Pluralism Vs American Culture

Have you ever wondered how High Schools are in other countries? Despite sharing some minor similarities, the differences between Nicaraguan and American High School education are clear. Such as, note-taking methods, grading system, classroom environment.

Canada is internationally recognized as a culturally diverse nation that emphasizes the concept of “The Mosaic”. No other country in the world encompasses inhabitants from so many different backgrounds who exhibit strong loyalty towards Canada, while still preserving their cultural heritage. This is contrasted to the American ideal of the "Melting Pot", which attempts to shape all of their citizens into a set mold. Canada’s philosophy is believed to be more effective and respectful than that which is possessed by our American neighbours. The following will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches, and analyze the impact of the structures on each country’s society.

In the United States, pluralism is pertinent and very significant for the government because the government itself is distributed with various powers given to the states. These states then give powers to their local governments, which continues to distribute the power. In the government system, there are levels of that consist of branches that control the many different parts of the system, so that no one person or group is given too much power. The United States has a system of checks and balances, which is pertinent to the power system and the pluralist theory ("What is a pluralist theory of government?" 2017).

Canada’s identity comes in many shapes and forms. Multiculturalism has been adopted and is at the forefront of Canadian identity. Following the Second World War, Canada’s multiculturalism policies became more acceptable and even successful in, not only accepting, but inviting multiple ethnic cultures in. In contrast to other countries, multiculturalism adaptation works for the Canadian culture. Canadian policies on multiculturalism have shifted over the past few decades; policies are now implemented for integration, not discrimination.

For many Canadian citizens, including Julie believe that you should only have been allowed to hold one passport from one country, in nineteen seventy seven when Canada changed their rules to, you are able to hold two passports for two different countries it caused an uproar in some particular ground and or individuals. It can be seen that Julie was very passionate about being a Canadian citizen and that she believes that being loyal to Canada was a necessary factor of being Canadian, considering this it can be concluded that Julie was patriotic, she had love and devotion for “her” country. On the contrary, certain individuals, immigrants for example, or humans with parents of different ethnic background, may disagree with this statement due to their circumstances. They may consider it a gift because they are able to live here in Canada, or they are able to see both parents, either way nationalism comes into place for both opinions. For the people who believe that dual citizenship is an intruding factor of being loyal to Canada nationalism comes into place starting with all those people who have patriotic feelings, efforts and, principles. They all have came together to form those groups, likewise, the people who do have dual citizenships. Thus, nationalism plays a fairly big role within the idea of being a true, loyal Canadian

According to Michael Haas, cultural pluralists respond that American cultural pluralism thrives in an integrated, not a segregated, society. They accept cultures as internally dynamic, changing and adapting over time with plenty of room for diversity inside each culture. Cultural attachments are seen as important but not exclusive, as Americans must respect those of different cultures in order to enjoy liberty together. As immigrants and native-born citizens have learned from one another, thereby broadening their views on art, cuisine, education, history, music, and other aspects of life (Immigration to the United States).

“Multiculturalism exists when people accept and encourage many cultures to thrive in a society. Multiculturalism can lead to many great outcomes, including racial and ethnic harmony, which simply means that people from different backgrounds get along well together. Living with and accepting different cultures helps us understand each other and discourage hatred and violence.” () Furthermore, various ethnic groups introduce their individual beliefs, traditions, as well as, religions to the Canadian society. Generally speaking, be part of an expanding multicultural society has impacted Canada economically, demographically and socially. Thus, the presence of the variety of different cultures, languages and heritages, results in the need for the county to adapt and change, based on the new reality of Canada.

Every community in Canada, whether it is large or small, is a gold mine of diversity, tradition, culture and much history. It’s the familiarity, knowledge of their heritage, and sense of belonging at school, work, home, or their place of worship, that strengthens their identity or who they are as Canadians. If someone identified as Canadian, it means they are a part of Canada’s society. To be Canadian means freedom. Canadians have the freedom to think for themselves, speak what they believe, and live their life with no limits. Because of this freedom, they have certain character traits and qualities. Simply, Canadians contain a certain Canadian attitude, the recognition of Canadian multiculturalism and prominently, Canadian pride.

Canada is routinely defined as the exemplar multicultural society with the most diverse cities in the world such as Vancouver, Toronto and Quebec. The concepts of integrity and complexity are being shaped in Canadian society because of its co-existence of different cultures. Indeed, multiculturalism has been a keystone of Canadian policy for over 40 years with the aim of pursuing Canadian unity (Flegel 2002). Accordingly, Canada is generally estimated a country where people are all equal and where they can share fundamental values based upon freedom. Diversity is sustained and promoted by governmental policy, however, there are still racist interactions, which are destructive to minorities integration, especially recent ethnic groups’ arrival (Banting & Kymlicka 2010). This paper will examine challenges that multiculturalism has brought society and residents of Canada.

Canadian multiculturalism is fundamental to our belief that all citizens are equal. Multiculturalism ensures that all citizens can keep their identities, can take pride in their ancestry and have a sense of belonging. Acceptance gives Canadians a feeling of security and self-confidence, making them accepting diverse cultures. All Canadians are guaranteed equality before the law and equality of opportunity regardless whichever origins. Canada’s laws and policies recognize Canada’s diversity by race, cultural heritage, ethnicity, religion, ancestry and place of origin and guarantee to all men and women complete freedom of conscience, of thought, belief, opinion expression, association and peaceful assembly. All of these rights, our freedom

Multiculturalism as argued by Himani Bannerji in "The Dark Side, of the Nation: Essays on Multiculturalism, Nationalism and Gender," (1996) acts like a thin veil that hides European settler-colonist, even racist, ideologies which permeate the socio-political landscape of Canada. Bannerjii applies a Marxist perspective as she questions the notion of multiculturalism in Canada that is separated from existing power relations and social structures (p.110). The author critiques the discourse of multiculturalism that allows the Canadian state to limit its understanding of multiculturalism to “difference” thus neglecting class, gender, sexuality and other social factors while preserving its post-colonial capitalist and oppressive structures. Bannerjii

What is Canada? What is a Canadian? Canada, to employ Voltaire's analogy, is nothing but “a few acres of snow.”. Of course, the philosopher spoke of New France, when he made that analogy. More recently, a former Prime Minister, Joe Clark, said that the country was nothing but a “community of communities”. Both these images have helped us, in one way or another, try to interpret what could define this country. On the other hand, a Canadian could be a beer, a hockey-playing beaver or even a canoe floating in a summer day's sunset. A Canadian could also be a “sovereigntyphobe”, refusing to see the liquefaction, albeit political, of the second largest country in the world.

In 2014, 35 million Americans identified as Hispanic, of whom 64 percent said they had Mexican heritage - almost 11 percent of the total population. As birthrates for Hispanics exceed those of Anglos, demographers estimate that by 2042 non-Hispanic whites will be a numerical minority in the United States. At the beginning of this century, there were twenty-one states where Hispanics were the largest ethnic minority.

A country built on immigration, Canada has long had a reputation of being culturally and ethnically diverse. While multiculturalism is meant to be built on equality and appreciation of different cultures, its concept has gained both support and opposition. On one hand, it allows for more assortment and the voices of minorities have a higher chance to be heard. On the other hand, loss of unity and conflicts may occur due to contrasting worldviews of the citizens. All in all, multiculturalism is a controversial policy that has both advantages and disadvantages, but has proven to be a successful strategy in Canada.

The side in opposition to multiculturalism firmly believes that it weakens America by keeping immigrants from adequately assimilating to the core values of America’s Anglo Protestant identity. This side believes that multiculturalism weakens the “social bond” of the United States by denying that immigrants need to assimilate to the language and values of the country’s dominant culture. The rise of non-English speaking communities is seen as a detrimental factor in the goal of achieving unity in American culture. Opponents state that immigrants coming to the United States must always lose their previous culture from their country of origin, to be able to completely assimilate to and fully embrace