"Reasonable accommodation" is all the rage now here in Quebec. Once again, it is this province leading the way in challenging - or at least debating - contemporary prevailing ideals in this country.
The debate cuts right to the heart and viability of multiculturalism - something that was never popular in Quebec to begin with. There is something deliciously contradictory in this given that Quebecers remain suspicious of English-speaking Quebecers! I am not encouraged by this fact.
Nevertheless, most Quebecers seem to think along "republican" lines and see the assimilation of cultures best absorbed with the melting pot theory prevalent in the United States.
Allegiance to two worlds is functional in theory and up to a point. When faced with a decision who do you think most people side with? Canada or their homeland? I suspect most, when they ponder hard and remove their understandable emotional ties, would side with Canada. One litmus test I like to use is if Canada plays someone in soccer who would you pull for?
Can a nation truly build a nation on the construct of multiculturalism in a country already fractured along provincial lines?
Canada may have taken on too much in search of the just society. It deserves credit for trying but is it working?
This is a young, immature society - and I don't mean this in a bad way. We chose the multicultural path because in part we failed to properly define the Canadian identity and superficially rejected the melting pot theory.
Either you go with Pierre Elliott Trudeau's vision of Canada (which included the multicultural theory) or the Franklin Theodore Roosevelt model - one which I am partial too. FDR once said being American is not a matter of race or origin but a matter of the heart.
Doesn't the melting pot theory address better the ideal of bleeding all the colours of the world into one the best?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.