|
Monday March 7, 2005 |
BACK |
NEXT
Jean or John? what about giovanni?
by Angelo Persichilli
THE HILL TIMES
So, what’s it going to be, Jean,
or, John? What about Giovanni? Former deputy prime minister John Manley said
recently that it is “important to recognize that we have had leaders from
Quebec for quite a long time, and you know, maybe that’s part of the
alternance.” Of course: he was suggesting that the next leader by either
English or French, but what about the rest of us? This is not just a
linguistic dispute, it’s Canadian politics at its best, or, its worst.
I read once that
while the Americans debated about sending into space a doctor or an
engineer, Canadians fought about sending a francophone or an anglophone.
But that’s not
all. Don’t forget, that we are also multicultural. Yep, this is the
multicultural Canada: where the appearance of being multicultural takes top
priority over substance.
Make no mistake,
the idea of multiculturalism is a good one, but that’s exactly what it is:
an idea used by the Liberals to wrap themselves in at election time to get
votes from minorities. Multiculturalism in Canada is “strong and vibrant,”
at least in every federal election campaign every four years. But lately
it’s much more popular, considering that we go to the polls every three
years.
Last time I
participated in one of those wine and cheese parties for “ethnics” organized
by the ministry on multiculturalism (or whatever they call it) it was in
1994-95.The then minister responsible for this policy was a very good and
sincere person, Sheila Finestone. Unfortunately it is not the person who
defines the ministry but the ministry that defines the minister.
She was boasting
about the credibility Canada was enjoying abroad because “with
multiculturalism we have proven to the world that people of different
cultures can live together despite the differences.” The question I asked
was very simple: if we believe that multiculturalism is able to keep people
of different cultures together in peace and harmony, why don’t we use
multiculturalism to keep Canada together and put to an end the dispute in
Quebec? I don’t remember the answer because I left right in the middle of
it.
So, this
beautiful idea works for every community, but for the two “founding
cultures.” Our multiculturalism is so much better than the American melting
pot that we have in the United States a black Secretary of State, and a
woman; a black former chief of joint military command; an American of Greek
origin who’s a candidate for the White House; and a woman of Italian origin
for the vice presidency.
They can have
someone called Cuomo or Pataki as governors of New York State, and Giuliani
as police chief and mayor of New York; but here in Canada, we cannot have
someone other than an Anglophone as mayor of Toronto.
When Dalton
McGuinty won the leadership of the Liberal Party it was argued that he won
because “Mr. Cordiano is too ethnic [although no one would quite say it],”
according to The Globe
and Mail on Dec. 3,
1996, or “unlike Lawrence MPP Joe Cordiano, he is not an Italian Canadian
(Liberals don’t like to admit this, but ethnicity is a factor in their
leadership contests), according to
The Toronto Star
on Dec. 2, 1996. Well, nothing
has changed and it’s the same for other minority groups.
“See Angelo,” a
former federal minister told me, “you have to understand that immigration in
the States is much older than the one in Canada. People there are more
assimilated.” So, let me understand: isn’t that the difference between a
melting pot and multiculturalism? The first one, allegedly, will let you
integrate in the new country without losing your culture, while the melting
pot will assimilate you? Now I understand: assimilation brings you to the
top, integration keeps you in the ghetto?! Is that what multiculturalism is
all about? Or this is just the Liberal Party’s multiculturalism? I see.
While in other
countries people are elected or appointed because they are considered the
right person for the position, we still talk about the alternating process
to appoint or elect people to lead the country.
Of course, things
are changing, but not because the political organizations, and Liberal
Party, in particular, are promoting it, but because the people are making it
a reality. All Canadians, and I mean all of them, are really working and
living together.
Even people in
Quebec are sick and tired of this charade between the two “founding
cultures.” They vote for the Parti Québécois or the Liberal Party, looking
for good governments and they, the separatists, have been able to provide to
the people of Quebec very good governments.
In Canada, we
have Canadians. It is in Ottawa, where we have professional “federalists,”
professional “separatists” and professional “multiculturalists.” The concept
of “founding cultures” and the “alternating process” has remained only in
the minds of some politicians, probably because lacking any other innovative
idea, they keep talking about unity, but practise ghetto politics.
On
Toronto Life’s
issue of April 1993, former
Liberal senator Keith Davey was quoted as saying: “Left to its own device,
the party in Toronto would have 20 Italian candidates, seven Sikhs, seven
Greeks and a WASP in a pear tree.” We have to admit that he was definitely
wrong at least on one account: I don’t see any WASPs in a pear tree! |
