{"title":"Canadian Multiculturalism, Identity, and Reconciliation: Evidence from a National Survey","authors":"Kaylee G. Brink","doi":"10.1080/02722011.2023.2220596","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Indigenous-settler reconciliation seems to enjoy widespread support, yet progress has stalled. At the same time, multiculturalism, a concept that celebrates diversity and equality, is a point of pride for many Canadians. Should reconciliation not be included in Canada’s imagining of multiculturalism? This study aimed to analyze the possible relationship between symbols of Canadian multiculturalism and support for further reconciliation using responses to a representative survey of non-Indigenous Canadian adults (n = 5,203). Political affiliation, knowledge of residential schools, and demographic variables were also analyzed. Only one multicultural variable was a predictor of support for further reconciliation efforts, along with measures of political ideology, home language, and views on individual responsibility for reconciliation were meaningful. Components of individual identity are more influential in reconciliation support than the collective (multicultural) identity. This contrasts many claims by citizens and the federal government alike, that multiculturalism is an important part of Canadian identity. The study revealed that while multiculturalism is a touchstone of Canadian identity and pride, it may have a minimal role in reconciliation, positive or negative.","PeriodicalId":43336,"journal":{"name":"American Review of Canadian Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"172 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Review of Canadian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02722011.2023.2220596","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Indigenous-settler reconciliation seems to enjoy widespread support, yet progress has stalled. At the same time, multiculturalism, a concept that celebrates diversity and equality, is a point of pride for many Canadians. Should reconciliation not be included in Canada’s imagining of multiculturalism? This study aimed to analyze the possible relationship between symbols of Canadian multiculturalism and support for further reconciliation using responses to a representative survey of non-Indigenous Canadian adults (n = 5,203). Political affiliation, knowledge of residential schools, and demographic variables were also analyzed. Only one multicultural variable was a predictor of support for further reconciliation efforts, along with measures of political ideology, home language, and views on individual responsibility for reconciliation were meaningful. Components of individual identity are more influential in reconciliation support than the collective (multicultural) identity. This contrasts many claims by citizens and the federal government alike, that multiculturalism is an important part of Canadian identity. The study revealed that while multiculturalism is a touchstone of Canadian identity and pride, it may have a minimal role in reconciliation, positive or negative.
期刊介绍:
American Nineteenth Century History is a peer-reviewed, transatlantic journal devoted to the history of the United States during the long nineteenth century. It welcomes contributions on themes and topics relating to America in this period: slavery, race and ethnicity, the Civil War and Reconstruction, military history, American nationalism, urban history, immigration and ethnicity, western history, the history of women, gender studies, African Americans and Native Americans, cultural studies and comparative pieces. In addition to articles based on original research, historiographical pieces, reassessments of historical controversies, and reappraisals of prominent events or individuals are welcome. Special issues devoted to a particular theme or topic will also be considered.