Critical Reflection #2

INTERCULTURALISM

From the article; “Quebec Nationalism and the Production of Difference: The Bouchard-Taylor Commission, the Hérouxville Code of Conduct, and Québec’s Immigrant Integration Policy”:

“Of course, we wanted to upset people by speaking about stoning and female circumcision, but it was time that somebody “put on their pants” and looked “beyond the end of their nose.” If we adapt to all the new immigrants, what will become of our Québec culture in ten or twenty years?” (Leroux, 11).

This resonates with me as an Aboriginal person because I can relate to the struggle of identity and self-preservation. Anyone who knows the history of Aboriginal peoples of Canada, or North America for that matter, know how easily it is to misappropriate lands, and to devastate peoples’ cultures and languages. In my opinion, Quebec’s drastic measures to preserve its society, language, and culture are with legitimate reasons. If it can be done to Aboriginal people of Canada then, it can be done to francophone Quebecers. However, we must all be accepting of others who are different than us and be willing to adapt in some way, so that we can exist together peacefully and respectfully.

Gurbaj Singh Multani’s “reasonable accommodation” case demonstrates how the line between what is acceptable or not, is not easily defined. In 2004, the Quebec Court of Appeal ruled that security in schools was more important than the rights of Orthodox Sikhs to wear their kirpans. Two years later, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a ban of kirpans in schools infringed upon the Charter of Rights & Freedoms’ religious freedoms of individuals. “The decision by the Supreme Court was not a popular one in Québec, largely because it was seen as delegitimizing Québec’s juridical and legislative independence” (Leroux, 8).

I can see how people of Quebec can view the ruling as “delegitimizing” but on the other hand I recognize that so long as Quebec is part of this country, that it must respect the decisions of the highest court in Canada. When it comes to the actual wearing of the kirpan, I am conflicted because it can be used as a weapon in schools however, we cannot interdict a person from practicing their beliefs. "Religious tolerance is a very important value of Canadian society" (CBC).

“The Commission’s terms readily adopt the language of interculturalism and accommodation common in Québec society in the prelude to the commission’s proceedings, supplanting the concepts of multiculturalism and tolerance that prevail in the rest of Canada…”“We will avoid the concept of tolerance, which, for some people, betrays a discreet form of hierarchy or paternalism. The individual who professes it implicitly sends the following message: ‘You’re not following the social norms, but I’m overlooking it’” (Leroux, 16).

When highlighted you can clearly see the separation between “Quebec society” and “the rest of Canada.” I prefer the word ‘accommodation’ because it does sound much nicer compared to ‘tolerance’. However, both imply the “other” is not the “norm”. I don’t think that there is much difference between multiculturalism and interculturalism except that the latter is “focused on interaction and integration” (Heinrich) in the French language.
Works Cited

Heinrich, J. “Quebec's diversity is different, Taylor says: Quebec interculturalism. Canadian multiculturalism. Shall the twain ever meet?” The Montreal Gazette. 2008. <http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=0e04c8a5-7b7c-4c42-9e2c-401e4f1b52b6>

Leroux, D. “Québec Nationalism and the Production of Difference: The Bouchard-Taylor Commission, the Hérouxville Code of Conduct, and Québec’s Immigrant Integration Policy.” Quebec Studies, 49(2) 2010: 107-26.

“Timeline: The Quebec Kirpan Case.” CBC News Online. 2006. <http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/kirpan/>