by
Dean, Faculty of Education, Brandon University
Jerry Storie
Human understanding is a by-product of the critical examination of a set of facts, the use of reason and logic, and open and honest communication. In life, as in politics, understanding is compromised and change unlikely if we are afraid to seek the truth faithfully and diligently.
Unfortunately, as Herbert Agar, the Pulitzer Prize wining author of The Peoples Choice, has noted, "The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear." The corollary of this wisdom might be that the truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth that few willingly speak.
Last fall, as I was preparing to teach an education foundations course to final year Bachelor of Education students, I came to realize that politicians and academics were largely ignoring a real and growing problem in Canada, and other fully democratic countries – our common understanding of multiculturalism. In discussing multiculturalism, I think Canadians must understand two issues - what being a multicultural society means and what constitutes "Canadian" values.
A casual survey of political rhetoric on the issue of multiculturalism is instructive. For many politicians the truth, particularly during elections, becomes increasingly more like Steven Colbert's "truthiness" - if it sounds true, that's good enough. This is certainly the case around the issue of multiculturalism and what it means for our society.
Multiculturalism for many Canadians, it seems to me, is akin to Folklorama. It is the celebrations of the overt aspects of culture: the food, the music, the clothes, the folklore, in addition to the colour of skin and the country of origin.
In the rush to be welcoming, understanding and tolerant, Canadians have convinced themselves that multiculturalism is about superficial differences and not about values - fundamental values - like those enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, such as equality of person, religious freedom, and freedom of speech. Canadians, and particularly Canadian politicians, do not talk about values or the potential for conflicting values. As a multicultural society, it has become politically incorrect to talk honestly about the potential consequences of welcoming hundreds of thousands of new Canadians each year whose underlying cultural beliefs, particularly religious beliefs, are fundamentally at odds with our Charter of Rights and other core Canadian values.
But does being multicultural mean we ignore, tolerate, or support values and practices that are abhorrent in a free, egalitarian and democratic country? The answer to this question is being discovered in many European countries, including Great Britain where home-grown terrorist appear committed to jihad. In Canada, as Quebec rural municipal councillors recently found out, attempting to discuss what adopting Canadian values might mean for some immigrants brings instant notoriety. We may have carried our own sense of decency and tolerance too far.
Evidence of this propensity to ignore this real and growing problem is everywhere. A few weeks ago, politicians of all stripes appeared at a community event in Surrey B.C. to talk glowingly of Canada's multicultural mosaic at an event apparently sponsored and organized, in part, by a Sikh group that Canadian authorities have identified as a terrorist organization.
Political leaders remain steadfastly silent in the face of the recent arrest of young Muslim Canadians apparently prepared to do harm to their own country and countrymen. This is a new and alarming phenomenon in Canada. This was followed by death threats against Muslim Canadians simply for arguing for more openness and dialogue in Mosques around the world. Isrhad Manji's book The Trouble With Islam sparked a similar reaction among some Canadian Muslims. Few Muslims, and fewer non-Muslims, appear ready to examine the underlying causes of this inability to openly discuss differences of religious or cultural values.
At the root of this apparent clash of values is God, or more specifically, the cultural manifestation of our primordial superstition that there is a God. In a 2003 Ipsos-Reid national poll a growing number of Canadians, now 24%, agreed with the statement "God is an old superstition". Certainly for these Canadians, and perhaps for many others, because of the diversity of religious beliefs and our society's secular trappings, religion is not considered an integral part of our culture. We are, for the most part, a staunchly secular society, at least at the public level. For most Canadians, religion is like underwear - people assume you are wearing some, but no one is so impolite as to ask.
While separation of church and state is an accepted notion for most Canadians, the idea of separating religious views from other aspects of life is patently impossible or deemed heretical for many of the 250,000 immigrants and refugees that Canada welcomes annually. For many of them, culture is inextricably linked to a set of religious beliefs that helps to define them. It speaks to who they are, what they value and what they believe.
We have become accustomed to ignoring the truth, if it is inconvenient. Al Gore has revived a career on this premise. We have our own set of inconvenient truths – one is that our society cannot afford to be indifferent to the implications of the transmission of cultural differences, which have real world consequences.
The dilemma for politicians is: how do we address the issues of the separation of church and state, tolerance, intellectual curiosity, and rational thinking without offending someone's sensibilities? It is a challenge worthy of Solomon.
The cover of the most recent Macleans magazine asked the rhetorical question: Is God poison? The question is a legitimate one, and one that arises not only from ancient religious disputes between Protestants and Catholics, Shiite and Sunni, Islam and Christianity or tribal god against tribal god. It is a persistent fact of human history. It is a truth that cannot be ignored, even if we attribute all the horror to the manipulation of peoples' fears or wishes by political or religious leaders.
Every culture has created its God or Gods. Some religious leaders can frame the idea of God in a very positive way. But more often, the myth has been used by hucksters and the crown princes of religious sects to the disadvantage of the weak and vulnerable. Superstition and myth have often trumped reason in the affairs of men. Voltaire reminded us long ago that "those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." This appears to be as true today as ever. The question of the role of the God problem in the relatively modest religious-political confrontations occurring in Canada and other democratic countries cannot be dismissed.
The history of western civilization is replete with examples of why the church and the state must be separate. History has shown us the consequences of being held hostage to someone else's God. The Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and hundreds of other wars over the centuries sustained by political and religious fervor are explanation enough. As Canadian soldiers risk life and limb to support Afghanistan in its efforts to build a democratic country that respects human rights and embraces democracy, we have the spectacle of a Muslim being sentenced to death for the heresy of conversion to Christianity. How can we explain the separation of church and state to people for whom the term is an oxymoron? Western societies have several centuries of intellectual and political debate and struggle behind them when it comes to such questions. The freedoms that are enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms are yet only words to many recent immigrants.
Canadians, it seems to me, should be re-examining the relationship between religion, culture and Canadian values. Certainly, those agencies and individuals responsible for Canadian immigration and citizenship, those writing curriculums for our schools, and teaching our teachers should be interested in the debate.
The Manitoba curriculum documents supporting social studies classes clearly anticipate discussion of citizenship issues, including the diversity of religious beliefs. The social studies curricula have identified what most would agree are Canadian values: a belief in democracy, tolerance, religious freedom, and the genuine desire to understand and appreciate cultural differences.
The inclusion of values and a determination to talk about them is welcome and timely. The problem is that what teachers, and politicians, actually talk about are the superficial differences. What they don't talk about is the deeply divisive issue of religious values and beliefs and how they play out in the lives of citizens.
As we open our doors to ever more immigration, we need to ask some questions: What are Canadian values and do we really expect new Canadians to adopt and come to believe in them? Can this happen if we allow or encourage private religious schools, private community centers, and the isolation of communities? Can we be silent when our values clash on issues such as freedom of religion and religious views or the equality of women?
As educators, what are we to think about intellectual curiosity, the right to question ideas and authority, including religious authorities? Are we to teach Canadian values - without apology - without fear of being labeled insensitive or worse?
How is this done in the classroom when the cultures of many our immigrants are imbued with religious beliefs and power structures which incorporate religious dogma into their educational systems, their political systems and their approaches to a multitude of issues from human rights and marital relationships, to freedom of expression and freedom of religion? How can teachers, or Citizenship and Immigration Canada, approach a prospective Canadian and talk meaningfully about our secular values, the triumph of reason over superstition, when their very being is threatened even by its discussion?
What we cannot do is leave teachers alone in classrooms to instill Canadian values in our most recent Canadians. Politicians, community leaders, and thinking Canadians have to shoulder the burden of confronting the truth. Politicians need to shake off the temptation to ingratiate themselves with new Canadians by spouting platitudes. Citizenship is hard work, and new Canadians need to understand that it requires a personal commitment to reflection and change. They need the courage to talk about religious freedom, the individual's right to think for oneself and reject or embrace any set of ideals they so desire.
The point of both politics and education is to get people to understand what is important and what is not, and what is likely to be true and what is not, and what is real and what is not. The trick is to do this in a way that doesn't offend the listener's intelligence and undermine their willingness to hear the truth.
We have much to gain from sharing our communities and the work of building Canada with people from other parts of the world. But we need to acknowledge that immigrants flock to Canada in part because of the havoc the values in their own societies have wrought. They come in part because of their outward appreciation for Canadian values- respect and tolerance, a secular and open democratic government, respect for human rights and the rule of law, among others things.
Immigration Canada, politicians and political parties need to define for immigrants what being Canadian means and ensure potential immigrants are prepared to embrace all Canadian values, not just the ones that give them personal and religious freedom with no ultimate responsibility for the kind of Canada we are building. We should hear more than silence from new Canadians and their leaders when Canadian values are being undermined. We also need to hear more from our own leaders about how we are going to maintain and strengthen our own commitment to Canadian values and ensure that all Canadians are singing from the same proverbial – albeit secular - hymnbook.
I am reminded that Winston Churchill once said, "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened." I have stumbled many times, but am trying not to hurry off so quickly this time.
The belief in God has always seemed deeply irrational to me - harder to understand even than my belief that the Toronto Maple Leafs will win the Stanley Cup again. We must not be timid about encouraging and supporting the questioning of superstitions -- facets of our cultural lives that cannot be understood or explained in a rational and believable way.
In his exhaustively researched Anacalypsis: An Inquiry into the Origins of Languages, Nations and Religions, first published in 1833, Godfrey Higgins reviews the history of distortions, both intentional and unintentional, deception, and outright lies that underpin the religious dogma found in the worlds' well-known religions. Likewise, anyone who has read Emile Durkheim's seminal work Elementary Forms of Religious Life or Tom Harpur's The Pagan Christ knows a little about how and why we created such powerful myths.
Over the years our society has shed many superstitions, but we have work yet to do if Canada is to ever enjoy the full benefits of our multicultural reality.
Selected readings
Durkheim, Emile. 1915. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. London. George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
Harris, Sam. 2004. The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason. W.H. Norton & Company, New York
Harpur, Tom. 2004. The Pagan Christ. Thomas Allen Publishers, Toronto
Higgins, Godfrey. 1833. Anacalypsis: An Inquiry into the Origin of Languages, Nations and Religions. Reprinted. 1997. Kessinger Publishing. Kila, MT.
Johnson, James Turner. 1997. Holy War Idea in Western and Islamic Traditions. Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Manji, Irshad. 2003. The Trouble With Islam: A wake up call for courage and honesty. Random House Canada. Toronto
Paine, Thomas. 1957. The Age of Reason. Liberal Arts Press. New York (Originally published 1794)
Ali, Tariq. 2002. The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihads and Modernity. Verso. London.
About Ecclectica | Current issue | Issue archive | Links | The editorial team | Contact us
ISSN 1708-721X