She was saying that the equality of results approach contradicts Martin Luther King’s dream of people being assessed by the “content of their character” rather than their group identity!

The equality of results approach has a great downside. It actually contributes to disharmony. It is based on the same group identity politics that leads to discrimination, resentment, and debates about who has the better case for privileged treatment. In fact all humanity can make a case for equality of results because of disadvantages in the past. In Canada’s past, many people from the French and English community experienced barriers because of class, religion and ethnicity.

Almost all humans can go back just a few generations and list ancestors who were serfs, slaves, persecuted, … . For thousands of years slavery was legal; it was rule of the people over rule of law; it was rule of the aristocrat, the emperor, the conqueror, the czar, the warlord, the Caesar, the theocracy, …. there was no democracy to speak of until a little over 200 years ago and it has spread and improved steadily.
Adam Hochschild is twice the winner of the Lionel Gelber prize. His latest winner is Bury the Chains about the beginning of anti-slavery laws. When the movement began in England a little over 200 years ago, 3/4 of the world was in some kind of servitude. People were essentially enslaved all over the world, often by their own.

There is a good review of the book at this link by Michael O’Brien:
http://www.morgellons-disease-research.com/Morgellons-Message-Board/world-news/4561-new-president.html

Until the 60′s immigration in Canada and the U.S. was much more selective. And many of those immigrants were subject to very overt barriers. My family came from Sicily at the end of the 19th century. They were subject to overt discrimination in Toronto the Orange. Many of their friends were interned in WW11. My grandfather would have been, but for some tips from a friendly Irish cop who shopped in his little fruit store.

Once it opened up, it was on the basis that by merit, new communities who did not see themselves here in Canada – in the school teachers, in the justice system, in the politicians, in the workplace, … could still do fine. And they did. In fact because of certain cultural traditions and values, some communities outperformed the average Canadian born citizen. The percentage of some communities in elite professions is above average.

Those who argue that new Canadians should see themselves need to see themselves in major institutions like education, justice, health, politics … are actually practicing the very thinking that leads to discrimination, and it says they are different, they are stereotypable. Those who say that the schools must be culturally relevant to all the different communities, are saying the old bigots were right – these people are different – they can’t succeed in the Canadian culture.

While I think there are flaws with either approach, what I do agree with is that it the challenges of multi-culturalism are felt in all parts of the Canadian societal fabric. I am particularly concerned with ethnic politics, where political parties skew policies to that of particular demographics, regardless if the substance those policies reflect what it means to be Canadian.

Thanks again for the comment!

The issue of Multiculturalism is needlessly complex. It is a result of the reality that many communities have contributed to Canada’s development, and a result of a new paradigm of nation building. Rather than ethnic nationalism and other kinds of group identities, the foundation of building Canada is civic nationalism and the rule of law.

Multiculturalism is not a goal but a result of a just society. It is the result of accepting immigrants and job applicants on their individual merits, rather than their group identities. The late professor Pat Duffy Hutcheon described multiculturalism as the “equality of opportunity for individuals regardless of biological inheritance or ancestral history.” That concept is a challenging adjustment to older Canadians and to immigrants whose cultures discriminated by class, cast, ethnicity, religion, gender, etcetera.

Multiculturalism can be undermined by the old way of thinking. Those who demand ‘equality of results’ and quotas for their group identity, are promoting a disharmonious ‘us versus them’ ethnic nationalism, and a resentment of the ‘other’.

In fact they are using many of the same arguments that Pearson and Trudeau attempted to disprove.

**YOUTUBE VIDEO REVIEWS ON THE HOTTEST ELECTRONICS OUT**…

One of the most important principles of an atheist is the paramountcy of reason; anything that cannot be proved rationally or through science should be not believed in i.e. God/religious belief

To the atheist schema, the act of religious faith/belief represents an intellectual deficiency – the religious believer R really has not given though to their beliefs… if R did, R would see the error in their ways.

It is to that extent that the atheist believer is condescending.

Is there anything to substantiate such a claim?

Is there anything to substantiate such a claim?