Carney. Party apparatuses don't look for leaders that way-- Scott Brison and his friends might, but they do not constitute the LPC. Recruiters from all 3 parties have been known to approach people they shouldn't in the judiciary and the civil service (my late godmother found a judge for Bill Davis). This is very much like Inspector Renault complaining about gambling in the casino.
Both parties will cheerfully abandon all sorts of things to put Stephen Harper in opposition. The horse-trading will cause conniptions everywhere. Who is junior and who is senior will depend on the numbers on election day and, given that we do not know the issues or the personnel, guessing that is a mug's game.
Back to my regularly schedulled insomnia.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og: Thread Killer
Ship's token CN Mennonite
# 3200
|
Posted
Harumph......why is it when ever somebody talks about mulitculturalism in this country, we end up talking about Quebec?
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
That stat about Canada only being 19% born outside of the country hides a bit of a divide.
Vancouver and Toronto tend to be much larger (at one point Toronto was close to 50% born outside the country).
The bigger question to me is how is Australia handling that diversity? I think Canada does well at the micro level of individuals dealing with individuals, but poorly on the macro, with a lot of whipped up fervour by politicians at the "others".
--------------------
I wish I was seeking justice loving mercy and walking humbly but... "Cease to lament for that thou canst not help, And study help for that which thou lament'st."
Posts: 5025 | From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Québec usually comes into the conversation on account of its focus on identity-- once they decided that catholicism was not the defining characteristic, they shifted to language. They were initially (and some still are) threatened by the concept of multiculturalism because it challenged that, and they feared that it was a plot to diminish their place in Canada.
Og's point about the divide between cities of immigrants and the rest of the place is a very important one. Even from Ottawa, where I thought I was accustomed to the presence of immigrant minorities, the larger proportions in Toronto and Vancouver are noticeable. On returning from my travels from more monochrome places, I find myself noticing the diversity here and I see that it has become one of the factors by which I call the place home.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
I hope this isn't a tangent, but I have just read the OP and was struck by this chart of the percentage of Australians based on country-of-origin:
quote:
Australia 27%
Canada 19.8%
USA 13%
UK 11%
Germany 8.7%
France 5.8%
This would not be considered particularly "multicultural" in the U.S. in the early 21st century (though it might have 100 or more years ago).
What strikes me is the Euro-centric nature of immigration to Australia, certainly as compared to recent immigration to the U.S.
Now, I know nothing about this topic as it relates to Australia and have no particular feelings about what caused this trend. But ... could there possibly be a "white flight" element in the population trend reflected in the chart? Or, might it relate to perceptions that Australia is somehow a more open (or possibly egalitarian) society than the countries from which these people have come? Or what?
[ 26. January 2013, 15:15: Message edited by: roybart ]
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
@SPK- I thought I had mentioned that it was not the Liberal Party which had approached Carney. Party apparatuses don't look for leaders that way-- Scott Brison and his friends might, but they do not constitute the LPC. Recruiters from all 3 parties have been known to approach people they shouldn't in the judiciary and the civil service (my late godmother found a judge for Bill Davis). This is very much like Inspector Renault complaining about gambling in the casino.
Both parties will cheerfully abandon all sorts of things to put Stephen Harper in opposition. The horse-trading will cause conniptions everywhere. Who is junior and who is senior will depend on the numbers on election day and, given that we do not know the issues or the personnel, guessing that is a mug's game.
Back to my regularly schedulled insomnia.
I am not and never was referring to the party apparatus or offices, I was referring to the Liberal Party as a movement and Liberals generally. The excuse that it didn't have the "head office" stamp is irrelevant.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I am sorry, SPK, but you were not clear on this. Liberals, yes, but Liberal Party, capitalizing Party, infers that the structure was involved. Curiously, it appears that the Conservatives are most unhappy with the episode as they seem to have thought that Carney, having worked with them so closely, was one of theirs. My interlocutor mischievously noted that working with them closely would have guaranteed that he wasn't. *end of tangent*
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by poileplume:
SPK wrote: "The church diversity that is bog-standard in English Canada just doesn't compute in French, Catholic Quebec where no other wannabe ecclesial community need be considered."
We have four churches in our town: catholic, catholic, catholic and English catholic, 94% of the population is RCC. The Anglicans are the major protestant denomination, there are three of us.
You see 93% of the population are French and can't speak English.
So I take it that you meet for Mattins in the bottle of GIN itself then?
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by roybart:
I hope this isn't a tangent, but I have just read the OP and was struck by this chart of the percentage of Australians based on country-of-origin:
quote:
Australia 27%
Canada 19.8%
USA 13%
UK 11%
Germany 8.7%
France 5.8%
This would not be considered particularly "multicultural" in the U.S. in the early 21st century (though it might have 100 or more years ago).
What strikes me is the Euro-centric nature of immigration to Australia, certainly as compared to recent immigration to the U.S.
Now, I know nothing about this topic as it relates to Australia and have no particular feelings about what caused this trend. But ... could there possibly be a "white flight" element in the population trend reflected in the chart? Or, might it relate to perceptions that Australia is somehow a more open (or possibly egalitarian) society than the countries from which these people have come? Or what?
No, you've misread the chart.
27% of Australians were born in a country other than Australia.
13% of Americans were born in a country other than America.
And Australian immigration is certainly not Euro-centric these days. Asian immigration outnumbers European by 3 to 1.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
Roybart, if you go to the Bureau of Statistics site:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/2071.0main+features902012-2013
you will find a table showing the place of birth of those born overseas. 20% come from the UK, 3.5 % from Italy, 2.8% from South Africa and 2% from Germany. While just over 9% comes from New Zealand, that's scarcely surprising. The remainder from a specified country came from India or East Asia. I would have thought that there would have been a sufficiently large number from Lebanon to warrant an individual figure.
If you delve further into the reason for migration, I suspect that most of those from Europe (and Lebanon) are family reunions. If you look at the median age of migrants from Europe, it is much higher than those from the East Asian countries and India. There was substantial immigration from South Africa in the 1980s, for a combination of reasons -anti-apartheid for some, fear of a majority ruled country for others, economic reasons for a third group. Many from NZ would be looking for work.
To go back to the OP, we observed Australia Day at church by singing the national anthem between the Blessing and the Dismissal. The hymns were (all from Together In Song) 188, 671, 615, and 135. These are all very familiar tunes, but with wording more appropriate to her than the UK e.g., All Things Bright and Beautiful has an unchanged chorus, but the verses refer to indigenous landscapes, flora and fauna. The Intercessions made specific reference to the ancient peoples of the land and our ill-treatment of them.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
