“They were not him, he was not them, yet they were all the same”
I was waiting for the elevator along with another tenant in my apartment building in downtown Calgary. I commenced a courtesy chit-chat with this tenant. At one instance, I asked him how he liked living here (I meant in Calgary as most people who live here are not from this City) and his answer was so unexpected. He said he wasn’t too excited living in our building as it had (in his own words) “just become too immigranty“.
The usage of the word Immigrant as an adjective was new to me. Upon inquiring further, the person indicated that when he had moved in to the building it had a relatively good mix of demographics (presumably meaning more Canadian born residents) but now it had become full of immigrants (the new Canadians).
It was spring of 2011. Calgary was slowly recovering from the energy bust of 2009. Indeed I had noticed that over the previous 4 months, there had been a sudden influx of new residents, most appearing to be new Canadians. What he stated was a fact.
Now hold a breath! Would it surprise you to learn that this neighbor of mine is a relatively recent immigrant to Canada himself (and a person of visible minority)?
So now you must be confused. Why would a person of visible minority AND a new Canadian be so upset with the fact that the building he resides in has an influx of others like him – The Immigrants?
I was intrigued by his statement. Since our elevator arrived and we had to depart on separate floors our conversation ended there. But I made it a point to catch up with him a few days later. At a point during our second chat I brought up the elevator conversation from earlier, and told him I was curious to know why he felt (and what he meant) by the place becoming “too immigranty”. This is what he had to say.
[Heirarchy of Immigrants]
A common misconception by most Canadians is that all immigrants (regardless of country of origin, religious background, ethnicity) face a common set of experiences (opportunities and challenges) as a group. There-in lies the basis of misunderstanding of the immigrant phenomenon by most Canadian born residents.
[He explains further]
The immigrant set can be generalized in to two distinct groups. Lets call one group CONGREGATES and the other DISSIPATES.
The Congregates, upon arrival to a new country/city/environment, tend to be drawn to those most similar to them. This behavior can be oft-times mistaken as cliquish or xenophobic to an outsider of that Congregrate group. In reality, it is simply a matter of simple economics and practicality. Language barriers of the new environment tend to foster immediate group cohesiveness among the Congregrates (who presumably share their native language). The group bonding overcomes all individual deficiencies and works as a shield against external bias and prejudices that a congregate member is more likely to face as an individual. Everyone looks out for the other within this group. As a result, there is not much incentive to move beyond or outside of the group, even for employment reasons. Over time, the group bonding becomes more rigid thus making it ever more impractical (or harder) to move outside of the group.
Dissipates on the other hand tend to be sole survivors. They either don’t wish to belong to any identifiable group out of their own volition (for personal, social, religious, political reasons) or because their particular identifiable group is so small or dispersed that group bonding is impractical. As solitary survivors, these individuals tend to immerse faster and harder in to the mainstream culture. They adapt and rewire their behavior to learn, integrate and exude attitudes and the lingo of the people of “visible majority”. However, the acceptance by the junta is not always reciprocal. The Dissipate is after all and outsider attempting to enter the circle of trust. Thus Dissipates traverse a path of the nomad – belonging neither here nor there – but moving on nevertheless and never looking back.
He was a Dissipate. The “immigranty” folks in the building as referred by him were the Congregates. Get this! He was from the same visible minority group as them. Yet they were not him and he was not them but they were all the same!
[Why he cares]
Well from social, economic and political viewpoints it matters a lot. Canada is a young nation of relatively small population that is evolving through its generous immigration policy. While the case for diversity and talent and population growth for sustainability of this nation is commonly touted in the media, there is another aspect that is often overlooked.
It is the aspect of maintaining the Canadian Identity. What that identity is always evolving; just ask any Canadian on the street and you will get a different response each time. Yet not everything can be clearly defined by words. There is a non-verbal understanding of what it means to be Canadian. It is something you feel inside about yourself, about others around you, about the world. There is an established identity that has passed down from generations. It is based on political freedoms and social ideology. The onus is on the newcomers to grasp some understanding of this identity. Consider the simple case of heritage buildings in a City. Do you tear it down to build way for modern structures? OR do you preserve the shell and renovate the interior with contemporary finishing?
It is true that Canada does have varying regional identities of some sort. One can broadly identify the English Canadian identity, the francophone identity, the Native Indian identity and so forth. But the immigrant identity is much more diverse and for most part is in direct contact with the so called English Canadian identity.
[He asks the question]
What happens if the Congregates persistent on indefinitely? Will it lead to social ostracisation reminiscent of the Paris riots etched in our memories from not too long ago?
The Province of Quebec has been contemplating this very same question as they felt their Quebecois Francophone identity was dissipating. It appeared to them that it was no longer just enough that newcomers in the Province had to learn to speak French . Immigrants had to also exude a strong desire for adopting the Francophone culture.
How can our nation’s immigration policy be altered to accommodate this attitude (viz. less congregation, more dissipation in to mainstream society)?
First, while all existing criteria for selection and acceptance of applications to enter this country permanently are valid, there must also be an element of being able to judge how likely the person is going to immerse and adapt to the Canadian identity. This can be easily resolved through the various foreign offices that serve as first point of contact with the potential newcomer. The officers of the consulate are trained to understand the local culture well. They are best placed to make an informed non-biased judgement on how likely a particular applicant will become a Congregate or Dissipate in Canada.
Second, policies need to go beyond job-training workshops and ESL classes. Classes must stress the importance of establishing Canadian values that must be respected by everyone just as a Canadian would be expected to respect the culture and traditions of a foreign country.
[Talks about social policy]
An interesting phenomenon that can be readily observed by anyone is that in large urban centers that are generally multicultural and diverse, the congregate phenomenon tends to happen more than in small urban locales where the dissipates tend to proliferate better. A reason behind this can be attributed to availability syndrome. More congregate members available more easier to form insular groups. So if social policy allows incentives to locate to small urban centers, then it is likely to see positive net benefits to both the new settler as well as to the local community.
Movements away from the core lead to seismic shifts. To maintain stability it behooves all people in the nation to continue to define and preserve its core identity and share these common values while also respecting individual traditions and cultures. The expectation is that the newcomers leave behind some of their “excess baggage” at their departing airport and try on some “new clothes” upon arrival in Canada!
This is the first of a two-part series on Canadian Immigration commentary from the perspective the immigrants themselves and not by any think tank or policy maker.
- larkycanuck.com | Social Commentary | My Tupperware List (larkycanuck.com)
- Farrol Consulting – a full-service Canadian immigration consulting firm
- [Success story] (2) Kim Mina : Immigrant Services Calgary (korcan50years.com)
- IMMIGRATION: ‘Invisible’ minorities do not have to stay that way (vancouverdesi.com)
Thank you for taking time to read this post. Blogging is a labor of love. Reader donations in the form of comments or sharing on other social media channels below are much appreciated.