|
|
|||
|
||||
|
Home 
News
Conference Dispatches
Canadians and Their Pasts: A New Research Project, April 17, 2007
Canadian Heritage Knowledge Centre Presents...
|
|
|
|
||
|
Canadian Heritage Knowledge Centre and the Policy Research Group Presents …
April 17, 2007 Canadians and Their Pasts: A New Research Project (Les Canadiens et leurs passé : un nouveau projet de recherche) Professor Kalpana Das, director of the Intercultural Institute Montréal (IIM) Professor Kalpana Das, director of the Intercultural Institute Montréal (IIM) divided her presentation into three parts: i) A brief history of the IIM ii) A brief overview of the last 40 years of Canadian society iii) Interculturalism and multiculturalism i) Intercultural Institute of Montréal (IIM) – A Brief History The creation of IIM in 1963, a non-governmental and community-based organization, was not motivated by political action at the federal level. IIM was the result of voluntary action firmly rooted in the community. The beginnings of IIM occurred in a radically different socio-cultural context in comparison to today. In the 1960s, ambers of Quebec’s Quiet Revolution were red hot and the concept of “diversity” was not a common topic of discussion. As the institutional infrastructure of IIM is firmly imbedded in the grassroots level, IIM has consistently interacted with numerous partners within governmental and non governmental sectors. For example, IIM was a major partner when the first Multicultural Regional Office was first established in Montréal. The IIM occupies now has a three-part mandate to serve as: a) an inter religious, intercultural and interracial centre of reconciliation, encounter and solidarity among peoples of different cultures, religions, ages and socio-economic backgrounds b) a centre of analysis and social transformation guided by the wisdom and savoir-faire of all cultures and religions c) a living alternative laboratory exploring important issues of social economics, political education, ethics, etc., with intercultural and interreligious inspiration guiding the construction of an intercultural society. (source: http://www.iim.qc.ca/ ii) Canadian Society as Pluralistic: A Brief Overview of the Last 40 Years The 1960s were shaped by critiques of the Catholic Church in Quebec, which fuelled the Quiet Revolution, linguistic and cultural struggles between French and English speaking Canadians, the mistreatment of Aboriginals, and the vast influx of mainly European (and some non-European) immigrants to Canada. In the 1970s, the socio-cultural make-up of newly arrived immigrants was radically diversified with respect to religious, cultural and linguistics identities. This “radicalization of diversity” challenged the state and the grassroots community to reflect this change within various policies, programs and initiatives. The 1980s saw the “institutionalization of interculturality” as more and more newly arrived immigrants enrolled in Canadian universities. Working with Canadian universities to implement programs reflecting the changing academic landscape, IIM determined that one cannot talk about interculturality without analyzing the impacts of international socio–cultural–economic dynamics of large population movements upon localized relationships between different communities and cultures. Furthermore, modern and post-modern theorizing on the lingering vestiges of colonialism adjusted IIM’s mandate to include international development. With the emergence of cross-cultural professionals and consultants in the private sector in the 1990s, the challenge for IIM was to carve out a space for the organization within this market. iii) From Multiculturalism to Interculturalism At the outset, to avoid the branding as a federal initiative, IIM embraced the concept of pluralism as opposed to multiculturalism. According to Professor Das, multiculturalism can espouse similar meanings to pluralism, however, the former term is not as widely accepted or effective within grassroots circles. IIM’s mandate recognizes diversity as inherent in the reality of all societies, as no one culture is truly homogenous. For IIM, the challenge rests in how we all live in this “diverse reality” and foster social harmony and cohesion. Ultimately, this “diverse reality” that we all share is not simply a juxtapositioning of diverse groups against each other, since we are all interrelated to the “other” that defines us. It is impossible for us to live in isolation, since technology has brought us closer together than ever. However, socio–philosophical–political–psychological distances remain. And technology alone cannot address the “pluralistic nature of reality.” As a result, IIM is committed to understanding the human condition by referencing different cultural models and encouraging interaction between various realities at the individual, communal and societal levels. Therefore, interculturalism as opposed to multiculturalism is not about integration as much as it is about the interaction between diverse groups on an equal footing in full acknowledgement of the “other.” In reference to the looming global ecological crisis, Professor Das confirmed that we have much to learn from communities whose knowledge systems have allowed them to live with nature for centuries in relative social, economic and environmental harmony. Although technology has provided us with many societal benefits, it is imperative within the “pluralistic nature of our realities” that we consult knowledge systems outside the technological sphere. – Francesco Manganiello, Canadian Cultural Observatory |
Printer friendly version|
Culturescope.ca is a service of the Canadian Cultural Observatory and its partners.
|
The Canadian Cultural Observatory and Culturescope.ca do not endorse and are not responsible for the content of external sites. Links will open in a new window.
Some of the material available in the resource collection originates with an organization not subject to the Official Languages Act and is available on this site in the language in which it was written. |
|
|
|
|||