,nrrmor,on”l
k,W”“,
Printed tn the USA.
0, /,,rrKu/rura/
Krlarron,.
All nghts rewrrcd
vol. 6. pp. 137.15 I, 1912
“,47-,767,X2
020137.15$03.00.0
Copjnght
e 19x2 Pergamon
Press Ltd
ETHNIC IDENTITY
Myth and Reality in Western Canada
J. FRIDERES
AND S. GOLDENBERG
i%e University of Calgary
ABSTRACT.
The paper analyzes eleven research projects which have focused on
the issue of ethnic identity. Each study addresses the question of how important
ethnicity is to the individual. The results suggest that ethnicity, as measured in the
present studies, is of little importance to Canadians. Ethnicity. however, should be
viewed as an adaptive response to the conditions governing the context for
acquisition of scarce and desired goods! What is clear is that assertions of the
universal and constant import of ethnicity to Canadians are not true.
A sense of common origins or common values and beliefs has long been
of great concern to individuals trying to unite aggregates of people into “self
defining”
groups. This is a problem
for Marxists
in terms of class
consciousness
and solidarity, and it is identical to the problem facing blacks
who must learn to perceive their “brotherhood”
or to women in terms of
“sisterhood.”
The recognition
of all forms of collective identity is both
problematic
and variable, as is the mobilization
of groups based on this
identity. In Canada, ethnicity (and ethnic identification)
has held a revered
position for politicians
and academics alike. To a certain extent it has
become a central component
of the layman’s concept of “how Canada
works.” The present analysis addresses the question of how important
ethnicity is to Canadians and tries to place this issue in its proper situational
or contextual perspective.
THE POLITICAL
BACKGROUND
The federal government’s
policy and objectives are concerned
with
preserving and developing
Canadian
identity, strengthening
citizenship
participation
and encouraging
cultural diversification
within a bilingual
framework.
These objectives are institutionalized
through a policy of
Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. James Frideres, Department
University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4.
137
of Sociology,
2500
138
J. Frideres and S. Goldenberg
multiculturalism
that embodies three dimensions:
(1) support for all of
Canada’s cultures and assistance for the development
of those cultural
groups which have demonstrated
a desire and effort to continue to develop,
(2) assistance for members of all cultural groups in overcoming
cultural
barriers to full participation
in Canadian
society, and (3) promotion
of
creative encounters and interchange among all Canadian cultural groups in
the interest of national unity.
Multiculturalism
is an important
dimension of our national policy and
since 1971 this concept is further developed both in importance
and in
budgetary terms. The Canadian Consultative
Council on Multiculturalism
(CCCM) was established in 1973 to act as an advisory body to the Minister
of State for Multiculturalism.
The stated philosophy behind such a step was
the belief that ethno-cultural
groups should be able to influence the decision
making process by means of a continuing consultative procedure. It would
then serve as an important source of information
to the minister responsible
for multiculturalism
on opinions in Canada’s diverse cultural communities.
Besides the CCCM, there are a number of additional
federal cultural
agencies that play a significant role in the promotion
and preservation
of
cultural diversity in Canada. While their goals may not be as specific as
those of the CCCM, their overt goal is nevertheless to contribute
to the
maintenance
of ethnic identity and diversity. Such organizations
are: Social
Science Federation
of Canada, Canada Council, Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation,
National Film Board, The National Museums Corporation,
and the Public Archives.
Five programs (in addition
to the programs of the federal cultural
agencies) have been developed to implement the multicultural
policy of the
government and are carried out under the administration
of the Citizenship
Branch of the Department
of Secretary of State. These programs are:
Teaching of Official Languages, Canadian Ethnic Studies Ethnic Histories,
Cultural Development
Programs, and Multicultural
Grants.
The result of these “cultural” programs has reinforced our belief about
the importance of ethnicity and/or ethnic identity. Major policy statements
regarding immigration,
language and citizenship are based, to some extent,
upon our multicultural
policy. All of these happenings
suggest to each
Canadian that ethnicity must be an important dimension of life.
THE
ACADEMIC
BACKGROUND
There would seem to be at least four discernible theoretical positions,
each with a distinct body of literature
associated
with it. The oldest
perspective
is that of the assimilationists.
These authors, pre-eminent
among them Gordon (1964) have long argued that ethnicity would fade and
finally disappear as it became increasingly
irrelevant to the newcomers
absorbed in American society. Ethnicity, like other ascribed traits, would be
Ethnic Identity
139
dropped in an achievement-oriented
society in which opportunity
was
available
to all. This is primarily
a structural
position
with a social
psychological
consequence.
It is most clearly exemplified in the “melting
pot” literature. An empirical hypothesis drawn from this position would
suggest that the salience of ethnicity will decrease over time. To the
extent that ethnicity continues to exist, this is interpreted as a temporary
structural
lag. This perspective then is basically functional
and argues
that ethnicity will disappear since it would serve no function in such a
melting pot society (Driedger, 1980; Putnins, 1978).
In recent years, the primary challenge to the assimilationist
perspective
has come from the conservative
movement,
led by Greeley (1974). The
conservatives
have stressed the persistence of ethnicity as an enduring
structural feature of North American society, involving group solidarity
and loyalty that merges into class consciousness
at times. Indeed, a
variant
of this conservative
thesis is based in what we would now
describe as a conflict perspective.
This position
emphasizes
the entrenched and institutionalized
inequalities
of North American stratification systems (in opposition
to the alleged hidden ideological premises of
Gordon’s implicitly evolving egalitarian
system). It suggests, in contrast,
that ethnicity
is of enduring
importance
since it is a function
of this
inequality.
Ethnicity
is seen as a persistent
collective
response
to
inequality,
and both inequality
and ethnicity are treated as constants.
Glazer and Moynihan’s work (1963) might be cited as an example of this
variant.’
One might infer from this position the empirical expectation
that ethnicity will show great stability and persistence over time within
North American society.
The third ideal-typical
position is more explicitly conflict-based
and it
moves the argument,
in our view, a quantum
leap forward.
This
perspective
follows the above position to its logical conclusion,
suggesting that ethnic identity is an emergent and variable response to
similarly variable structural
features of a society. This is the position
adopted by Yancy, et al. (1976) and Francis (1976) in their thesis on
emergent identity and by Goldenberg
in an even wider context applying
to all so-called
ascriptive
characteristics,
including
kinship
(1977).
According
to this thesis, one might predict either a rise or fall in the
salience of ethnicity,
depending
on causative
situational
features. If
mobilization
of collective ethnic identity is perceived to be useful, it will
likely come about. If ethnicity is of no apparent value, it will diminish in
import over time. The case of American
Jewry is a frequently
cited
example of such ethnicity as a variable response.
The fourth perspective
can be attributed
to Gans (1979) and treats
ethnicity
as a symbolic
and social psychological
factor only, of no
‘See J. Reitz (1980) for a review of this position
in Canadian
society.
140
J. Frideres and S. Goldenberg
instrumental
signifi~nce.
It is a remnant, a bit of nostalgia for the old
days and ethnicity is considered residual, and most likely transient. This
position suggests that one will find ethnic identity only as a nostalgic
loyalty now and that those who claim it will not link it to any goalrelated instrumental
utility.
Each of these positions
carries with it a view of ethnicity as either
structural,
social psychological,
or both. Each implies either the continuing or short-term
importance
of ethnicity.
Each can be translated
into operational
terms and there are hypotheses that can be drawn out of
each perspective to be tested. Our first task, however, is to ascertain the
actual level of ethnic identity in Canada. We will then try to distinguish
among
these competing
perspectives
and come to some conclusion
concerning
their relative merits on the basis of the existing empirical
literature concerning
Canadian ethnicity. Before a detailed discussion of
the results of these studies is presented, a brief methodological
note is
presented. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
METHODS
Eleven studies conducted
in Canada measuring the salience of ethnic
identity of individuals
have been chosen as our data base. With two
exceptions,
these have been conducted
totally within Western Canada.
The data used in the studies identified were obtained by questionnaire
or
interview/ schedule using a survey research design. Two major techniques
for eliciting the salience of ethnic identity were used: (1) the Twenty
Statement Test (T.S.T.) (Who am I?) and (2) an open-ended question. In
some cases the question simply asked the respondent
which ethnic group
they identified with. In other cases a list of ethnic groups’were provided
and the respondent
could check one or alternatively
list his/her ethnic
affiliation
if it was not on the list. Other ethnic identity measures were
also used in the studie,s. For example, a semantic differential was used in
one case (Frideres, 1975); involvement
in ethnic affiliations and language
1976) and intra ethnic contact
retention
(Backeland
and Frideres,
(SEER, 1975). (See Table 1 for identification
of studies.)
The studies being analyzed were conducted
between 1974 and 1979.
Sample sizes ranged from less than 100 to over 3,000. Our assessment of
the actual procedures
used in the data collection for the studies did not
reveal any anomalies
with regard to procedure or method of analysis.
Hence it is unlikely
that the results obtained
are an artifact
of
procedures-either
in methods or in analysis.
RESULTS
The first question
to be addressed
in this review of studies concerns
the
141
Ethnic Identity
Percent
of Respondents
Claiming
TABLE 1
Ethnic Affiliations
A
Study
South Asian/Interfaith,
N=256
T.S.T.
0
OpenEnded
(%)
(%)
Frideres/Goldenberg,
N=213
1976
Frideres/Goldenberg,
N=lOO
1976
Other
(%)
Sample
10
Adults, urban, Alberta
13
33
12
Husband/wife,
Alberta
4
11
15
University students, urban
Alberta
2
40
12
Adults, urban, Alberta
46
6
urban,
Adults, small town Alberta
1977
408
Frideres, 1975
N=464
12
Frideres/Goldstein,
N=95
Cross National Canadian
Adults
16
6
30
60
Adults, urban Manitoba
30
35
Adults, urban Alberta
46
19
Adults, urban Manitoba
Adults (rural/urban)
Alberta
1974
Frideres, et al., 1977
N=323
1976
Ellishen, 1976
N=3200
aThe percentage
Quebec.
C
25
SEER, 1975
N=135
Backeland/Frideres,
N=114
Studies
1979
Mackie, 1977
N=665
Panting/Gibbons.
N=1632
for Ten Canadian
Cross National Canadian
Adults
51b
distribution
of “none”
bThe data is only for Francophones
varied
from
23% in Maritimes
to 62% in
in Quebec.
salience or import of ethnic identity for Canadians. Table 1 provides data
with regard to this question.
All of the studies cited have at least one
open-ended
question with regard to ethnic identity. The results are clear.
Half of the respondents
do not claim to hold ethnicity
as a salient
component
of their identity structure.
The data, in fact, show that a
considerably
lower percentage (than 50%) hold no salient ethnicity. Such
a finding alone indicates that ethnicity is not a constant undercurrent
of
importance
to all individuals in our society.
142
J. Frideres and S. Goldenberg
Reitz (1980) also suggests that ethnicity
is declining
in import for
Canadians
except for what he calls “middle class” ethnics-not
linked to
either economic segregation
in high status jobs or migration
into the
middle class. While a small proportion
of the respondents
felt that
“ethnicity”
was important,
this does not mean that this sector of society
will not make demands, or that it is sociologically unimportant.
Other methodological
techniques for assessing ethnic identity have also
been used such as projective and scale techniques. The results of these are
listed in Table 1 under columns
A and C. For example,
using the
technique of T.S.T., rates of ethnic identity are even lower. These data
also suggest that ethnic identity is not pervasive in Canadian society nor
is it as intense as some would like us to believe. On the other hand, the
discrepancies
pointed out in the data base do suggest that for some
groups ethnicity remains an important identity dimension.
Other subjective and objective measures of ethnic identity have also
been utilized in the above studies. For example, one study asked whether
or not the respondent
felt his/ her fate was bound up with one’s ethnic
group. Slightly over ten per cent responded
“yes, definitely,”
or “to a
large extent.” Likewise, less than 1Oyo felt that one’s ethnic group was a
very important
part of their life. And, over 35% claimed to “never or
seldom think about being ethnic” (Frideres and Goldenberg,
1977).
Objective techniques have also been used by researchers in an attempt
to assess the “ethnicity”
of respondents.
Questions such as voluntaryassociation
membership
in ethnic organizations,
ownership
of ethnic
artifacts,
usage of ethnic artifacts,
retention
of language,
and use of
ethnic mass media have been utilized in some of the above studies. The
results obtained in the studies using this procedure show fewer than 10%
of the respondents
claiming to regularly use a nonofficial language, or to
regularly use ethnic artifacts or the ethnic mass media.2 In the South
Asian/Interfaith
study (1979) it was shown that fewer than 1070 of the
respondents
belonged to an ethnic organization
while at the same time
over one-third
belonged to a “community”
(non-ethnic)
organization.
The analysis of Polish membership
patterns in Toronto also supports the
above conclusion
(Radecki, 1979). The results of the present studies also
indicated (when measured) that recent immigrants
were higher users of
such facilities as ethnic mass media, more likely to belong to an ethnic
organization
or use their mother tongue more often, but as pointed out
in the Federal Government’s
Green Paper on Immigration
(1974) and
confirmed in the above studies, after 3 to 5 years ethnicity is very much
decreased. One would be hard-pressed
to conclude from such results that
these respondents
find their ethnicity
to be of great or current im‘The Frideres-Goldstein
(1974) study
example, Weingrod, 1979.
involved
Jewish
intra-
and inter-marriages.
See, for
Ethnic ldentitl
portance
suggests
ethnicity
143
to their lives, as is often claimed of Canadians.
Indeed, the data
some of the situational
contexts or conditions
under which
may be of greater or lesser importance.
CHANGING
ETHNICITY
In three of the studies cited above, Frideres and Goldenberg
(1977,
1978) and Frideres (1975), a series of questions was asked to determine
the relative import of different types of identity as well as the extent of
change. One question asked respondents
to indicate what dimension
of
identity was the most important for them. The results of the three studies
indicate that family is the most important
dimension
of identity for a
study
majority
of respondents.
In fact, in the Goldenberg-Frideres
(1978) well over 80% indicated family as the most important
dimension
of their identity.
The above studies also showed that gender and
occupation
are salient aspects of identity though not nearly as important
as family. What became equally clear was the fact that ethnic identity
was not defined as a salient component.
In the Frideres (1975) study,
only 5% of the respondents
felt that ethnicity was the most important
aspect of their lives. The above data supports the claim that ethnicity is a
less important
aspect than other elements of identity, with which it can
be compared.
The Frideres-Goldenberg
studies (1977, 1978) also assessed data on
identity change. First of all, each respondent
was asked to locate on a
IO-point ladder where they personally stood at the present with regard to
their choice of the most important
identity dimension.
Then they were
asked where they stood 5 years ago and where they thought they would
stand 5 years into the future.
While this measurement
technique is not specific to ethnic identity, the
results were intriguing.
On the average, past and future movements
showed a 3-point shift. For example, if someone felt that on a IO-point
scale (0 is “not important,”
10 is “very important”),
their present “family
identity” was 7; when asked where it was 5 years ago, they would answer
“5” and felt it would be an “8” 5 years into the future. This represents a
shift of 3 points. This crude measure of change did not take into
consideration
the sign nor the absolute position on the scale to begin
with. Since the absolute positioning
of the “present” (the base line point)
is not the primary concern in the present paper, we focused on upward
versus downward shifts.
Looking specifically at those respondents
who claimed that ethnicity
was the “most important”
identity, we found that the overall trend was a
decreased importance
of ethnicity.
That is, a continuous
reduction
in
importance
of ethnicity was given by the respondents
for the 10 year
(past to future) time period covered by the respondent.
144
J. Frideres and S. Goldenberg
The studies also elicited information
with regard to the “circumstances” in which ethnic identity is most important,
the frequency
of
occurrence
of these circumstances
and how this has changed over the
past 5 years. Ethnic identity
became most salient under three conditions-travel
(both to homeland and outside of Canada); religious or
secular holidays; and with family (kin). The frequence of occurrence for
travel was very small (once in every 5 years). However, holidays were
“constant”
in that they occurred regularly every year. With regard to
“family-kin”
contacts,
we discovered
that this condition
is no longer
independent
of holidays-hence
holidays and kin-family
contacts have
remained stable over the past 5 years. On a short time scale, this data
supports notions of a “circumstantial
identity” as posited by Yancey and
Francis.
When respondents
were asked how “ethnicity”
was expressed,
enhanced or transmitted
to younger members of the family under the above
conditions,
the answer was directly related to Gans’ hypothesis. Answers
included “we just feel ethnic,” “it’s something I can’t explain,” “a feeling.”
There was no “formal training”
of younger members of the family but
rather a reassertion
of the family’s ethnic background
and a reaffirmation
that it was acceptable
to retain it. Circumstances
seem to
produce expressive identity even if there is no instrumental
needs for it.
Such “nostalgic identity” is likely to be much more short-lived than that
produced
as a means to a valued end. Indeed nostalgic identity is a
frequent prerequisite
to complete assimilation.
On the other hand, even
complete assimilation
is impermanent,
as witness the German Jews of the
World War II era or the Spanish Jews of the era of the Inquisition,
both
of which groups exemplify, tragically but clearly, that ethnicity can be
forced onto individuals against their will or choice. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZ
ETHNIC
IDENTITY
Identity
is an elusive and complex concept, although
in its most
general sense, it is used to refer to an individual’s sense of who he or she
is (Kando,
1977; Mead, 1925; Gergan, 1971; Lambert,
1967; Vaughan,
1972). However, individual
researchers use a great variety of definitions
of this concept in their research (Isajiw, 1970; Dashefsky, 1972; Parsons,
1968; Foote, 1951).
The social and personal identity of an individual involves the symbolic
use of some aspect of their culture to differentiate
them from other
individuals
or groups (Taylor,
1967; Zavalloni,
1971; Comeau
and
Driedger, 1978). The origin of these differentiating
aspects may lie within
the group or it may be imposed from outside the group, i.e., labeling. It
is clear that such an understanding
presupposes
the social structural
nature of an identity.
Further,
allegiances
can be viewed as existing
(1) on a continuum
for high to low in intensity
or salience to the
individuals
involved and (2) as arranged in some hierarchical order with
regard to other groups, i.e., there may be competing allegiances.
If one adopts the model proposed
by Devos and Romanucci-Ross
(1975) individuals
may be conceptualized
as finding themselves orienting
primarily to: (1) the past, (2) the future, and (3) the present. Our interest
is in past orientations.
The fact that someone has affiliations
with, or
belongs to a particular
ancestry or origin reflects a past orientation.
Ethnic and family identity are examples of such a past orientation.
At any one point in time these identities may have greater or lesser
salience, i.e., the extent of identification
with these three orientations
may change over time. Secondly, as pointed out above, conflict may
emerge among
the three orientations.
Where two or more of the
orientations
are viewed as congruent (or overlapping) they can be defined
as supportive and thus little conflict among them may result. However, if
internal
(or exogenous)
factors to the group presently
receiving the
individual’s
orientations
are not viewed as mutually
supportive,
then
conflict will emerge, and the individual
may experience
this as stress.
Thus, the hierarchical
arrangement
is not stable, and will be altered as
circumstances
change, e.g., marriage.
Conceptualized
this way, self identity is a particular
and transitory
arrangement
of subidentities
acquired in the process of learning of social
roles and identification
with social groups. It should be noted that
although several individuals
may belong to the same or similar groups,
play the same or similar roles, the resultant identity organization
may
result in different outcomes, depending upon the specific constellation
of
the respective subidentities
(Isrsely, 1978).
In addition, we characterize
these subidentities
as mutually dependent
as well as interpenetrable.
Viewed in this perspective, identity is seen as a
dynamic
construct
and even after it is crystallized,
identities are not
conceptualized
as ever-enduring,
constant or rigid.
In short, ethnicity is seen as a set of attitudes related to a sense of
ancestral identification
with a segment of the world’s populations.
As
Van den Berghe (1969) has pointed out, we all have, whether we are
willing to recognize it or not, an ethnic origin. In addition to creating a
sense of common origin, ethnic identity also can establish the correctness
of one’s own behavior and at the same time allow one to assess the
correctness of the outsider’s behavior.
In order to predict the priorities of loyalty in an individual
and to
determine whether his/her ethnic identity is given priority over another
form of identity, one must understand
the potential uses of identity by
the individual.
Instrumental
concerns are those which are principally
goal directed. On the other hand, expressive concerns are considered
ends in themselves.
Truly a dilemma faces the individual.
On the one
146
J. Frideres and S. Goldenberg
hand, the individual
may have to decide whether or not retaining
an
affiliation
with a particular
ethnic group is an advantage
or disadvantage.
The individual
must decide whether it is worthwhile
to
him/ her to give up his group identity or to maintain it and seek to realize
his goals despite the inconveniences
of his ethnic status. On the other
hand, the maintenance
of ethnic identity can also be an expressive
activity. If so, then the individual may feel that the psychological
rewards
of ethnic identity are well worth the costs involved, i.e., not being able to
change behavior or occupation.
A constant interdependent
relationship
is
established
between the two activities. What has been referred to as the
“crisis” in identity occurs when one has to choose between conflicting
loyalties.
Gans has provided
an alternative
conceptualization
thus far unnoticed-symbolic
ethnicity.
This, according
to Cans, can be characterized by a nostalgic
allegiance
to the culture
of the immigrant
generation,
“old country,”
or traditional
cultural values of some past
generation.
However, this “pride” or “love for” a tradition is felt without
incorporating
it into everyday behavior. As noted earlier, identity is not
built solely by individuals
from such choices. Identity of all kinds is
partially chosen by individuals
and partially forced upon them for their
acknowledgment.
Identity
is a potential
to be mobilized
and to be
recognized, accepted and legitimated only under certain conditions. Thus
an ethnic organization
may “force” an individual
to recognize and
acknowledge
membership
in a group hitherto unrecognized.
“Passing” is
the phenomenon
of camouflage
or of pretending
to possess a racial
identity as “white” when one is “truly” “black.” Circumstances
may
facilitate or make impossible such racial, ethnic, or class transformation.
There is mobility among identities and identity elements are always in
competition.
CONCLUSION
It would seem that ethnicity
for a majority of Canadians
has little
significance in defining one’s identity. It may have little relevance for the
structuring
of social relationships
and it can, at various times and in
various contexts, attain a latent stage. However, it is true that under
certain
kinds of circumstances,
it may become important.
It may
substantially
effect individuals’
relations to others, to their jobs, their
communities
and themselves.
Because ours is an ethnically heterogeneous
society, ethnicity tends to
become fragmented or partialized. As Breton (1976) has pointed out:
Only certain areas of a person’s life involve his or her ethnicity. Ethnically
specified social expectations
tend to be restricted to a few limited aspects of
behavior such as, for example, those pertaining to the role of spouse or parent.
Ethnic 1dentit.r
147
Ethnicity
becomes partialized as a result of the process of social differentiation
which involves, as we have seen, a social organization
based on roles. Individuals
behave differently in different roles and in different contexts; they change “social
personality” from one to the other (pp. 60-61).
Parenti (1969) has also pointed out that one’s experiences
usually
produce complementary
identifications.
However, in a modern ethnic
heterogeneous
society the system is characterized
by a social structure
that is highly differentiated
and, as pointed out previously,
consists of
juxtaposed
groups, following a pattern of intersecting
circles (Coleman,
1970).
There is substantial
support then for the theoretical
argument
that
ethnicity is not as crucial a feature of Canadian life across the country as
is often claimed.3 This is particularly
so for the hinterland
regions of
Canada. We would suggest that ethnicity will be salient where it is used
defensively by charter groups seeking to protect their “preserves” from
invasion (Breton, 1964). In the West, no single ethnic group can act as a
total gatekeeper
of any institutional
structure.
A more individualistic
system exists rewarding
individuals
as they compete individually.
The
West is a “booming”
economic area, and boom conditions
encourage
rapid mobility
through
individualistic
achievement
Boom conditions
mean opportunities
are expanding
and there is a shortage of labour to
In such conditions,
there is no
occupy the newly created positions.
competitive
advantage
to being a member of any ethnic group. In this
instance ethnic affiliation can be expected to be of reduced importance.
Further, since opportunities
are expanding
rapidly, no single group can
control access to them, thereby limiting others’ mobility on the grounds
of ethnicity. On the other hand, in a shrinking economy, where choices
must be made among many competitors
for each position, ascriptive
qualities may be relevant in making the choice, and ethnicity may be a
crucial feature in such choices, along with “discrimination”
by gender,
age, and race. When opportunities
are restricted, those in control gain
the power to nominate successful applicants according to many criteria,
both achieved and ascribed.
A second factor related to the relative unimportance
of ethnicity in the
West might be the result of migration
trends.
Traditionally
(and
currently) international
immigrants
have initially settled in the East and
then after a period of time of settling in have moved to the West (Breton,
1964). Breton points out that older cities develop a great many support
systems for ethnics
of all kinds and this means that institutional
policies should be
“The question
of how many “ethnics” are required before national
implemented
is not a facile question. Presently it is assumed by the Federal Government
that, on the basis of objective “ethno-national”
identity figures, policies will be implemented. This criterion is supplemented
by the extent of pressure placed on the Federal
Government
by ethnic interest groups.
J. Frideres
148
and S. Goldenberg
completeness
is not in evidence for younger cities. The larger, older cities
are able to generate
“critical
mass” capable
of supporting
ethnic
institutions
(Goldenberg,
1977). Much of the recent influx to the West is
composed of people from Eastern Canada seeking opportunities
where
they abound.
These Canadians
are less likely to experience
ethnic
discrimination
(though they may well experience regional discrimination)
than would be true of international
migrants
from a very different
culture from ours.
We agree with Yancy et al, and Barr (1980) that ethnicity
is best
viewed as an emergent response to structural conditions.
It is not a fixed
state of affairs but rather an intermittent
process. It is but one of many
characteristics
which may be more or less salient to, and mobilized or
activated by , individuals
or groups depending on other social structural
conditions
in the society. Ethnic consciousness
is as much a variable as
class consciousness
and, indeed,
would argue that the conditions
governing
the emergence
of ethnicity
appears very similar to those
involved in the emergence of class consciousness
and class action.
With regard to policy implications,
we find that almost all multiculturalism
programs
support
ethnic cohesion
by reinforcing
ethnic
culture, particularly
language.
However, it would seem that economic
organizations
are a necessary component
for the survival of ethnic group
cohesion,
and this aspect of being ignored by current multicultural
policy.
Ethnicity should (and can) be viewed as an adaptive response to the
conditions
governing
the contest for acquisition
of scarce and desired
goods. For too long it has been argued that in our individualistic
and
universalistic
society ascriptive
characteristics
are irrelevant
and not
useful in a competitive system. The work of others in Canada has all very
clearly pointed out that a systematic
relationship
does exist between
ethnic affiliation and occupation,
education, and income. Therefore, one
might conclude that while the individualistic
ideology may prevail, the
actual system of stratification
is usually quite different. Western Canada
now, like the U.S. at an earlier period, is expanding at an enormous rate.
Under these unusual circumstances,
ethnicity tends to have little value to
individuals.4
In Eastern Canada or in most of the United States ethnicity
may resurface as a relevant identity simply because conditions
there are
different and less favourable.
If one assumes then that the instrument
of the acquisition
of goal
resources is a central problem
faced by individuals,
the major issue
4The reader
to read Chapter 6 of R. Burkey, Efhnic and Racial Groups: The
Menlo Park, California,
Cummings
Publishing
Co.. for a
discussion of the ethnogenesis
process of the U.S.A. I would also like to thank a reviewer
who pointed out that while a statistical majority minimizes ethnicity, it does not necessarily
make it less important.
Dynamics
is encouraged
q” Dominance.
Ethnic Idemit),
149
concerns
the conditions
under which group membership
may be advantageous.
It is our position,
based on the available
evidence, that
ethnic identification
will flourish when people believe that it can be
useful in the struggle to obtain or retain valued resources. On the other
hand, when people can see no net usefulness in such group memberships,
they will tend to attempt to disassociate
themselves from it. Such an
attempt may succeed for fail, depending
on the responses of others as
conditions continually
change.
Our review of these eleven studies conducted
primarily
in Western
Canada suggests that at the time of the studies, ethnicity was of limited
importance
to these Canadians.
We have suggested several reasons to
explain this lack of importance
and to integrate such a finding into the
more general
literature
on conditions
facilitating
or inhibiting
the
emergence of ethnic identity. All specific studies of such a variable are
necessarily dated, and we might even go so far as to suggest that as the
boom passes through Western Canada and the growth of opportunities
slows as well, it is likely that ethnic identity will become more relevant
than it now is to these Western
Canadians.
What is clear is that
assertions
of the universal
and constant
importance
of ethnicity
to
Canadians
are not, and probably never were, true. We are only slowly
learning
the implications
of the realization
that ethnic identity is a
variable and not a constant. zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
REFERENCES
H. Ethnic Diversity in Catholic America. New York: Wiley. 1973
BACKELAND,
L. & J. FRIDERES
Franc0 Manitobans
and cultural loss: A
fourth generation. Prairie Forum, 1976, 2, I-18.
BARR, E. A contingency approach to ethnic relations: lessons from the Japanese
Canadian
experience.
In K. Ujimoto and G. Hirabayashi
(Eds.), Visible
Minorities and Multiculturalism:
Asians in Canada. Toronto: Butterworth,
1980.
BLISHEN,
B. Perceptions
of national
identity.
The Canadian Review of
Sociology and Anthropology,
1978, 15, 128-133.
BRETON, R. Institutional
completeness
of ethnic communities
and personal
relations to immigrants. American Journal of Sociology, 1964, 70, 193-205.
BRETON, R. The structure of relationships
between ethnic collectivities. In L.
Dreidger (ed.), The Canadian Mosaic. Toronto:
McClelland and Stewart,
1976.
COLEMAN,
J. Social inventions. Social Forces, 1970, 49, 163-177.
COMEAU, L. & DREIDGER,
L. Ethnic opening and closing in an open system:
a Canadian example. Social Forces, 1978, 57, 600-620.
COMMITTEE
OF SOUTH ASIANS/INTERFAITH
Immigrant
Profiles in
Calgary, Alberta. Unpublished manuscript, Calgary, Alberta, 1979.
DASHEFSKY,
A. And the search goes on: the meaning of relio-ethnic identity
and identification.
Sociological Analysis, 1972, 33, 239-245
ABRAMSON,
I50
.I. Frideres and S. Goldenberg
DEVOS, G. & ROMANUCCI-ROSS,
L. (Eds.) Ethnic Identity: Cultural Continuities and Change. Palo Alto: Mayfield, 1975.
DRIEDGER,
L. Jewish identity. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 1980, 3, 67-88.
FOOTE, N. Identification
as the basis for a theory of motivation.
American
Sociological Review, 1951, 16, 14-21.
FRANCIS, E.K. Interethnic Relations. New York: Elsevier, 1976.
FRIDERES,
J. Identity in an urban rural context. Human Resources ofAlberta,
Volume II, Edmonton, Alberta, 1975.
FRIDERES,
J. & GOLENDBERG,
S. Hyphenated
Canadians:
comparative
analysis of ethnic, regional and national identification
of Western Canadian
university students. Journal of Ethnic Studies, 1977, 5, 91-100.
FRIDERES,
J. & GOLDENBERG,
S. The situational context of ethnic identity.
Unpublished manuscript,
1978, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta.
FRIDERES,
J. AND GOLDSTEIN,
J. Jewish-Gentile
Intermarriage.
Social
Compass, 1974, 21, 69-84.
FRIDERES,
J., DISANTO, J., GOLDENBERG,
S & J. HORNA Citizenship
Acquisition in Calgary, Alberta, Volumes 1 and II. Secretary of State, Ottawa,
1977.
GANS, H. Symbolic ethnicity: the future of ethnic-group and culture in America.
Ethnic and Racial Studies, 1979, 2, I-20.
GERGAN, K. The Concept ofSeIf. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1971.
GLAZER,
N & MOYNIHAN,
P. Behind the Melting Pot. Cambridge,
Mass.:
Mass. Institute of Technology Press & Harvard University Press, 1963.
GOLDENBERG,
S. Kinship and Ethnicity Viewed as Adaptive Responses to
Location in the Opportunity Structure. Journalof Comparative Family Studies,
1977, 8, 119-166.
GORDON, M. Assimilation in American Life. New York: Oxford University Press,
1964.
GOVERNMENT
OF CANADA
Immigration Policy Perspective. Ottawa, Information Canada, 1974.
GREELEY, A. Ethnicity in the United States. New York: Wiley, 1974.
ISAJIW, W. Definitions of ethnicity. Ethnicity, 1970, 1. 26-34.
ISRSELY, H. Semanticdtfferentiation
of meaning:recording the content ofethnic
identity of third generation Japanese Americans. Pacific Sociological Association, Spokane, Washington,
1978.
KANDO, T. Social Interaction. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby, 1977.
LAMBERT.
W. A social psychology of bilingualism. Journal of Soc,ial Issues.
1967, 23. 97-103.
MACKIE,
M. Ethnicity and nationality: how much do they matter to Western
Canadians? Presented to CSSA, Fredericton, N.B., June, 1977.
MEAD, G. The genesis of the self and social control. International Journal of
Ethics, 1925, 35, 251-273.
PARENTI, M. Ethnic politics and persistence of ethnic identification.
In H. Bailey
and E. Katz (Eds.), Ethnic Group Politics. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill,
1969.
PARSONS, T. The position of identity in a general theory of action. In C. Gordon
and K. Gergen (Eds.), The Selfin Social Interaction. New York: Wiley and Sons,
1968.
Ethnic Identit)
151
PONTING,
R. & GIBBINS, R. Contemporary
prairie perceptions of Canada’s
Native People. Prairie Forum, 1977, 2, 57-81.
PUTNINS, A. Ethnic identification
in second generation Latvians. International
Migrations, 1978, 16, 122-130.
RADECKI,
H. Ethnic Organizational Dynamics: The Polish Group in Canada.
Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 1979.
REITZ, J. 7’he Survival of Ethnic Groups. Toronto: McGraw-Hill-Ryerson
Ltd.,
1980.
S.E.E.R. Social Dislocation of Jasper, Alberta. Parks Canada, Ottawa, 1975.
TAYLOR, D. Ethnic identity: some cross-cultural comparisons.
In J. Berry and W.
Lonner (Eds.), Applied Cross-Cultural Psychology, Amsterdam:
Swets and
Zeitlinger, 1976.
VAN DEN BERGHE, P. Pluralism and the polity: a theoretical exploration.
In L.
Kuper and M. Smith (Eds.), Pluralism in Africa. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1969.
VAUGHAN,
G. Ethnic awareness and attitudes in New Zealand children. In G.
Vaughan (Ed.), Racial Issues in New Zealand. Auckland: Akarana Pres, 1972.
WEINGROD,
A. Recent trends in Israeli ethnicity. Ethnic and Racialstudies, 1979,
2, 55-65.
YANCEY, W., E. ERIKSEN & JULIANI,
R. Emergent ethnicity: a review and
reformulation.
American Sociological Review, 43, 391-403.
ZAVALLONI,
M. Cognitive
processes and social identity through focused
introspection.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 197 1, 1, 235-260. zyxwvutsrqpon
ABSTRACT
TRANSLATIONS
La prksente communication analyse onze projets de recherche
qui tous traitent de l'identitg ethnique. Chacun des projets
pose la question de savoir quelle es,t l'importance de
l'ethnicite' pour l'individu.
Les,resultats obtenus sugg\erent
que l'ethnicitg, telle qu'envisagee dans les dits projets de
recherche, est de peu d importance pour les Canadiens.
L'ethnicitg, cependant, doit &re envisage'e comme une re/ponse
favorable aux conditions, prises dans un contexte don&, pour
l'acquisition de biens rares et d&i&s.
Le point important
B noter est qu'il est faux d'affirmer l'importance,
our les
Canadiens, de l'universalitg et de la Constance de 1P ethnicite/.
En este ensayo se analizan once proyectos de investigaci&
que
tienen coma foco el tema de la identidad e'tnica. Cada estudio
indaga sobre la pregunta de cual es la importancia que la
etnicidad tiene para el individuo. Los resultados sugieren
que la etnicidad, definida dentro de 10s estudios dados, es de
poca importancia para 10s canadiences.
La etnicidad, sin
embargo, debe ser vista coma una respuesta adaptiva a las
condiciones que gobiernan el context0 de la adquisicicn de
bienes deseables y escasos.
Se propone que aque/llas as
aserciones que entraiian una importancia constante y universal
a la etnicidad, por parte de 10s canadiences, no son verdaderas,