Counselling Anglophone and
White Ethnic Canadians: A Multicultural Perspective
Honoré France
2001
Including Euro-ethnic groups in multicultural counselling not only
provides counsellors with an awareness of how distinct visible minority groups
are, but emphasizes the uniqueness of important ethnic groups. In addition, it emphasizes the spirit of
diversity. Diversity, in the national fabric of the Canadian confederation,
should not been seen as a challenge or problem, but as a resource. Anglo-Canadians and white ethnic Canadians
are described, providing the practitioner some insight into what makes these
groups different. The article is
rounded out with important multicultural rules.
In a pluralistic and multicultural society it is vital to help make people aware that there is not just a large majority on one side and visible minorities on the other side. In fact the “white” population, which has been referred to in the research literature as the "majority" is made up of a variety of different peoples with differing cultural practices, values, languages and religions. When many of them came to North America they were escaping persecution for being different either because of their language, beliefs, religion or ethnic identity. They came to Canada in the last 150 years, as many people who immigrate today, to find justice and a safe place to rear a family. The first wave of European immigration was primarily English and French. Later it was Irish, Southern, and Eastern European Today, the primary groups are coming from China, with large segments from such diverse places as Trinidad, Ethiopia and El Salvador. In Canada, many of these people have been labelled allophone, to show the distinction from being neither Francophone nor Anglophone. We need to get it into our consciousness and into our counselling and teaching practices that in a true multicultural society every group of people are different. So what does it mean to be PLURALISTIC or MULTICULTURAL? It means to become aware and knowledgeable about everyone, regardless of their colour, ethnic background, language or religion. This paper will not cover francophone, which is covered in another paper, but Anglophone, particularly Anglo-Saxons and white ethnic that includes people who originated from other parts of Europe such as Eastern and Southern Europe. To highlight the differences, I have chosen to focus on Italian and Jewish Canadians. Acculturation and Assimilation According to Dyer (l994) the concept of national identity is not only recent, but fluid in nature. That is because the nation state is historically a recent phenomenon that goes back to a time when people started to live in large groups. Before that, people identified with their families or clans. Nation-states are not permanent, but rise and fall according to historical events. Canada is not unique in that regard, having not only a very recent history, but also having a dramatically diverse population that has changed since Confederation. The various people who immigrated to Canada have adapted themselves to the new land and created over time a national identity that is changing as the diversity of its people change. The forces that forged Canadian society can be better understood, by examining the concepts of acculturation and assimilation. Acculturation is an internal process of accepting the values of the majority society at the expense of one’s traditional culture. It often occurs slowly over time in which one’s original cultural values change. According to Berry and Sam (l997) there are four strategies of acculturation: assimilation, traditionality, integration and marginality. These dynamic forces that shaped people to become what they are should not been seen as negative or positive, but as processes that were either chosen (i.e. Irish), forced (i.e. Fist Nations) or circumstances (i.e. refugees from a variety of countries). Generally peoples, particularly those of European origin, have assimilated into the mainstream of Canadian life with little difficulty. Assimilation is a process where people are absorbed, either passively, deliberately or by government policy, losing their cultural differences and blending into society. For example, people of German ancestry give up the language and custom of their ancestries either by choice or over time and become Anglo in language and culture. In the United States, this process is sometimes positively viewed as a “melting pot” in which everyone blends together to make something different. The Canadian government on the other hand has stressed that it is committed to encouraging other groups to maintain their identity so there can be a pattern of distinct differences among people. In actuality, this has sometimes been an ideal view not shared by the general population that might want people to behave in a way similar to their own. Despite whether the “mosaic” or “melting pot” is better, the fact is, that many people, when they go to work, must give up what makes them distinct.
Traditionality, unlike assimilation, occurs when people choose to hold on to their language and culture often rejecting or avoiding interaction with the majority culture. Traditionalists while maintaining their own culture and traditions, have little knowledge or appreciation of the majority culture. Groups like the Doukhobors, who have kept the Russian language and customs, or the Mennonites, who kept the German language and customs, have maintained them by keeping themselves apart from mainstream Canadian culture. Interestingly, traditionality is much more difficult to maintain when there is frequent contact, even in Doukhobor society which by the late 20th century were assimilated unlike the Mennonites. When the same action is forced upon people it is called segregation. Segregation occurs when those in power force separation on the powerless (i.e. Apartheid). Integration, on the other hand, is a process of maintaining one’s language and culture, while gaining knowledge and an appreciation about the majority culture. Thus this bi-cultural stance maintains it is possible to have knowledge about or even an appreciation of the majority culture while maintaining one’s own culture and traditions. This ideal is more demonstrative of the “mosaic” philosophy. Berry and Kim (1988) go on to stress that those who have a strong sense of their cultural identity, while being able to function successfully in majority society are the least likely to suffer mental problems. Marginality is the process in which the original or traditional culture is not maintained and there is a rejection of majority culture. It has to be understood that sometimes the process of acceptance or rejection may be determined or affected by historical experience of discrimination. Marginalized people have lost their language and traditions and have not replaced them with dominant values. People who are marginalized have rejected themselves and others, which not surprisingly lead to acculturation stress accompanied by alcohol and substance abuse. According to Robinson and Howard-Hamilton (1999) this relationship between marginalization and substance abuse can be seen in some Hispanic and Aboriginal groups, which have been culturally devastated. The case of the Inuit of Davis Inlet is a good example of the effects of people who have been marginalized by majority society.
What needs to be remembered is that dealing with different ethnic groups successfully is being able to adapt helping strategies that can exist with acculturalization differences. Culture plays a fundamental role in people’s lives that take in beliefs, behaviours and traditions. Effective counselling can only occur when one becomes aware, accepts and values the differences in others. This is what accepting the diversity in society is all about. It is important to remember that while diversity are the traits that distinguish one group from another group, “ethnicity is the consciousness of a cultural heritage shared with other people” (Bucher, p. 13, 1999).
Anglo-Canadians includes not only those people whose parents originated from English speaking peoples, but also Germanic and other northern Europeans. In addition, it also includes those who acculturated by English speakers. After the defeat of French forces on the Plains of Abraham in Quebec, Canada was an integral part of the British Empire with every "white" person born during this period considered English or a citizen of the British Empire and thus identifying themselves as British. The concept of Canadian started only after Confederation and even then, Canadian identity was firmly rooted in Anglo-Saxon tradition. Other early groups such as Scandinavians and Germanic peoples quickly adapted and became English in national consciousness. Before the turn of the century more than 80% of the peoples who immigrated to Canada from Europe came from the British Islands or Germanic countries. Later generations of immigrants from other European ethnic groups, regardless of origin, have assimilated to the point that their ethnic identity can be consider Anglo-Canadian.
Other than Francophones, the English speaking peoples, who were primarily Protestant, saw themselves as the founding people of Canada. In fact, up until the Pearson years, most elements of Canadian government and cultural practices were primarily English in origin. Peoples from other parts of Europe, particularly Southern Europe, were considered as "not measuring up" to English standards. Interestingly, people of British ancestry are multicultural in ethnic origin. Anglo-Saxon, often used to describe people of “English” origin as actually Germanic and Scandinavian. When Canadian immigration laws were changed in 1947, with the passing of the Canadian Citizenship law, all citizens of Canada were considered British subjects. In other words, new immigrants were supposed to assimilate, which Fleras and Elliott (1992) called “anglo conformity.” In fact, the political nature of the Canadian government, laws, social traditions and other aspects of culture were primarily British. Even the Canadian national flag had the British union jack as its most distinguished feature. Immigration up until this point favoured those from Western Europe and discriminated against those from other parts of Europe and the world. Early immigration laws were not only racist in nature, but assimilationist in content and segregationist in intent (Walker, l985). The government of the timerealized that this “white only” policy was morally and politically indefensible. While those from Eastern Europe were considered acceptable, Mediterranean and Jewish immigrants needed a special permit and those of colour, Chinese, Japanese, and Indian had exclusionary laws designed to keep them out. Economic demand for labour often allowed these groups into Canada to work, but then shut off when the labour demands lessened. Immigrants were expected to comply with Canadian (British) culture and values. After World War II this began to change and for the first time; the Canadian government:
…eliminated the preference for suitable minorities from the selection process and introduced a set of universal criteria for entry. Applicants were admitted on the strength of their capacity for self-reliance (Fleras & Elliott, pp. 42-43,1992).
In 1967, the immigration laws changed with the criteria for entrance and eliminating ethnic and racial background with a point system. Four classes of immigrants were defined: family, independent, entrepreneur and refugee. These classes of immigrants could apply under three categories: sponsored, independent or nominated. Under this system “discretionary powers” was given to the immigration officers who implemented the plan. Skills, language ability, age and education determined the suitability of the immigrants. Under all categories the primary core of the immigration policy was family reunification, with the independent category being fairly low (i.e. only 4% until l988 when it increased to 28%). The laws are continually being changed to suit the times, but the result is the changing face of the people of Canada. At the time of Confederation in 1867 only 8% of the population was neither British nor French (Fleras & Elliott, 1992). By the year 2001 less than half of the population of Canada is neither British nor French. However, despite the change, British traditions predominate. Consider the fact demonstrated by the important symbol - Canada's head of state is the British monarch. In comparison with the United States, Canada is very "British." For instance, Benedict Arnold is a "hero" in Canada, while in the U.S. the name Benedict Arnold is synonymous with a traitor. In the city of St. John's, New Brunswick, there is a statue to commemorate his heroic deeds. With just a few exceptions, all of the Canadian Prime Ministers have been of British heritage and Protestant. Interestingly, Canadians, unlike Americans, with some exceptions (i.e. Hutterites) define themselves in relationship to language in that descendants of Europeans who have been in North America for two or more generations see themselves as Anglo or Franco rather than ethnic.
In order to put in perspective the multicultural nature of counselling, the relationship of minorities and new Canadians needs to be understood. Historically, there appears to be three aspects of relationships: Conquest (differing national groups competing); Anglicizing and the two solitudes (assimilation); Cultural Mosaic (diversity). According to Axelson (l993) “…conflict is especially likely when the dominant group exerts its influence on minority groups for conformity or when misconceptions are perpetuated by both groups” (p.76). Consider the following historical phases and how they may affect issues of trust and cooperation between majority and minority groups:
1. Initial Meeting: This type of situation occurred when people met as equal and engaged in some mutual exchange or interdependence (e.g. during the fur trade).
2. Subjugation: One group exerted dominance over the other through theft of their land, controlling their culture and restricting cultural norms by outlawing or marginalizing their language (reservations, English only or covenants against certain religious groups);
3. "Melting Pot": this idea was based on the notion that Anglo-Saxons would be the dominant cultural group with all groups conforming to it as the "master" culture (this notion excluded visible minorities);
4. Canadian Identity: this was based on the idea that a new identity would emerge based on the "melting pot" theory, accepting all cultural groups, including the so called "founding races" (French & English), still excluding visible minorities;
5. Multiculturalism: based on the idea that all peoples regardless of colour, creed or national identity are equal partners. This not only included the stressing of bilingualism, but inclusions of "heritage languages" (aboriginal languages, Chinese, Ukrainian, Japanese, Punjabi, etc. in the curriculum and national policies. To redress earlier discriminatory practices, equal employment opportunities and other educational opportunities are made available to accelerate advancement.
While the idea of a pluralistic or multicultural society occurred officially in l972 with a bill introduced in the House of Commons by the then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, people of different cultures have been living side by side maintaining cultural diversity (e.g. French, English, those of African and Asian origin, and aboriginal peoples). However, there were problems and outright hostilities. Today, laws bring greater protection and have gone a long ways to alleviate past injustices. One way of viewing how cultural diversity and ethnicity is explained by Gordon's theory (McLemore, l980). There are four components to the theory:
1. Secondary structural assimilation: consists of sharing by the majority with minority in education, business, and other areas of living that are often imposed or developed because of the circumstances. The atmosphere is characterized as cold and impersonal (e.g. desegregated facilities or equal employment opportunities).
2. Primary structural assimilation: the mixing of different cultural and racial groups, majority and minority, in social and living situations in which relationships are close, personal and warm.
3. Cultural assimilation: this occurs when minority groups lose their cultural identity by adopting the majority cultural norms (e.g. value preferences, language, religion, family practices, and interest in heritage. Interestingly, McLemore (l980) found that among immigrant groups, there are less hostility to the majority and shorter periods of time of assimilation. However, there is also some cultural resurgence by the 3rd generation. Among "conquered peoples" there is more hostility and longer periods of time of assimilation. In addition, there is a strong tendency towards separation or secessionist activities.
4. Marital assimilation: this occurs as the final step in the process of assimilation when members of either the majority or minority marry. One aspect of this phenomena not discussed in Gordon's theory involves those who choose between one cultural over another and those who choose to be bicultural. Research suggests that it takes 3 generations to assimilate into the majority population.
According to the literature (Fleras & Elliot, l992; Axelson, 1993; Alladin, l996), one's views on life stem in part from one's religious beliefs, which inturn influence one's social reality. Protestantism in Canada was largely Anglican, when churches were available, but there were also Methodist and other Calvinistic churches that had a strong influence. When churches were not available, people conducted their own services by reading the bible or having prayer meetings. In the early days, before the middle of the 18th century, 98% of people, outside of Quebec, were Protestant. Their belief system and customs were interwoven into the fabric of society and culture. There was a "deep mistrust" of Catholics. The influence of culture and religion is evident is the "Protestant work ethic." What is it and how is it expressed in everyday life? "According to the ethic, work and productive activity in the society are n expression of one's spiritual being and one's eventual self worth" (Axelson, l993, p. 79). If one's life was predetermined, then one had a "calling" or a sacred duty to accomplish certain things. If one was successful, then it was because of God's will, if not, then some "sin" one might have committed caused one's failure. Working hard and being productive became important aspects of the work ethic that determined whether one was good or bad. In fact, the notion of being good or bad was an important value preference among Anglo-Saxon peoples. This sometimes translated into seeing situations in terms of "black or white."
In examining majority worldview, which by in large refers to those with a European ethnic heritage; the world is seen as a place where one has to work hard to survive. Even in times of plenty, work is seen as one’s obligation o family, society and God. Since the early exploration of the Americas, in order to survive, immigrants had to sacrifice and labour long hours. Thus, being productive and advancing personally and economically (doing) was a duty. An interesting question is how these values of productivity and control impact counselling? Obviously a great deal of pressure is put on the individual to succeed. Consider the following influential quotes from a variety of European and North American literary, social and political leaders:
It is work which gives flavour to life.” Amiel
“To youth I have but three words of counsel – work, work, work.” Bismarck
“There is no substitute for hard work.” Edison
“I look on that man as happy, who, when there is question of success, looks into
his work for a reply.” Emerson
“Work is love made visible. And if you cannot work with love but only with distaste, it is better that you should leave your work and sit at the gate of the temple and take alms of those who work with joy.” Gibran
“Every child should be taught that useful work is worship and that intelligent
labour is the highest form of prayer.” Ingersoll
Up until the twentieth century, Canada was predominately populated by First Nations and the first European settlers – British and French. The nature of the Canadian federation created geographic pockets of cultural acculturation that confronted later European immigrants (Upper and Lower Canada). As the new immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe settled in the various areas dominated by the traditional “founding nations”, they often assimilated into either the English or French society. However, many kept many of their cultural traditions that make them distinctive from either of the two earlier groups. The following are some examples of some of these distinctive or white ethnic groups.
The worldview of Catholics is different from those of Protestants. According to Axelson (l993) "Catholicism functions as influence in the adaptive process for many of the new White Ethnic groups, and perpetuation of spiritual and ideological ties with Catholicism in one form or another is an important characteristic of many of the southern and eastern European peoples who migrated in masses to [North America]" (p. 85). - Is Catholicism a religion of the heart and mainstream Protestantism a religion of the rational mind? If so, this may mean that some preferences or ways of acting are different because of the differing religious "upbringing." For new immigrants and those living in French Canada, the Catholic Church plays a big part in their lives. Politics and where the Church stood on a particular issue often determined how people would vote. There was a pervasive influence in the lives of new immigrants in the following ways: conscientious fulfillment of duty; awe of higher powers; deep reflection; inner sacred preoccupation; a close and lasting relationship with the supernatural (that is, the ultimate structure of the universe, its center of power, and human destiny). The Catholic Church in Canada: As a result of 19th- and 20th-century immigration, the Roman Catholic church in Canada grew rapidly and was removed from mission status in 1908. The newcomers, however, changed its character. Irish immigration in the early 1800s reduced the French-Canadians to a minority among Catholics outside Québec and led to conflict over language and Episcopal appointments. Such tension continued in the 20th century with the arrival of southern and eastern Europeans. In the early 1990's the Roman Catholic church was the largest religious group in the country, with about 45 percent of all Canadians. It still had some government recognition, especially in Québec and in provinces where Catholic schools received tax aid. Its clergy included 3 cardinals and 118 other prelates. [1](Encarta, 2001)
The literature presents a number of examples of white ethnic groups that continue to identify with their culture through language, religion or other cultural practices. In Canada, these can be diverse ethnic groups such as Greek, Russian, Ukrainian, and Polish to name a few. A summarized of two distinct examples follows:
Many of the Italians who came to North America were from southern Italy where they were poor and often experienced repression. As a result, these Italian immigrants identified more with the family and villages rather than the Italiannation. Because they were different and uneducated, they were exploited and thus most of these immigrant sought refuge in the family or "village atmosphere" of their communities in the large cities where they settled ("little Italy").Their neighbourhoods were close knit, with strong family ties and deep allegiance to the Catholic Church. This probably helped them maintain their separateness and uniqueness and lessened the tendency to be assimilated by the larger culture. The family structure often was extended to the community structure that was hierarchal in nature. At the top was the "padrone" or Godfather. This is not the same as the various depiction of organized crime, but a social system brought over from southern Italy in which those on top helped others in time of need. "Making it" in Canadian society often meant a clash of culture in which the individual had to put his or her welfare ahead of the group. According to Axelson (l993) "the mainstream culture emphasizes individuality and material achievement, often at the cost of breaking away from the family, old friends, and the culture of parents and grandparents" (p. 89).
One of the distinguishing characteristics of Jewish immigration to North America is that they came highly education, literate with experience in living as a minority society. In Europe they had been forced into ghettos and restricted to the larger society except in certain occupations that serviced the larger society in which they existed (e.g. merchants, banking, and artisans) and other types of profession to service their own communities (doctors, teachers and other professionals). As people experienced being persecuted, they developed coping mechanisms that assisted in their survival and advancement in North America. During the period of the "holocaust" the entire "Jewish inteligencia" of Europe immigrated to North America. They experienced less cultural shock according to Axelrod (l993) because there were less restrictions, economic opportunities, and a sense that here they could build permanent homes. In addition, "Jewish devotion to family life was, and is, highly valued, and loyalty to kin, along with a strong spirit of ethnocentrism, offered strength in confronting many environmental obstacles" (Axelson, l993, p. 91). With 2000 years of being "sojourners" the Jewish community took care of the poor and elderly in ways different than other minorities. In addition, their strong value on learning allowed them to adapt to the new educational opportunities and for many, for the first time, to become citizens in a new land. One of the largest Jewish populations in the world is in New York City. While the strong sense of ethnocentricity has given them certain advantages, it has also made them a continual target for "hate" by "skinhead and neo-nazi" groups despite the gains over the years.
Multicultural counselling is not just about counselling minorities, although counselling initially did not embrace cultural differences in theory and practice. This acceptance of the new reality of diversity in society has changed the nature of counselling. The traditionally theories have had to be revamp to reflect the multicultural nature of society, including those theories that deal with anglo- and white ethnic groups. Axelson (l993) defines multicultural as “…the interface between counsellor and client that takes the personal dynamics of the counsellor and client into consideration alongside the emerging, changing, and/or static configurations that might be identified in the cultures of counsellor and client” (p. 13). In working with clients who are different, it is important to consider the following rules, identified by Pedersen (1994):
1. Consider that conflicting cultural views are equally right;
2. Consider that one can have multiple views or even conflicting views
depending on the situation;
3. Try “seeing” what the situation is like from another cultural
perspective;
4. Listen for the cultural perspective in dealing with another ethnic
group;
5. Develop the ability to shift to another cultural perspective by learning
behavioural expectations and values;
6. Learn to accurately identify culturally appropriate feelings in specific
rather than general terms (i.e. cues, signals and patterns of emotional
expression);
7. Explore multiple levels of support that are possible within a given
cultural group;
8. Develop the ability to identify culturally learned criteria being used
to evaluate alternative solutions;
9. Develop the ability to generate insights for the culturally different
client from his/her culturally learned perspective.
According to Alladin (1996) Canadians have to realize that “…a serious study of racism in schools and society will inevitably create controversy (since) …racist practices have been so integral in our history that they have gained acceptance” (p. 160). However, in a multicultural society, such as Canada, all cultural groups add to the "cultural mosaic" and work as partners in the development and growth of the nation. Increasingly, other cultural groups are replacing the original groups who immigrated to Canada, the French and English. In the major Canadian cities Chinese and Indo-Canadian groups are becoming the dominant ethnic groups. While in the north and in places across the Prairies, First Nations groups are becoming the dominate ethnic groups. Immigration to Canada is coming more and more from Asia rather than Europe. However, to understand the important contributions that the English and other white ethnic groups have made, I have summarized material from the literature on these groups (except French Canadians which is addressed in Gilbert Donnelly’s paper). While it is easy to generalize and see the majority population as one monolithic group, there is a great deal of differences that I hope this paper summarizes. I also feel that revisiting the "majority cultural identity model" is a good place to start in order to understand cultural norms and how the dominant culture has shaped many of the political and social institutions. And what I have summarized here by describing the Anglo-Saxon and white ethnic groups, I haveonly scratched the surface. The struggle for national identity is part of being Canadian and it is constantly being redefined. In this notion however, it might be good to keep a sense of humour about it. Consider this statement by Canadian novelist, poet, and critic, Margaret Atwood (l990): "the beginning of Canadian cultural nationalism was not "Am I really that oppressed?" but "Am I really that boring?"
Alladin, M.I. (l996). Racism in Canadian schools, Toronto: Harcourt Brace & Company, Canada.
Atwood, M. (1990). "Dancing On the Edge Of the Precipice," interview with Joyce Carol Oates published in Ontario Review (fall-winter 1978; reprinted in Conversations, ed. by Earl G. Ingersoll, 1990).
Axelson, J. (l993). Counseling and development in a multicultural society, 2nd Edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Bucher, R.D. (l999). Diversity consciousness: Opening our minds to people, cultures and opportunities, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Berry, J.W. & Kim, U. (1988). Acculturation and mental health. In P.R. Dasen, J.W., Berry & N. Sartorius (Eds.), Health and cross-cultural psychology: Toward applications (pp. 207-236), Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Berry, J.W. & Sam, D.L. (1997). Acculturation and adaptation. In J. Berry, M. Segall, & C. Kagitcibasi (Eds.), Cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 291-326). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Dyer, G. (l994). The human race: Tribal Identity, Ottawa: National Film Board.
Encarta, (2001), Roman Catholic Church, Microsoft.
Fleras, A. & Elliot, J.L. (l992). Multiculturalism in Canada: The challenge of diversity, Scarborough, Ontario: Nelson.
McLemore, S. D. (l980). Racial and ethnic relations in America, Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Pedersen, P. (l994). A handbook for developing multicultural awareness, 2nd Edition, Alexandria, VA: ACA.
Walker, J. (l985). Racial discrimination in Canada: The Black experience, Booklet #4, Ottawa: The Canadian Historical Association.
The population of Canada was 28,846,761 at the time of the latest census in 1996, compared to 27.3 million in 1991. The growth rate from 1991 to 1996 was 1.14 percent per year; this is the fourth highest rate among the 27 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which correspond roughly to the most developed industrial countries of the world. Half of this growth is due to immigration. Canada’s liberal immigration program accepts newcomers from nearly every other country in the world. The estimated population in 2000 was 31,330,255. Most Canadians live in cities, and most of the cities are close to the southern border. The largest urban centers are in Québec and Ontario provinces, or central Canada, where some two-thirds of the people live. Most of the population is ethnically British or French, although other European countries are well represented, and indigenous peoples are the majority in the north. French and English are the official languages, although the people who speak English as their mother tongue outnumber those whose mother tongue is French by 2½ to 1. Roman Catholics, who include most French-speaking people, are the most numerous religious group, followed by the United Church of Canada and the Anglican Church. Immigrants are a growing minority, particularly those from Asia, and have been changing the face of Canada’s largest urban areas. Canadians have a high literacy rate and a number of fine universities. The standard of living is one of the world’s highest, although one in seven households is poverty stricken. Violent crime is low compared to other North American societies, but has been rising.
Canada is a nation of people who came from somewhere else. All but the indigenous people arrived within the past 400 years, most within the past few generations. For that reason most Canadians still feel some attachment to their old homelands. The majority of the population is of European descent, but the proportion of Asians is increasing. About half of all immigrants in the decade from 1981 to 1991 came from Asia, and Chinese is the fastest-growing mother tongue in Canada. As ethnic groups intermarry, however, ethnic identities are becoming more blurred; 29 percent of Canadians report more than one ethnic origin. Indigenous peoples make up about 3 percent and blacks about 2 percent of the population.
Immigration is important to maintaining Canada’s population. The current childbearing generation has smaller families than earlier generations: The fertility rate (average number of children born per woman) is 1.6, less than the population replacement rate of 2.1. At the same time, older people are living longer, so that the average age of the population is higher. In 2000 Canada’srate of natural increase was 0.43 percent, resulting from a birth rate of 11.6 per 1,000 persons and a death rate of 7.3 per 1,000. There is a downward trend in the birth index—in 1981 it was 15.3—and the likely end result will be zero growth or population loss. For this reason the Canadian government decided in the 1980s to compensate for the low birth rate by allowing more immigration. (Encarta, 2001)