university of ottawaaix1.uottawa.ca › ~laczko › soc2309-2004.pdf · qualitative: non-numerical...

��

CLASS LECTURE NOTES

� Macrosociology–Big Structures

� Microsociology–Face-to-face interaction

� Social life is structured

� Sociological theory: linked concepts

� Sociological theory: used to analyze empirical data

� Data = systematic observations

�� ! "��#"��$�#

��%��%� !�&%'��' !�#(

��'&!�� "��#"��$�

�)(*�!�� +'�� '�#(

��

� Qualitative: non-numericale.g. speeches, diaries, documents, notes;

participant observation

� Quantitative: e.g. Census of Canada (whole population)

Sample surveys (random sample)

��

++++++++++++++ASSOCIATION

-------+++++++++SOCIAL GROUP

--------------+++++SOCIAL CATEGORY

----------------------STATISTICAL CATEGORY

ORGANI-ZATION

RELATIONSCONSCIOUS-NESS

+++++ presence of characteristic ----- absence of characteristic

�The Canadian ecumene=

total inhabitedareas (see Hiller Figure 1.1)

��

1. LOCALITY

2. ORGANIZATION

3. DURABILITY

4. SELF-IDENTITY

CANADA: AN “IMAGINED COMMUNITY”

� THE PROBLEM OF SOCIETY WITHIN POLITICAL UNITS (p. 7 Hiller)

IN WHAT SENSE IS THIS A « PROBLEM »?--political units (often called states) often

contain multiple subsocieties

��

� ETHNIC GROUP – ETHNICITY (BASED ON ORIGINS, LANGUAGE, RELIGION...)

--------------------------------------------------------Related terms� ‘RACE’ OR RACIAL GROUP

(BOTH BIOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL ASPECTS)

� RACISM-STEREOTYPES (PERCEPTIONS)-PREJUDICE (EVALUATION)-DISCRIMINATION (BEHAVIOUR)

(we will return to these in a few weeks)

� DISCUSSION QUESTION FOR SEPT 27 2004:

� WHAT ARE 3 NOTEWORTHY FEATURES OF CANADIAN SOCIETY, IN YOUR VIEW? DISCUSS THEIR IMPORTANCE.

�� ," �!� (�'�-��$�!�#��$��-�.%/�� )0

, �"�!�� !��1 '�2 ��'�3��"�3��1�$��'� ��)0

��

�4�5�!�� !!)��'#��%#��'��1��%"

�4�6��%"��'#��%#'�##��&� !! ��2�'#��&� �#� ��

� �� , '��/��!�1)� '/� �#�� !�(�$�(�'�0

� ��

��

UNITARY STATES

1 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

+ -------------

+ MUNICIPALITIES-------------------------EXAMPLES:

UNITED KINGDOM*FRANCESPAIN*BELGIUM*ALBANIASLOVAKIA*= IN TRANSITION

FEDERAL POLITICAL SYSTEMS

1 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

+ OTHER REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS(CALLED PROVINCES, STATES, REPUBLICS....)

+ MUNICIPALITIES-----------------------EXAMPLES:

CANADAUNITED STATESAUSTRALIAGERMANYFORMER YUGOSLAVIAFORMER CZECHOSLOVAKIAFORMER U.S.S.R.INDIA

��

3 PARTS

1. CENTER OR CORE 17TH c. HOLLAND18TH c. GR. BRITAIN20TH c. WESTERN EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA, JAPAN

2. SEMIPERIPHERY (COMBINES FEATURES OF CORE & PERIPHERY)

3. PERIPHERY (LESS DEVELOPED AR EAS)

CORE REGIONS OR COUNTRIES USUALLY HAVE i. DIVERSIFIED ECONOMY & LABOUR FORCE (MIX OF PRIMA RY,

SECONDARY & TERTIARY SECTORS)ii. STRONG STATES

��

POLITICAL ORGANIZATION OF WORLD-SYSTEM HAS SHIFTED

-FROM A WORLD-SYSTEM OF EMPIRES -TO A WORLD-SYSTEM OF ‘INDEPENDENT’ STATES

WHERE IS CANADA IN THE WORLD-SYSTEM?

2 PERSPECTIVES:1. FROM PERIPHERY TO SEMI-PERIPHERY2. FROM PERIPHERY TO (PERIMETER OF) THE CORE

��

� Pt2 - Pt1 = (B - D ) + ( I - O)

P = POPULATIONt2 = LATER TIME POINTt1 = EARLIER TIME POINT

B = BIRTHS (FERTILITY)D = DEATHS (MORTALITY) I = IN-MIGRATIONO = OUT-MIGRATION

� B - D = NATURAL INCREASE� I - O = NET MIGRATION

��

LOW (NEAR ZERO)

LOWLOWCONTEMPO-RARY DEVELOPED SOCIETIES

HIGHLOWHIGH (DECLINING)

LESS DEVELOPED CONTEMPORARY SOCIETIES

LOW (NEAR ZERO)

HIGHHIGHTRADITIONAL PREINDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES

RATE OF NATURAL INCREASE

DEATH RATE

BIRTH RATE

LEVEL OF SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

� Show acetate on demographic transition….

��!��

��"��

��#��

ASSESSMENT

IS STAGE 2 NECESSARILY LINKED TO INDUSTRIALIZATION?

– YES, IN HISTORICAL EXPERIENCE OF MANY CURRENTLYDEVELOPED COUNTRIES

– NO, IF ONE LOOKS AT THE REST OF THE WORLD...

– MANY LOW INCOME COUNTRIES HAVE NOT (YET) INDUSTRIALIZED, YET THEIR MORTALITY RATES HAVEDROPPED

– FOOD, MEDICINE, SANITATION, PESTICIDES

5�57��+��+��

,8�!!��"4��0

� Ethnicity, language, and religion are closelycorrelated (British—Protestant) (French—Catholic)

� Earlier settled and rural areas: more homogeneous

� Aboriginal Canadians: North and West� Visible minorities…in large urban areas� French-English bilingualism territorially

concentrated

5�57��+��8�6��+��

��,8�!!��"4��0

� 1. High levels of both immigration andemigration; more immigration west of Quebec

� 2. New sources of immigration since 1960s—changes to Canada’s urban areas

� 3. Natural increase: everywhere, but more important in Quebec and Atlantic provinces

� 4. Aging of the population and itsconsequences, positive and negative

� GO OVER UPDATED TABLES 1.1-1.6 ON ACETATES

� GO OVER UPDATED FIGURES FROM CHAPTER 1..

��$��

��

Leslie S. LaczkoDepartment of Sociology

University of OttawaOttawa, Ontario

Canada K1N 6N5

laczko@uottawa.ca613 562 5800 x1255

prepared for

Thomas D. Hall, ed.A World-Systems ReaderRowman and Littlefield,

Boulder, CO2000

�%&'(��

��!��

��!�)��*+,

1 World-System

5-6 Continents

159 Independent States

656 Major Languages

6876 Ethnic Groups

Source: constructed in part from Boulding (1979:271)

�%&'(�"

��!

��!��*-,.

�/.01/&20/34�35�.0%0(.�6/07/4�67/)7�%0�'(%.0�*,�8(1)(40�35�07(�8382'%0/34�)%4�.8(%9�07(�:%/4�

'%4;2%;(!��*-,.

(131)38%Total World-System

(55)20%Middle East and Africa

(23)30%Asia and Oceania

(26)58%The Americas

(27)63%Europe a

Number of statesIndexRegion

a read: In 63 percent of the 27 states in Europe, at least 90 percent of the population could speak the main language.

Source: Reconstructed from Rustow (1967), table 3.

�%&'(�<

��!��*=,.

* Of which 15 are in Europe.Source: Reconstructed from Wilmer’s summary of United Nations data (1993:56-5, note 12)

164Total number of states 1980s

34Largest group less than

50% of population

64Largest group between 50% and 85% of population

36Largest group between85% and 95% of population

30*Largest group over 95% of population

Number of statesEthnic composition

� SCATTERGRAM FROM LACZKO 1994(in kit of readings)

� ETHNOLINGUISTIC PLURALISM BY GNP PER CAPITA

� EXCEPTIONAL CASES OR � «STATISTICAL OUTLIERS »

��

� THE MODERNIZATION PROCESS, INCLUDING...

-LITERACY-MASS COMMUNICATIONS-UNIVERSAL EDUCATION-INDUSTRIALIZATION-ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

� STATE EXPANSION

-HOMOGENIZATION POLICIES-INCORPORATION OF MINORITIES INTO LARGER

SOCIETY-AGE OF STATE

��)��!��

��

� ETHNIC HOMOGENEITY ‘AN UNUSUAL AND TRANSITORY CONCEPT’

� 1) UP TO 1750: -ALL CIVILIZED SOCIETIES POLYETHNIC AND HETEROGENEOUS

-ONLY BARBAROUS AND BACKWARD LANDS WEREHOMOGENEOUS

WHY? CONQUEST, DISEASE, TRADE

� 2) 1750-1920:-THE TRIUMPH OF NATIONALISM-HOMOGENEITY AN IDEAL; ONLY A PARTIAL REALITY.

� CLASSICAL IDEAL: CITY STATE

� MEDIEVAL TOWN LIFE: ABSORBED RURAL POPULATIONS

� COMMUNICATIONS..POP. GROWTH

� MASS MILITARY MOBILIZATION

� 3) 1920–PRESENT: REASSERTION OF THE POLYETHNIC NORM

� “A RETURN TO NORMAL”-IDEAS-DEMOGRAPHY: STAGE 3 OF DEMOGRAPHIC

TRANSITON-COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN COUNTRIES-MILITARY COOPERATION

�%''%)(��'(:(40�>�4(?(4��(?('38:(40��%021(��1%4)7�

�'%40��3)/(0@A� �/''(1�8�-B�-C��

2 manifestations of uneven development in Canada:

1. Manufacturing concentrated in ‘Golden triangle’2. Regional inequalities

ORIGINS OF BRANCH PLANTS:National Policy of 1879:

1. Tariffs to bring in industry2. Railways3. Immigration to fill West4. Production of wheat for world market

��!��

D��

�� PRIMARY SECTOR 44% IN 1901

7 % IN 1991, 4,8% IN 2001

� SECONDARY SECTOR 27.8% IN 1901

26% IN 1991, 20.8% IN 2001

� TERTIARY SECTOR 27.9 % IN 1901

66% IN 1991, 74.4% IN 2001

WHAT IS UNUSUAL IS THAT IN CANADA, THERE HASNEVER BEEN A PERIOD WHEN THE SECONDARYSECTOR HAS BEEN DOMINANT

��

� CANADA DOES NOT FIT THE PICTURE OF AN ‘INDEPENDENT CAPITALIST SOCIETY’,

� NOR IS IT PART OF THE THIRD WORLD...

� BUT: IT SHARES SOME FEATURES WITH EACH..

� POSSIBLE CRITICISMS OF EMPHASIS ON FOREIGN OWNERSHIP AND FOREIGN INFLUENCE:

-PROMOTES ‘CANADA AS VICTIM’ MENTALITY-ASSUMES ALL ‘INDEPENDENT’ STATES OUGHT TO HAVE AUTONOMOUS NATIONAL ECONOMIES

-UNDERESTIMATES POWER AND IMPORTANCE OF CANADIAN CORPORATIONS WORLD WIDE

�9��:��8�,54;��8�!!��0�'�

��#�� ! ��1�'# �& *� '�� "! '�#

� --CANADA ONCE HAD A THRIVING INDIGENOUS MANUFACTURING SECTOR

� -CAUTIOUS CANADIAN BANKERS PREFERRED TO INVEST IN SAFER ‘MULTINATIONALS’ …

��!��"�

� staples thesis…forward and backward linkages� staples trap

� nationalists versus continentalists

� portfolio (loans and bonds) and direct foreign investment

� brain drain and brain swamp� labour drain and labour swamp

� cultural penetration� split-run editions (Time, Newsweek etc..)� Canadian content (‘cancon’)

� coca-colonization� McDonaldization

� :2'0/4%0/34%'�)31831%0/34.�%4E�(F01%0(11/031/%'/0@

� 73:3;(4/G%0/34�35�)2'021(

� �31E/.:��'3)%'�:%425%)021/4;�531�'3)%'�:%19(0

� 83.0��31E/.:�

� E(/4E2.01/%'/G%0/34

� 4(3�)34.(1?%0/.:�%4E�E(1(;2'%0/34

��<��#��&��&��( +��+'$�#�(�'� � ' /

� ��31(/;4�E/1()0�/4?(.0:(40�/4��%4%E%

� ��%4%E/%4�E/1()0�/4?(.0:(40�%&13%E

.((�5/;21(�"�"�8��+��

= ��H�� 7�8��+�-��>+�

� COLONIES OF SETTLEMENT:

CANADA, USA, AUSTRALIA, N. ZEALAND, ARGENTINA, CHILE, URUGUAY

� COLONIES OF EXPLOITATION:

ASIA, AFRICA, SOUTH AMERICA ESP. PERU

��

-TWO SOLITUDES

-TWO ‘EUROPEAN FRAGMENTS’

-A NEW WORLD ‘SETTLER SOCIETY’

–METROPOLIS (pl. METROPOLI) AND HINTERLAND (S)

–A FRAGILE FEDERATION

–ELITE ACCOMMODATION : A CONSOCIATIONAL DEMOCRACY

– A VERTICAL MOSAIC� – A CLASS SOCIETY

� A BILINGUAL+MULTICULTURAL SOCIETY� A JUST, MORE CARING SOCIETY� A « MIDDLE POWER »

��

2 TYPES OF STRATIFICATION SYSTEMS

� CLOSED: CASTES� OPEN: STRATA, CLASSES

3 KINDS OF SOCIAL MOBILITY

� HORIZONTAL� VERTICAL (UPWARD OR DOWNWARD)� INTERGENERATIONAL

��

�� KARL MARX:

POSSESSION OR NON-POSSESSION OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION

(EX: BOURGEOISIE AND PROLETARIAT)

� MAX WEBER:

MULTIDIMENSIONAL APPROACH� CLASS� STATUS OR PRESTIGE� POWER

BOTH MARX AND WEBER ARE FOUNDERS OF THE CONFLICTPERSPECTIVE...

��!��!��**-

�/''(1��%&'(�<��!�8%;(�=C�

4.6%20%LOWESTQUINTILE

10.0%20%

16.3%20%

24.7%20%

44.5% of total income

RECEIVE20% HIGHESTQUINTILE

��

(c. = cerca = “approximately”)

c. 30 %FORMER COMMUNIST COUNTRIES EASTERNEUROPE

c. 60-70 %BRAZIL, MEXICO

40 - 50 %OTHER INDUSTRIALIZEDCOUNTRIES

44.5%CANADA

� *!��4��7"/ ��?5��'� 1� ��#��*%��'�3��'

+'��(� @%�'��!�#��& (�!��# '/ 7' �� /

+'/�$�/% !#-�� ' / -��A��

1996 44.524.716.310.04.6IncomeShare

43.623.316.711.35.2

HighestQuintile

FourthQuintile

Middle Quintile

Second Quintile

LowestQuintile

5��'� 1� ��#��*%��'�3��' +'��(� ��!�#

�& (�!��#-�� ' / -��

3.95.1Other income

7.12.3Investment income

1.562.1Government transfers

87.530.5Employment earnings

Source of Income (B)

28.01.6Income Share (A)

Highest IncomeDecile

Lowest IncomeDecile

5��'� 1� ��#��*%��'�3��' +'��(� @%�'��!�#��&

(�!��# '/ 7' �� / +'/�$�/% !#-�� ' / -��A

4.55.5Other income

4.23.3Investment income

3.666.0Government transfers

79.923.3Employment earnings

Source of Income (B)

44.54.6Income Share (A)

Highest IncomeQuintile

LowestIncomeQuintile

�%&'(�<�"��382'%0/34�"C��(%1. 31��'E(1 %4E �/;7(.0 �(?('. 35 E2)%0/34

�00%/4(E!��%4%E%!��**-�%4E ",,�

Less Than Grade 9

Highest Level of Schooling Attained (%)

Grades 9-13

7.6--25.0Nunavut

13.613.322.5NWT

15.916.820.0Yukon

16.115.421.9BC

15.115.324.7ALB

11.111.129.1SASK

13.013.027.8MAN

17.516.721.5ONT

14.013.616.6QC

11.311.223.6NB

14.013.326.4NS

11.411.627.0P.E.I.

9.59.227.1NFLD

15.414.949.0Canada

200119962001

University Degree

5��'� 1� �& ��$�!# �& �/%� ��' ! �� '(�'� �'�

�� 5�"%! ��'�1�/ �;� '/ �$��-�*)��<-�� ' / -�

�� '/ ��

19.620.913.716.7University

26.929.522.626.7Collegeand Trades

24.121.125.620.7HighSchool

29.428.538.135.8Less thanHighSchool

WomenMenWomenMen

20011991

� '+'

��(��& (

�!��#-�� '

/��

80000Canada

P.E.I.

Nunavut

Median Income ($)

� *!��4A��7'�("!�)(�'� � ��#-� '/ �/� '

+'��(�-�*)�5��$�'��

22 09521 0008.59.0BC

23 02520 0005.37.7ALB

19 63615 6005.76.3SASK

20 46918 0005.27.3MAN

24 81622 5007.18.8ONT

20 66519 3008.612.0QC

18 25714 80010.410.7NB

18 73516 7009.712.8NS

18 88012 00012.115.7P.E.I

16 05011 30016.918.0NFLD

2000199320021995

Median Income ($)Unemployment Rate

�1%��4��( !� �� !�� '�'1# � ��!!

� �'��# � �$� �� +'��$ !#-��A��

year1 9 6 7

year1 9 7 2

year1 9 7 7

year1 9 8 2

year1 9 8 7

year1 9 9 2

year1 9 9 7

year2 0 0 1

�%&'(�<�C��('()0��))28%0/34.!��2:&(1 35 %14(1. %4E �?(1%;( %14/4;.!�

&@��(F!�",,,

38 42045 656211 81544 070Elementary School andKindergarten Teachers

35 24240 65638 3209 810Social Workers

62 64095 60517 69524 510Lawyers and Quebec Notaries

117 597134 9446202 195Judges

21 93321 75026 155505Dental Assistants

57 202105 1522 5705 805Dentists

38 97245 088227 78013 995Registered Nurses

67 698102 7678 22514 105General Practitioners and FamilyPhysicians

23 31126 9261 147 040428 690Clerical Occupations

24 54027 889375 9758 285Secretaries

23 98726 68285 2508 470Bookkeepers

$ 63 636$ 113 51850 755151 400Senior Management Occupations

WomenMenWomenMen

Average EarningsNumber of Earners

�1%��4��+'��/�'��&��3 +'��(�# �'�

� ' / �&��!��/ �� #-��B��

year 1 980 year 1 983 year 1 986 year 1 989 year 1 992 year 1 996 year 2001

��+�6��+��C+��

D�8��5��+�+��5�E��:

� DOES ‘LOW INCOME’ MEAN ‘POVERTY’?� DEFINITIONS OF POVERTY� --CRITERIA OF RELATIVE DEPRIVATION� --CRITERIA OF ABSOLUTE DEPRIVATION

��

INCOME = ALL EARNINGS IN A GIVEN YEAR, FROM ALL SOURCES

WEALTH= ACCUMULATION OF INCOME AND INHERITANCE OVER TIME

INCOMES ARE UNEQUALLY DISTRIBUTED,BUT WEALTH IS EVEN MORE UNEQUALLY

DISTRIBUTED, IN CANADA AND OTHERINDUSTRIALIZED SOCIETIES

��

� A SYNTHESIS OF THE FUNCTIONALIST AND CONFLICT PERSPECTIVES

LENSKI’S PESPECTIVE : � --MATERIALIST : material conditions the most

important factors in the long run� --EVOLUTIONIST: societies have evolved

through stages...

� SHOW GRAPH—LEVEL OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY (DEPENDENT VARIABLE)

� BY DEGREE OF SURPLUS (INDEPENDENT VARIABLE)

�E�7�+�6� ��+�+��,"4��8�!!��

� STRUCTURAL MOBILITY –brought about by changes in the occupational structure—oftenmacroeconomic in origin

CIRCULATION (OR EXCHANGE) MOBILITY-movement between positions—based on individual characteristics and attributes

��

TABLE ON OCCUPATIONS OF CANADIANFATHERS AND SONS c. 1989

��

� IF G1, G2, G3... ARE GENERATIONS, THEN IN A COMPLETELY CLOSEDSOCIETY, THERE IS NO INTERGENERATIONAL MOBILITY, SO

R12 = 1.0 (“PERFECT” CORRELATION BETWEEN FATHER’S AND SON’S STATUS)

AND IN A COMPLETELY OPEN SOCIETY,

R12= 0.0 (NO CORRELATION BETWEEN FATHER’S AND SON’S STATUS;EACH OCCUPATIONAL POSITION BECOMES COMPLETELY OPEN AFTER EACH GENERATION)

IN CANADA, OBSERVED CORRELATION BETWEEN FATHER’S AND SON’S

OCCUPATION (R12) IN THE GENERAL POPULATION IS APPROX. 0.3 -0.4

---------------BUT:OF ALL LARGE FAMILY FORTUNES OBSERVABLE

AT TIME t, A MAJORITYARE INHERITED.

��H��<�

��CLASS, STATUS, POWER

IN ALL INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES,� -PRESTIGE (WHITE COLLAR) IS HIGHER THAN

PRESTIGE (BLUE COLLAR)� -INCOME OF WHITE COLLARS IS ALSO HIGHER ON

THE WHOLE, � ALTHOUGH FOR MANY DECADES IN CANADA THERE

WERE MANY HIGH INCOME BLUE COLLAR JOBS, SO THAT IN MANY FAMILIES, IT WAS TRUE THAT INCOME (WHITE COLLAR) LESS THAN INCOME (BLUE COLLAR)

��I��H��

��J��

��

� FOR MANY DECADES, CLEAR-CUT CLASS VOTING WAS EVIDENT IN MOST WESTERN DEMOCRACIES (ESP. UK+WESTERN EUROPE, TO SOME EXTENT IN USA)

� CLASS VOTING HAS BEEN DECLINING IN MOST WESTERN DEMOCRACIES

IN CANADA : � --LESS PRONOUNCED CLASS VOTING IN

CANADA THAN ELSEWHERE, BECAUSE OF COMPLEXITY OF CANADIAN FEDERAL SYSTEM, SALIENCE OF REGIONAL AND OTHER CLEAVAGES

� Q: WHY DOES LENSKI’S THEORY PREDICT THAT LEVVEL OF INEQUALITY WILL DECREASE IN ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES?

� A: THESE COUNTRIES WILL TO SOME EXTENT BECOME « WELFARE STATES »

F8��+��8��F��G��5��+��+��C+��+�6�

� KEYNESIAN WELFARE STATE-- (BASED ON IDEAS OF JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES)

� A « CULMINATION OF SOCIAL REFORM » THAT OCCURS AT A CERTAIN STAGE OF CAPITALIST DEVELOPMENT

� KWS:� THE STATE INTERVENES TO SOFTEN

THE CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN LABOUR AND CAPITAL

� INVOLVES ADOPTION OF A PACKAGE OF SOCIAL PROGRAMS …

� GOALS OF KEYNESIAN WELFARE STATE:

� TO REMOVE THE WORST EFFECTS OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY, AND TO PLACATE RESISTANCE TO IMPLICATIONS OF INEQUALITY

� TO GRANT SOCIAL CITIZENSHIP (IDEAS OF T.H. MARSHALL) AND SOME MEASURE OF DECOMMODIFICATION

� WHAT IS ‘DECOMMODIFICATION’ ?� PARTIALLY REMOVING PEOPLE’S

DEPENDENCE ON THE COMPETITIVE LABOUR MARKET

� RUNS COUNTER TO THE LOGIC OF CAPITALIST LABOUR MARKET

� TENSION BETWEEN PRINCIPLES OF CAPITALISM AND PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY

��

1) FOSTER AND FACILITATE ECONOMIC GROWTH, PROSPERIT Y(“CAPITAL ACCUMULATION”)

2) INSURE THE (SHORT AND LONG-TERM) LEGITIMACY OF THE SYSTEM

A. MATERIAL INTERVENTIONS– REDISTRIBUTION OR TRANSFER PROGRAMS– SOCIAL SERVICES

B. SYMBOLIC AND IDEOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS—SHAPING IDENTITIES, OUTLOOKS, BELIEFS, AND EXPECTATIONS

-----------

LIST OF STATE PROGRAMS...A. Djao

��

PROGRAMS AIMED AT:1) EQUALITY OF CONDITIONS (In some

ways)2) EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY (In some

��5��:��+�+@7��

� CANADA’S WELFARE STATE DOES NOT REDUCE INEQUALITY, ONLY A PARTIAL CONCESSION TO NEEDS AND DEMANDS OF WORKING CLASS

��

<��

1. LIBERAL MINIMALIST (RESIDUAL) MODEL– THE MARKET IS THE MAIN MECHANISM OF

REDISTRIBUTION (IN ADDITION TO BEING THE MAIN MECHANISM OF WEALTH PRODUCTION)

� –TARGETED (SELECTIVE) RATHER THAN UNIVERSAL PROGRAMS

EX: USA, AUSTRALIA, NEW ZEALAND AND…CANADA*

2. CORPORATIST (CATHOLIC) MODEL– COLLABORATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE

EX: AUSTRIA, ITALY, GERMANY

3. SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC MODEL– IMPORTANT ROLE OF TRADE UNIONS AND LEFT

PARTIES

EX: SCANDINAVIA

��

� COMPLEX MIX OF FEDERAL & PROVINCIAL PROGRAMS...

WHERE DOES CANADA’S WELFARE STATE FIT IN ESPING-ANDERSEN’S TYPOLOGY?

1) BASICALLY A MEMBER OF THE LIBERAL MINIMALIST FAMILY,

BUT ALSO...2) A “PATCHWORK QUILT”—TO SOME EXTENT A HYBRID: IT SHARES SOME FEATURES OF ALL 3 MODELS

IS CANADA’S WELFARE STATE MORE EXTENSIVE THAN THAT OF USA, AND MORE LIKE THOSE FOUND IN NORTHERN AND WESTERN EUROPE?

� YES, IN MANY WAYS, BUT IT OFTEN BEARS A CLOSER RESEMBLANCE TO THAT OF USA THAN TO THOSE OF EUROPE

��<��H��

��

1)ABORIGINAL PEOPLES \ DOMINANT SOCIETY

2) LINGUISTIC DUALITY: FRANCOPHONES / ANGLOPHONES

3) IMMIGRANTS + DESCENDANTS/ DOMINANT SOCIETY

��

�� C��

BY ANCESTRY-1.1 MILLION OR 3.9% OF TOTAL (MOST OF MIXED ANCESTRY)

BY IDENTITY-0.8 MILLION OR 2.8% OF TOTAL

OF THE 0.8 MILLION BY IDENTITY

-fewer than 70 % identify as North American Indians

-26% “Métis”

-5% Inuit

��

��1. STATUS INDIANS

–MEMBERS HOLD A DISTINCT LEGAL STATUS–MEMBERS ARE REGISTERED WITH FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT–ORIGINS: INDIAN ACT OF 1876

c. 573,000 IN 1996 (up from 192,000 in 1961)

2. NON-STATUS INDIANS ....Several hundred thousand today..

INCLUDING...3. MÉTIS......210,000 in 1996

4. INUIT (CONCENTRATED IN NUNAVUT AND NORTHERNQUEBEC)

c. 41,000 IN 1996

��#��

1. ASSEMBLY OF FIRST NATIONS(STATUS INDIANS)

2. NATIVE COUNCIL OF CANADA(NON-STATUS INDIANS)

3. MÉTIS NATIONAL COUNCIL

4. INUIT TAPIRISAT

= ��H�� 7�8��+�-��>+�

� COLONIES OF SETTLEMENT:

CANADA, USA, AUSTRALIA, N. ZEALAND, ARGENTINA, CHILE, URUGUAY

� COLONIES OF EXPLOITATION:

ASIA, AFRICA, SOUTH AMERICA ESP. PERU

�� EUROPEANS AND AMERINDIANS

-AGRARIAN SOCIETY –HUNTERS +GATHERERS-CENTRALIZED STATE -ORGANIZED INTO BANDS-CENTRALIZED CHURCH -NON-BUREAUCRATIC

RELIGION� IDEOLOGY OF “SETTLER” SOCIETIES:

-FOUNDING OF ‘NEW ‘ EUROPEAN SOCIETIESON “EMPTY” VACANT UNINHABITED LAND

-NO PLACE FOR AMERINDIANS AS SUCH– INTEGRATION OR...

� 1857: Gradual Civilization Act: goal ofassimilation of native peoples

� --beginning of government funding ofresidential schools, attendance at whichbecame compulsory in 1920

� 1876: Indian Act –Indian reservesformalized

� 1969: Federal government’sWhite Paper proposedabolishing DIAND, reserves, special status

� Why? Logic of individual rights: equality for all

F��" "��-��'��'%�/

� This document generated muchdiscussion, and mobilizedopposition of Aboriginalleaders…e.g.

� Red Paper of Harold Cardinal 1970

� 1969: Federal government’sWhite Paper …

� Part of Trudeau government’strilogy of measures (Official Languages Act 1969, Multiculturalism Act 1971)

��!��

��

� “ENFRANCHISEMENT” MEANT ACQUIRING CITIZENSHIP AND RIGHT TO VOTE AND LOSING ONE’S INDIAN STATUS

DEVELOPMENT OF CITIZENSHIPRIGHTS IN MODERN SOCIETIES

� EARLY INDUSTRIAL PERIOD: WHITE MALE ADULT PROPERTY HOLDERS

� LATER: +OTHER ‘RACES’ +WOMEN +NON-PROPERTIED

WHY THESE CHANGES?

� FUNCTIONALIST PERSPECTIVE: LOGIC OF DEVELOPMENT OF INDUSTRIAL

DEMOCRACIES: RIGHTS ARE EXTENDED IN STAGES

� CONFLICT PERSPECTIVE:CHANGES ARE OUTCOMES OF

STRUGGLES

� Show acetate on demographicdistribution of aboriginals in Canada

� Video: Our Nationhood (National Film Board, 2003) by filmmaker

Alanis Obonsawin

� Eastern Quebec: Listuguj(Restigouche) –economy of loggingand fishing

@%�#��'#�&��$�(*�� B-��

� In your view why did the filmmaker pick thetitle « Our Nationhood »?

� What is the filmmaker’s argument?� What are your main comments/criticisms of

the film?� More generally, how are Aboriginal minorities

different from other ethnic minorities in Canadian society?

��$ B-��

� More on « extension of citizenship rights » in Canadian context

� 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights and FreedomsConstitution Act- Recognizes aboriginal

peoples in Canada –A new « discursive resource » for future negotiations

--(show definitions…)

��75�� 7��+��

� « R. vs. PAWLEY »� (after 10 years in various Ontario courts) � COURT CASE ABOUT MÉTIS HUNTING

AND FISHING RIGHTS� -GRANTS MÉTIS SAME HUNTING AND

FISHING RIGHTS AS STATUS INDIANS ON RESERVES

��

� REGIONAL DIFFERENCES (DIVERSITY)

� REGIONAL DISPARITIES (INEQUALITIES)

� REGIONALISM

EXPLANATIONS FOR PERSISTENCE OF REGIONALISM (HILLER CH. 5):1. UNEVEN DEVELOPMENT2. STATE POLICY

a) NATIONAL POLICY 1879b) POST WWII ENCOURAGEMENT

OF BRANCH-PLANTSc) LATE 1980's: FREE TRADE

3. ELITE CONTROL AND CAPITAL FLOWS4. POLITICAL STRUCTURES5. NORTH SOUTH LINKAGES

��K��

��

WHICH IS MORE BASIC? GEOGRAPHY OR SOCIAL CLASS?

� GEOGRAPHY: GEOGRAPHICAL DIFFERENCES CANNOT BE

REDUCED TO SOCIAL CLASS DIFFERENCES; GEOGRAPHICAL FACTORS OVERRIDE CLASS FACTORS IN THE LONG RUN

� SOCIAL CLASS: GEOGRAPHICAL DIFFERENCES AND INTERESTS ARE

OFTEN JUST A DIFFERENT EXPRESSION OF CLASS DIFFERENCES AND INTERESTS, OR A MASK FOR CLASS DIFFERENCES

3 TABLES WITH EXAMPLES OF REGIONAL DIFFERENCES ...

“THE CANADIAN SYNDROME OF REGIONAL POLARITIES” —

(TERM COINED BY U.B.C. SOCIOLOGIST WERNER COHN IN 1970s)

� Table: Indicators of AnomicSocial Structure, Canadianprovinces, 1970s and 1980s

� *!��'��(��/�� #

� Homicide rates in Canada andthe U.S., (per 100,000 population)

� *!��'�%'�("!�)(�'� � ��#

� Unemployment rates since1961, by province

�� +��+��7��7��: Indicators of Anomic Social Structure, updated

% Born in another

Province

(2001)

Deaths due to:*Allrates per

100000

1.728786599961.23.759.6Nunav.

6.4147.8

32220603432.37.341.5NWT

10.6222.426718272324.26.425.8Yk

26.1246.81155138482.619.911.8B.C.

14.9271.7931013183.215.615.1Alb.

5.0214.713368203147.422.411.7Sask.

12.1212.011290131129.324.211.0Man.

26.8223.8607316768.620.18.7Ont.

9.9231.2569716856.229.121.8Qc

3.1227.3660825598.322.712.3N.B.

4.6218.2760920494.419.212.5N.S.

3.1197.07628134105.115.311.6P.E.I.

1.6169.95832145103.812.86.3Nfld.

% Prov. Pop. born

outsideCanada

(2001)

Divorce

(2000)

Crimes underCrim. Code

(2002)

CanabisConvictions

(1999)

SexualAssault

(2002)

Mental Disorder

(1999)

Suicide

(1999)

��K��

��

��!��

��L

EX: DIVORCE RATES

1920s British Columbia 4.2 times national average1950s 3.11960s 2.41980s 1.21990s 1.x very little change

��

ON SEVERAL INDICATORS, DIFFERENCESAMONG INDUSTRIAL COUNTRIES ARE 1.5

TO 2 TIMES GREATER THAN THOSE BETWEEN CANADIAN PROVINCES...

��

�� C=�

1. INACTION – LEAVE SOLUTION TO MARKET FORCES

2. SUBSIDIZED PROTECTION, I.E. INCOME SUPPLEMENTS, SUBSIDIES, ETC...

3. ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMODIFICATION:–LABOUR MADE MORE SALEABLE THROUGH

MOBILITY OR TRAINING SUBSIDIES–INDUSTRIES ARE RATIONALIZED TO BE

MORE COMPETITIVE...

@%�#��'�&��$�(*�� ;-��

� Pick one example of regionalism in Canada with which you are familiar, and explain

� 1) what the regional differences are…� 2) whether disparities or inequalities are

involved? Which ones?� 3) What are the main forms regionalism has

taken over the years—Is it real or a creationof the media?

��EVERETT C. HUGHES, FRENCH CANADA IN TRANSITION

(RENCONTRE DE DEUX MONDES) (1943) A STUDY OF DRUMMONDVILLE, QUEBEC

HIGH LEVEL OF PLURALISMA) STRUCTURAL PLURALISM: SEPARATE FRENCH AND

ENGLISH INSTITUTIONS B) CULTURAL PLURALISM : LANGUAGE, RELIGION

INEQUALITIES:OF CLASS, EDUCATION AND OCCUPATION...

� ...CORRELATED WITH INEQUALITIES BETWEEN FRENCH AND ENGLISH

LOUIS BALTHAZAR ARTICLE “THE FACES OF QUEBEC NATIONALISM”

TRADITIONAL FRENCH-CANADIAN NATIONALISM : (DOMINANT UNTIL c. 1960)

1. CULTURAL NOT POLITICAL

2. CULTURAL, NOT ECONOMY-ORIENTED

3. RELIGIOUS EMPHASIS

4. INWARD LOOKING (DEFENSIVE)

5. NOT OPEN TO NEWCOMERS

@7��A��+�� F��-�+��

�� H��+��+�7�+��I

� SEE PIERRE VALLIÈRES, � NÈGRES BLANCS D’AMÉRIQUE (WHITE NIGGERS OF

AMERICA)...� DUPLESSIS YEARS 1940s AND 1950s–� QUEBEC GOVERNMENT WAS PRO BUSINESS, ANTI-

ORGANIZED LABOUR

� QUIET REVOLUTION c.1960- 1970: MODERNIZATION OF QUEBEC

� “RATTRAPAGE”...CATCHING UP

� “MAÎTRES CHEZ NOUS” ...

� NEW MIDDLE CLASS...CONCENTRATED IN PUBLIC SECTOR

��7��+�� +��

@7��+��A�#�44

FROM: TO:-ÉLITIST SYSTEM DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM-PRIVATE SCHOOLS - PUBLIC SYSTEM-LOCAL BOARDS- -PROVINCIAL CONTROL-RELIGIOUS - SECULAR

��

1. LANGUAGE LEGISLATION, FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL....

LANGUAGE POLICIES OF MULTILINGUAL STATES CAN BE GUIDED BY 2 PRINCIPLES:A) PERSONALITY PRINCIPLE...

� CANADA’S FEDERAL OFFICIAL LANGUAGES ACT, 1969

B) TERRITORIAL PRINCIPLE (TERRITORIAL UNILINGUALISM)� BELGIUM: FRENCH AND DUTCH REGIONS

+BILINGUAL CAPITAL, BRUSSELS� SWITZERLAND: GERMAN, FRENCH AND

ITALIAN-SPEAKING CANTONS

SINCE 1970s: ONGOING TENSION BETWEEN PRINCIPLE A (FEDERAL LEVEL) AND PRINCIPLE B (PROVINCIAL LEVEL)

��

two ratios� FRENCH OUTSIDE QUEBEC/

ALL FRANCOPHONES IN CANADA, � ANGLOPHONES IN QUEBEC /

ALL ANGLOPHONES IN CANADA� both have been slowly declining, even as

technology decreases the importance of physical location and distance as a basis of community

"��

� WITH SEPARATE FRENCH AND ENGLISH EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS...

UNTIL 1970S, IMMIGRANTS WERE HISTORICALLY ABSORBED BY ENGLISH SYSTEM. WHY?1. ENGLISH THE DOMINANT LANGUAGE2. IMMIGRATION FEDERAL JURISDICTION3. FRENCH CANADA’S DEFINITION OF ITSELF AS A CATHOLIC

(AND DEFENSIVE) MINORITY

QUEBEC’S POPULATION1880s: 80% FRENCH, 20% “ENGLISH”

(mainly from British Isles)� by 1960s : 80% FRENCH, 20% “ENGLISH-

SPEAKING” (10% British origins, 10% other origins)

� so “Anglophone” community slowly became quite diverse...Jews, Italians, Greeks…

� SINCE 1977 AND BILL 101: IMMIGRANTS FROM ALL CONTINENTS HAVE BEEN DIRECTED TOWARD FRENCH SYSTEM

� SINCE 1970s, THOSE OF « NON-OFFICIAL LANGUAGE » MOTHER TONGUES HAVE OFTEN BEEN REFERRED TO AS « ALLOPHONES » IN QUEBEC

� TODAY: QUEBEC 83% FRANCOPHONES � +ANGLOPHONES� +OTHER MOTHER TONGUES (ABORIGINAL

+IMMIGRANT)

@7��+ +6��+��

� SINCE 1980s, QUEBEC HAS ATTAINED CONSIDERABLE POLICY AUTONOMY WITH RESPECT TO IMMIGRATION ISSUES

� --PREFERENCE FOR FRENCH-LANGUAGE IMMIGRANTS, OR THOSE MOST LIKELY TO BECOME FRANCOPHONES

@7��+ +6��+��

� QUEBEC HAS ABOUT 24% OF CANADA’S POPULATION, BUT IN RECENT YEARS HAS BEEN RECEIVING UNDER 15 PERCENT OF CANADA’S IMMIGRANTS

� IN COMPARISON, ONTARIO, WITH 35% OF THE POPULATION, HAS BEEN RECEIVING OVER 50% OF CANADA’S IMMIGRANTS

3. CHANGING GROUP LABELS� “CANADIENS”: CANADA’S FRENCH

MAJORITY

� “CANADIEN-FRANCAIS”: FRENCH A MINORITY WITHIN CANADA

� “QUÉBÉCOIS”: QUEBEC A MODERN STATE WITH A FRENCH-SPEAKING

MAJORITY

REMEMBER 2 MEANINGS OF “NATION”

1. POLITICIZED ETHNIC GROUP2. WE-FEELING OF RESIDENTS OF A STATE

IN RECENT DECADES IN QUEBEC, ...(STILL INCOMPLETE) SLOW SHIFT FROM 1 TO 2, i.e. FROM ETHNIC TO CIVIC NATIONALISM

THIS SHIFT STARTED EARLIER IN ENGLISH-SPEAKING CANADAEX: C. 1900 “CANADIAN” . “WASP”

TODAY..................... . RESIDENTS OF CANADA WHATEVER THEIR ORIGINS

4. CHANGING GROUP BOUNDARIES

BOTH ENGLISH AND FRENCH CANADA HAVE BROADENED THEIR GROUP BOUNDARIES (RELIGION AND ETHNIC ORIGIN TO…LANGUAGE)

� ENGLISH-SPEAKING CANADA : ANGLOPHONES� FRENCH-SPEAKING ...FRANCOPHONES

BOTH LINGUISTIC COMMUNITIES HAVE MEMBERS OF MANY ETHNIC AND RELIGIOUS ORIGINS...

5. BEFORE THE QUIET REVOLUTION IN QUEBEC...

“CANADIEN-FRANCAIS” ...A MAJORITY IN QUEBEC, MINORITY OUTSIDE QUEBEC, BUT ALL PART OFSAME GROUP NONETHELESS

��

� QUEBEC: “CAN.-FRANÇAIS”…TO….QUÉBÉCOIS

� ONTARIO: ONTAROIS, FRANCO-ONTARIEN

� MANITOBA: “FRANCO-MANITOBAIN”

BUT: ACADIANS HAVE NOT CHANGED THEIR LABEL...

NEW OVERARCHING GROUP LABEL : “FRANCOPHONES OUTSIDE QUEBEC”

(THE NEW LABEL CAME ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE NEW “QUÉBECOIS” LABEL)WHY THIS SHIFT?

–CANADIAN FEDERAL SYSTEM–CANADIAN WELFARE STATE

��#��!�

��!��**C

A CASE STUDY OF 1 COMPLEX SETTING– QUEBEC HAS ... FRENCH-ENGLISH DUALISM AND

ABORIGINAL AND IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES

IMPACT OF SOCIAL CHANGE ON INTERGROUP RELATIONS

PART I: INTRO, BACKGROUND, THEORY

PART II: DETAILED LOOK AT THE STRUCTURE OF ATTITUDES AS THEY WERE IN 1970

PART III: CHANGES 1970-1990s, ABORIGINALS AND IMMIGRANTS

-COMPARISONSCONCLUSION

��#��

��

MALAYSCHINESE MALAYSIANS (35%)

MALAYSIA

FINNSSWEDISH FINNS (c. 8%)

FINLAND

FLEMINGSWALLOONS (40%)BELGIUM

FRENCH CANADIANS

ENGLISH CANADIANS (20%)

QUEBEC

SUBORDINATE GROUP

ORIGINAL DOMINANT GROUP (PROPORTION)

SOCIETY

HISPANICSANGLO-AMERICANSNEW MEXICO

PUERTO RICANSANGLO-AMERICANS (10%)

PUERTO RICO

CZECHSGERMAN-SPEAKERS (35%)

CZECH REPUBLIC before 1945

CATHOLICSPROTESTANTS(60%)

ULSTER

CATHOLICSPROTESTANTSRHINELAND (c. 1900)

� ORIGINAL DOMINANT GROUP: OFTEN MORE URBAN, HEAD START IN WHITE COLLAR OCCUPATIONS, DOMINANT IN THE ECONOMY AND BUSINESS

� ORIGINAL SUBORDINATE GROUP: OFTEN MORE RURAL TO BEGIN WITH, LATER START IN HIGHER EDUCATION, OFTEN DOMINANT IN POLITICS

��

��1. INEQUALITIES BETWEEN F AND E WITHIN QUEBEC

HAVE BEEN MUCH REDUCED, PARTLY TRANSFORMED INTO INEQUALITIES BETWEEN QUEBEC AND REST OF CANADA

2. URBANIZATION AND INDUSTRIALIZATION DON’T OCCUR IN A VACUUM, THEY INTERACT WITH OTHER FACTORS (especially POLITICS)

3. URBANIZATION AND INDUSTRIALIZATION HAVE OFTEN LED TO A DECLINE OF ETHNIC INEQUALITIES, BUT NOT ALWAYS

4. THE PERCEPTUAL STRUCTURE IS SOMEWHAT INDEPENDENT OF OBJECTIVE CONDITIONS

5. THERE HAS BEEN A SHIFT IN THE MAIN BASES OF GROUP DEFINITION IN CANADA AND BELGIUM

EX: - from FRENCH CANADIANS… FRANCOPHONES- ENGLISH CANADIANS … ANGLOPHONES- WALLOONS… FRANCOPHONES- FLEMINGS … “NÉERLANDOPHONES”

From ETHNIC ORIGIN to…LANGUAGEFrom ASCRIBED to…. ACHIEVED

��

From Laczko research“Language, region, class, gender and income: perceived inequalities in Quebec and English Canada”, in J. Pammett and A Frizzell (eds.) Social Inequality in Canada, 1996

� VIDEO LATER THIS EVENING: � A SONG FOR QUEBEC BY DOROTHY

TODD HENAUT � ABOUT GERALD GODIN AND PAULINE

JULIEN, AND QUEBEC NATIONALISM SINCE THE 1960s…

��8��E+��?

� RECONQUEST OF THE CONQUEST BY MICHAEL IGNATIEFF

� (SEE ALSO REFERENDUM TAKE TWO)ABOUT 1995 VOTE…

�%&'(��"�513:��

��

�==,.I'%&321�1(M2/1(:(40.!�:%..

:/;1%0/34.��67/0( 2138(%4.

�==C�5/1.0�%40/��7/4(.( '%6

�=*-��'/5531E��/5034!�6(.0(14�.(00'(1.

�*,+��3207��./%4. E/.(451%4)7/.(E

+ +6��+��8+��-�

��+�7��

� 1908-Continuous Passage Act� 1914-Komagata Maru Incident� 1920s to 1940s: Administrative measures

aimed at excluding most “Non-Whites”; � within Canada, much prejudice and

discrimination against Jews, visible minorities, aboriginals , and many others…

� 1967: radical reforms: point system for admission

� *!��+��+ +6��+��

5��+��E��E+�F

<��

��!��

��

��N��!��N��

1. ANGLO-CONFORMITY A + B = A

2. MELTING POT (AMALGAMATION) A + B = C(I. ZANGWILL)

3. CULTURAL PLURALISM A + B = A* + B*(H. KALLEN)

---THE THREE MODELS CAN BE EVALUATED AS

A) THEORIESB) IDEOLOGIESC) STATE POLICIES

��<�� "��

��!�"��

1) ANGLO-CONFORMITY ....AND FRANCO-CONFORMITY (IN QUEBEC)

2) DOUBLE MELTING POT

3) MULTICULTURALISM IN A BILINGUAL FRAMEWORK (FEDERAL GOVERNMENT)

“INTERCULTURALISME” (QUEBEC GOVERNMENT)

��<��

��!��

FOR EXAMPLE …LANGUAGE: OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

LEARNED…AND…ANCESTRAL LANGUAGES RETAINED

EXOGAMY: INCREASINGRESIDENTIAL CONCENTRATION: MAJOR

CITIES OFTEN HAD (AND HAVE) ZONES WHERE MANY RECENT IMMIGRANTS SETTLED…OFTEN TRANSITORY

<�07(31/(.!�)340/42(E��

OCCUPATIONAL CONCENTRATION : IMMIGRANTS FOUND IN ALL OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORIES, BUT OVER-REPRESENTED IN SOME AND UNDER-REPRESENTED IN OTHERS

� FOOD & CULINARY HABITS....

+ +6��8��+��

��7��

� ARE IMMIGRANTS UNDER- OR � OVER-REPRESENTED IN CERTAIN

OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORIES?� SHOW TABLE: IN 1996, IMMIGRANTS

MADE UP 19% OF WORKFORCE, EVEN IF ONLY 17.4% OF POPULATION.

��

1960s ROYAL COMMISSION ON BILINGUALISM AND BICULTURALISM....

CANADA’S INITIAL MULTICULTURALISM POLICY : PART OF THE TRUDEAU TRILOGY

- 1969 OFFICIAL LANGUAGES ACT - 1970 WHITE PAPER ON ABORIGINAL RIGHTS- 1971 MULTICULTURALISM IN A BILINGUAL CONTEXT

1970s -----CELEBRATION OF ETHNIC DIVERSITY

EARLY CRITIQUES OF THE POLICY:- JOHN PORTER ... LIBERAL ASSIMILATIONIST- GUY ROCHER...QUEBEC NATIONALIST- + MANY ABORIGINAL LEADERS

1980s: MANAGING DIVERSITY, FIGHTINGDISCRIMINATION

(1985: CONCEPT OF VISIBLE MINORITY INTRODUCED)

1990s-present: PROMOTING COMMON SHARED VALUES

MORE RECENT CRITIQUES:

- R. BIBBY, MOSAIC MADNESS- N. BISSOONDATH, SELLING ILLUSIONS

��#��

>��

��

��A!��!��**-

� – HOW ARE FEELINGS OF FRATERNITY STRUCTURED WITHIN CANADIAN SOCIETY?

– HOW IMPORTANT IS CANADIAN CIVIC EXPERIENCE AS ADETERMINANT OF HOW FEELINGS OF FRATERNITY ARE ALLOCATED?

REQUIREMENTS FOR CITIZENSHIP IN MODERN STATES:

- OFTEN A COMBINATION OF ETHNIC AND CIVIC CRITERIAEX: GERMANY...(EMPH. ON ETHNIC)EX: FRANCE...(EMPHASIS ON CIVIC)

�**��

��<<"C��

QUESTION ASKED : (1ST SERIES)

“I would like you to think of recent immigrants to Canada. These arepeople who were born and raised outside of Canada. How comfortablewould you feel being around individuals from the following groups ofimmigrants. How about...” (read British first outside of Quebec, French

first in Quebec, then rotate)(1=not at all comfortable, 7=completely comfortable)QUESTION ASKED (2ND SERIES)

“ Now I would like you to think of people born and raised in Canada, who have different ethnic and cultural origins. How comfortable would you feel being around individuals from the following groups? How about persons having...”(read British first outside Quebec, French first

in Quebec, then rotate)(1=not at all comfortable, 7=completely comfortable)

� FIGURE 1 ON MEAN COMFORT LEVELS WITH VARIOUS ETHNIC LABELS...

� TABLE 2: CORRELATIONS AND FACTOR ANALYSES OF FRATERNITY SCORES

O��#��

�� **C

.((��/''(1�8""*�

� STUDY COMPARES THE IMMIGRANT EXPERIENCE IN CANADA AND USA

� BY MOST EMPIRICAL MEASURES, THE TWO SOCIETIES DISPLAY VERY SIMILAR LEVELS OFACCEPTANCE OF IMMIGRANTS, OPENNESS, TOLERANCE OF DIFFERENCE...

(DESPITE OCCASIONAL INTERMITTENT DIFFERENCES IN IDEOLOGY SUCH AS MELTING POT VERSUS MULTICULTURALISM...)

��+E��?

FROM FLERAS AND ELLIOTT 2002

��8+��E��+�6��E+��

J F8��6��+�G K��-��B��54��

� CANADA’S IMMIGRATION POLICYIN PRACTICE

� CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICE?

��

E. DURKHEIM: RELIGION A FUNCTIONAL NECESSITY IN ALL HUMAN SOCIETIES

K. MARX: RELIGION IS “THE OPIATE OF THE MASSES”—IT FOSTERS FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS

M. WEBER: RATIONALIZATION OF SOCIETY MEANS RELIGION CHANGES FORM

SECULARIZATION: 3 PERSPECTIVES

1) RELIGION BECOMES LESS IMPORTANT2) RELIGION BECOMES MORE COMPARTMENTALIZED 3) RELIGION IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING IN FORM

AND CONTENT

�� (%1'@�",07�)(4021@�

��

IN EUROPE:� ESTABLISHED CHURCH: OFFICIAL CHURCH OF A

NATIONAL STATE ; HISTORICALLY CLOSE TIES BETWEEN STATE ELITES AND CHURCH ELITES

� SECTS ARE OFTEN OPPOSITIONAL GROUPINGS, APPEALING TO THE LESS-PRIVILEGED MEMBERS OF SOCIETY

R. NIEBUHR (1930s):� IN USA, THERE WAS NO TRADITION OF ESTABLISHED

CHURCH LIKE IN EUROPE, SO...� CHURCH---DENOMINATION----SECT

��

��!�**�� "B��

CATHOLIC c. 46 %

UNITED CHURCH OF CANADAANGLICANPRESBYTERIAN collectively known as PROTESTA NTSBAPTISTLUTHERAN

GREEK ORTHODOXJEWISHMUSLIMOTHER...........................% LOW BUT INCREASIN GNO RELIGION..............% LOW BUT INCREASING

��>��A!�",,"

�8813F�P�35�07(��%4%E/%4�8382'%0/34�- ROMAN CATHOLICS OUTSIDE QUEBEC 23

ROM. CATHOLICS IN QUEBEC 19

- MAINLINE PROTESTANTS 19UNITED CHURCH 9ANGLICAN 6LUTHERAN 2PRESBYTERIAN 2

- CONSERVATIVE PROTESTANTS 8INCLUDING BAPTISTS, PENTECOSTALS, MENNONITES,ALLIANCE, NAZARENES

- OTHER FAITH GROUPS 6INCLUDING JEWS, MUSLIMS,BUDDHISTS, HINDUS, SIKHS

- RELIGIOUS NONES 20

(SOURCE: R. BIBBY, RESTLESS GODS, P.37)(A residual 5% or so, mostly Protestants, identify with other groups not classified above)

��2� �& #�!��!�1��%# 1��%"#-��

,��**)-��#�!�## 6�/# ��-�"4�A�0

� Baha’i 14,730� Native Indian or Inuit 10,840� Wicca 5,530� New thought 4,615� Scientology 1,220� New Age 1,200� Theosophy 765� Rastafarian 335

��

��)��**,

BELIEF IN…….. GOD LIFE AFTER DEATH

GREAT BRITAIN 76% 43%CANADA 89 54FRANCE 72 39INDIA 98 72ITALY 88 46JAPAN 38 18SCANDINAVIA 65 35USA 94 69(W.) GERMANY 72 33AFRICA 96 69FAR EAST 87 62

��

��!��

��

EX: WEEKLY SERVICE ATTENDERS, CANADA 1957-2000

1957 1975 1990 2000

� NATIONALLY 53% 31% 24% 21%

� R. CATHOLIC 83 45 33 26Outside Quebec 75 48 37 32Quebec 88 42 28 20

� PROTESTANT 38 27 22 25Conservative 51 41 49 58Mainline 35 23 14 15

� OTHER FAITHS 35 17 12

Source: R. BIBBY, UNKNOWN GODS (1993) and R. BIBBY, RESTLESS GODS (2002)

��

EUROPE:� ESTABLISHED CHURCHES WITHIN NATIONAL

STATES ----------------.....-...... OVER TIME.....--“SHADOW ESTABLISHMENT”

� HIGH (COMPULSORY) AFFILIATION------------------shift to...................NOMINAL AFFILIATION

� HIGH BELIEF..............-....HIGH BELIEF

� HIGH PRACTICE.......-....LOW PRACTICE

USA� NO ESTABLISHED OFFICIAL CHURCH AS IN

EUROPE-.......COMPETING DENOMINATIONS

(IN USA, ALL RELIGIOUS BODIES TEND TO ADOPTTHE DENOMINATIONAL FORM)

� HIGH BELIEF AND PRACTICE.........- OVER TIME....-CONTINUING HIGH BELIEF AND PRACTICE

CANADA� BETWEEN USA AND EUROPE

� HISTORICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE LESS CLEAR THAN IN USA

� HISTORICAL LINKS BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE LESS EXTENSIVE THAN IN EUROPE

� RESULT: CANADA’S CURRENT LEVELS OF BELIEF AND PRACTICE ARE LOWER THAN THOSE OF USA, BUT HIGHER THAN THOSE OF MOST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

� TABLE 7.15 FROM RESTLESS GODS , VALUES: WEEKLYS AND NEVERS

� TABLES FROM GOD AND SOCIETY IN NORTH AMERICA PROJECT....about religion in Canada and United States

�4��E+��!�'� �& ��&��'��

� In North America and Europe, size of tertiarysector has increased since 1980

� Also, higher levels of postsecondaryeducation

� And increasing proportions of women in p.s. education and labour force

� These STRUCTURAL shifts have lead to ----------VALUE shifts

� General argument (R. Inglehart ) is thatlong periods of prosperity have allowedpeople in the developed countries to movebeyond being concerned with scarcity

� Value types:� From materialist values (concern with

scarcity, standard of living) to � Post-materialist values (concern with

quality of life)

� In the developed world, the mix ofmaterialist—post-materialistvalues is very similar, and…

� the trend is toward higher levelsof post-materialist outlooks

� Post-materialist values are strongeramong� Younger generations� The more educated

� Also,� Decline of deference to authority…� Deference is lowest

� Among younger generations� Among more educated� Among those with post-materialist values

� Canada’s level of deference to authority is below that of the UnitedStates, and/but

� higher than that of Europe

�� !�/ (#-�� '/ +�� 7'��/

�� #-�� ' / � '/ �� )�� &

��'$��1�'1 E !%�#-��

� CANADA AND THE USA ARE ON DIFFERENT TRACKS, NOT CONVERGING

� --in other words, the international border hasa real and enduring impact on values andoutlooks

6��7��+��#�!��' &��(

��6+��5�� '�L��& �� /�'1#

� -Disagree with M. Adams: they argue thatover time, the significant differences are notso much between Canada and the US, but between 3 « regions »

� QUEBEC AT ONE EXTREME � THE REST OF CANADA AND THE US � THE U.S. SOUTH

8�F� ��6+��+��8�

��+�G

� JOEL GARREAU THE NINE NATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1981

F4�C)(!��L -�J ��'1 � ' /� ' K�,L��&

�� /�'1#0

� --CANADIAN IDENTITY OFTEN DEFINED IN CONTRAST TO UNITED STATES, BUT THE « NATURE OF THE CONTRAST IS CONTINUALLY SHIFTING »

��#��

��

1 CENTRAL GOVT50 STATE GOVTS+ a few overseas territories

1 CENTRAL GOVT10 PROVINCES2 TERRITORIES

REGIONALISM

SPANISH A REGIONAL LANGUAGE (7 %)

2 OFFICIAL LANGUAGES FR 25%; 2 LEGAL SYSTEMS

FRENCH-ENGLISH DUALISM

c. 1 % ; REGISTERED INDIANS vs. OTHER AMERICANS

c. 3-4%; STATUS AND NON STATUSNATIVE PEOPLES

USACANADA

EARLY SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE

LESS HISTORICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE

RELIGION

8%ideology of melting pot

17% `FOREIGN BORN”ideology of “mosaic”

IMMIGRATION

��"<,*��H��

��*!�",,B

*�<,��","TO REVIEW CLASS NOTES, SEE

http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~laczko (AFTER DEC 8, 2004)

FORMAT: - SIMILAR TO MIDTERM, - 3 TYPES OF QUESTIONS, A LITTLE LONGER

CONTENT: WHOLE COURSE, WITH HEAVY EMPHASIS ON SECOND HALF

SUGGESTIONS : - READINGS (TEXTBOOK AND KIT OF ARTICLES)

- BE ABLE TO SUMMARIZE IN YOUR OWN WORDS

- CH. 6 COMPARISONS: SPECIAL ATTENTION- LECTURE NOTES + MOVIES

�+��8�7��>C�

� AFTERNOON OF DEC. 7 AND DEC. 8, 2004 FROM 1500 TO 1700

� --BY PHONE OR DROP IN OR EMAIL AFTERWARDS : MOST OTHER AFTERNOONS, BUT SCHEDULE WILL VARY

university of ottawaaix1.uottawa.ca › ~laczko › soc2309-2004.pdf · qualitative: non-numerical...

Documents

slides04 chp4 chemosensory w16 - university of...

publ 14035 issue ch2 page 35 - university of...

slides09 fop10 v1&objects - university of...

andres pablo salanova´ - university of...

assessment methods - university of...

notes - university of...

the somatosensory system - university of...

sequence alignment xuhua xia xxia@uottawa.ca

the origins of peacebuilding - university of...

putting users first: the overhaul of uottawa.ca

x; - university of...

basic concepts in perception - university of...

vision ii overview of topics - university of...

saving liberal peacebuilding final - university of...

donsker’s theorem - university of...

economic growth in the open economy - university of...

mutation xuhua xia xxia@uottawa.ca

assessment methods - university of...

m. rioux and y. bourgault - university of...

9. correlational research - university of...