Abstract: In their recent article “'Utter Failure' or Unity out of Diversity? Debating and Evaluating the Policies of Multiculturalism” Bloemraad and Wright (2014) lament the lack of research done on the development of multiculturalism policies. This paper seeks to address this by looking at three important questions surrounding the evolution of multiculturalism policies. It examines the extent to which multiculturalism policies are path dependent, the variation across countries in the adoption of multiculturalism, and the extent to which the adoption of one multiculturalism policy leads to the adoption of others. The paper finds that multiculturalism policies exhibit path dependent patterns and are resistant to retrenchment, that there is wide variation in the extent to which different countries adopt multiculturalism policies, and that symbolic affirmation of multiculturalism is unique as a policy that leads to adoption of additional and more substantive policies. The paper builds on existing work by Banting and Kymlicka (2012) on the development of multiculturalism by making use of expanded data set that provides a time-series cross-section year by year scoring for the strength of multiculturalism policies in 21 different countries. This data set allows for a more fine grained analysis of the development of multiculturalism than has been possible in past research. The paper also makes use of hazard modeling techniques in order to conduct regression analysis on path dependent policies. The paper thus provides novel and important descriptive analysis of the development of multiculturalism.

Abstract: "In our paper we revisit the influential thesis about the existence of two very different types of nationalism – civic and ethnic – associated with inclusive, liberal-democratic and exclusive, authoritarian national identities. We argue that the “civic-ethnic” dichotomy (or the Kohn-Greenfeld framework by the names of its most influential contributors) is wrong on several accounts. “Civic” and “ethnic” are not mutually exclusive categories. No nationalism has historically emerged and developed as either “civic” or “ethnic”. Nationalism and nation-state has both civic and ethnic properties. While the former defines the citizenry and state, the latter refers to society or ethnic-cultural community. There is nothing inherently “benign” or “malign” about “civic” and “ethnic” properties of a nation. They both serve to demarcate the nation’s non-territorial borders by defining the criteria for inclusion into its citizenry and ethnic-cultural community (or, in multi-national / multi-cultural states, in a particular ethnic-cultural community). Our own framework draws attention to the connection between the type of a nation’s ethnic-cultural identity (revolving around the “national” language, church or putative common descent) and the degree of inclusiveness of its civic-political identity. We further argue that there is also a link between the phenomenon of pre-modern or early modern “internal imperialism” and the type of evolving national ethno-cultural identity. An examination of several historical cases (England, France, and Hungary) illustrates our argument."

Abstract: Between the 1950s and 1970s Britishness declined as the foundation of national identity in English-speaking Canada and New Zealand. This was primarily due to external shocks for the two countries: the Suez Crisis of 1956 was the starting point of the process in Canada. The United Kingdom’s application for entry into the European Economic Community was a common turning point for both countries. The UK’s withdrawal from East of Suez in 1967 was the end point of the process in New Zealand. The decline of the British connection led to a shift from an ethnic-centred (British) citizenship to a more civic-based one – that was more inclusive of other ethnic groups and indigenous groups in both Canada and New Zealand. The highpoints in Canada were the Canadian Citizenship Acts of 1967 and 1977, the awarding of the right to vote for First Nations on the federal level and the White Paper of 1969. In New Zealand one of the key points was the British Nationality and New Zealand Citizenship Act of 1977. The paper will draw comparisons between the Canadian and New Zealand experiences and offer some explanations for any differences. The paper will adopt a political and historical approach. It is significant, as no one in the existing literature has attempted to compare the two countries in this respect and through this approach before.

Abstract: Colonial production then regulation of Indigenous identity created the Indigenous ‘Other’ which was the genesis of Métis discontent. I claim that control over Indigenous people is maintained through regulation of identity and that Indigenous difference equates to power, the politics of which serve as the arena whereby colonial relations are produced and maintained. Overall, it is this production of difference and inequitable recognition of Indigeneity and rights that created, then maintained, the marginal space in Canadian society that Métis have been forced into. Métis marginalization began with non-recognition of their Indigeneity by the Canadian state, and contemporary constitutional recognition has done little to change Métis legitimacy within Canadian society. I claim that this is due, in part, to the divisions between Indigenous peoples that have become firmly entrenched and legitimated by Canadian and First Nation political institutions, both of which are invested in Métis marginalization. I further contend that Indigenous people naturalized state sanctioned identity regulation, initially because few alternatives were available to contest identity legislation, and contemporarily to shelter the few marginal rights recognized by the state for selectively few Indigenous peoples. So, the Métis continue to struggle for the power to self-determine as culturally distinct, diverse peoples who have been denied recognition and economic security. I explore these themes of identity regulation and discuss how exclusionary identity definitions impact the Métis.

Paper / Communication