Politique canadienne

A10(b) - The Politics of Backlash

Date: May 31 | Heure: 10:30am to 12:00pm | Location: Classroom - CL 434 Room ID: 15726

Chair/Président/Présidente : Michael Orsini (University of Ottawa)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Michael Orsini (University of Ottawa)

Session Abstract: Panel Abstract: The Politics of Backlash in Canada Perhaps more so than ever before, the concept of “backlash” politics has gained discursive currency and prominence in politics. Since feminist scholar Susan Faludi famously explored the concept of “backlash” in its relationship to women’s equality in the early 1990s, pundits, political scientists, and politicians have all drawn on the concept to help explain the state of contemporary politics (1991). In just the past year, for instance, the rise and success of a wide-variety of political phenomena – from Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders to the global escalation of angry populist politics – have been attributed to the “politics of backlash” (Cohen 2016). But what does it mean to study “backlash politics” in contemporary Canadian politics? What are “backlash politics”? What forms do they take? Is the “backlash” metaphor a useful one in the Canadian context? And finally, how do so-called backlash politics influence mainstream politics and governance in Canada? This panel seeks to explore these questions through the examination of a wide variety of political trends in Canada. By bringing together a disparate set of political issues– from mainstream federal and Quebec immigration politics to interest groups and social movements – the papers in this panel will address the question of what “backlash” looks like in Canada and speculate what that might mean for the future of Canadian political ideology and governance.

‘Think About the Men!’ Men’s Rights Activism, the Politics of Victimhood, and Backlash Politics in Canada: Kelly Gordon (McGill University)
Abstract: Men’s rights activism has long been considered as the epicenter of right-wing backlash politics. American scholars, for instance, have traced the many ways men’s rights movements – with support from the Republican Party and the larger religious right – have challenged feminism and feminist legal reform in the US (Kimell 1995, Connell 1995). Moreover, beginning in the 1980s, American men’s rights activists came to argue that men were increasingly suffering as women gained political prominence and influence (Faludi 1991). According to men’s rights activists, then, it is men – and not women – who are the real victims of sexism. By contrast, Canadian men’s rights activism has been relatively underexplored. Drawing on the findings of a mixed method analysis, this paper seeks to fill this gap in the literature by investigating the state of the contemporary men’s rights movement in Canada. I will argue that while the central grievances and strategic visions of men’s rights organizations across Canada vary in significant and noteworthy ways – with some men’s rights activists (MRAs) adopting inflammatory and controversial tactics and discourses while others seek to speak to the mainstream by softening their tone and message – there remains a remarkable convergence across the entire MRM when it comes to its approach to the politics of victimhood. In particular, Canadian MRAs engage significantly with arguments of victim-blaming, victim-making, and, perhaps most surprisingly, with arguments that promote the protection of ‘real’ victims.

‘The Myth of the Anchor Baby’: Birth Tourism and the Perceived Attack on Canadian Birthright Citizen: Megan Gaucher (Carleton University)
Abstract: In 2016, a petition was presented to Parliament by Conservative MP Alice Wong to refuse birthright citizenship to babies born to non-residents on Canadian soil, a process referred to as birth tourism or ‘Anchor Babies’. While statistically low, birth tourism has been identified as a point of contention in several major Canadian cities (Keung 2014, Ellis and Lee-Young 2015, Bourgon 2017). Non-residents accused of engaging in birth tourism are framed as “queue jumpers” and “system cheaters,” taking advantage of Canadian generosity and undermining the integrity of its citizenship program. With Canada being one of only two developed countries that recognizes the claim to birthright citizenship, and the Trump Administration calling for the refusal of citizenship to anchor babies, several questions warrant exploration: Which individuals born on Canadian soil are entitled to Canadian citizenship? How have contemporary narratives of citizenship and belonging implicated anchor babies and their families as threats to Canada’s citizenship program, the Canadian family, and Canadian society at large? How will motions to abolish birthright citizenship and/or police non-resident mothers elsewhere impact Canadian citizenship policy? This paper examines how gendered and racialized narratives of citizenship and belonging have been used to criminalize birth tourism. In addressing the implications these narratives present for anchor babies and their families, this paper highlights how calls for a “crackdown” on birth tourism are part of a larger trend of furthering divides between deserving and undeserving migrants, ultimately making the precarious citizenship status of certain individuals even more precarious.

Mobilization at the Margins of the Political System: Perceived Discrimination and Political Engagement Among Ethnic Minorities in Canada: Luc Turgeon (University of Ottawa), Clayton Ma (Concordia University), Stephen White (Carleton University)
Abstract: Although to a more limited extent than other countries, Canada is experiencing a backlash against immigration and ethnic minorities. What is the impact of this backlash on ethnic minorities’ political engagement? Existing research suggests that perceived discrimination is associated with lower political engagement among ethnic minorities in many Western democracies. A few studies, however, suggest that the effect of discrimination might not just be one of demobilization. For instance, Valdez (2011) observes that while discrimination would be associated with lower engagement in electoral and more formal forms of activities, it would be associated with higher engagement in non-institutional forms of activities. This paper re-examines the relationship between perceived discrimination and political engagement, looking at first and second-generation immigrants in Canada. The paper makes three contributions. First, it examines whether the pattern described above can be replicated for Canada. Second, it examines whether perceived experiences of discrimination in certain spheres of life exert a stronger influence on political engagement than in other spheres. And third, it examines whether ethnic consciousness serves as a mediating factor accentuating the link between perceived discrimination and political engagement; if existing studies tend to show that it is the case for demobilizing ethnic minorities in formal institution, we do not know whether this might accentuate the mobilization at the margins of the political system. Data are drawn from the Provincial Diversity Project, that includes a special sample of 1600 immigrants of first and second generation.