Download
1 / 12
120 likes | 284 Vues
Groups and Intergroup Relations: Canadian Perceptions . Jack Jedwab October, 2011. Methodology . This poll was conducted online in all regions of Canada with a representative sample of 2,345 Canadians , between September 20 th and October 3 th , 2011 .
E N D
Groups and Intergroup Relations:Canadian Perceptions Jack JedwabOctober, 2011
Methodology • This poll was conducted online in all regions of Canada with a representative sample of 2,345 Canadians, between September 20th and October 3th, 2011. • Final data was weighted by age, gender, language, level of education, regions and household composition (with or without children under the age of 18) in order to obtain a representative sample of the Canada population. • A probabilistic sample of 2,345 respondents would yield a margin of error of 2%, 19 times out of 20. • Survey respondents were selected randomly from the LegerWeb Internet panel, which has over 350,000 Canadian households. A stratification process was applied to invitation lists to ensure optimal representation of respondents. The panelists were recruited randomly from Leger Marketing telephone surveys. Several quality control measures ensure the representativeness and accuracy of Leger Marketing’s surveys with its panel members. • In the tables, the numbers in bold redindicate a significantly higher proportion than that of other groups. Numbers in bold blue indicate a significantly lower proportion than that of other groups.
Introduction • Perceptions of communities in Canada often reflect contemporary images held by the population and may have repercussions for full participation and inclusion by those groups that viewed negatively. Indeed it might be contended that the members of those communities that are very negatively risk confronting stigma within society. That which follows focuses on the one hand on perceptions of selected religious, ethnic groups and language groups and on the other the degree to which bilateral relationships between groups is seen positively or negatively.
When it comes to the groups we selected, it is by far the Muslims that are viewed most negatively by Canadians and thereafter Atheists and Aboriginals. Three of the four groups viewed most positively are visible minorities and some be may be surprised by the finding as vulnerability is often associated with visibility. The survey data suggest that there are changes in this regard as the country has become increasingly multiracial.
There are differences in the perceptions of the various groups identified here along language lines. Anglophones and Francophones have a more positive view of those identifying as Black than do allophones. Jews are viewed most positively by anglophones but rank second lowest in Quebec ahead of Muslims. Atheists rank high amongst francophones but low amongst anglophones and allophones.
Relationships, Cohesion and Harmony • The data around group perceptions is not disconnected from the perspective around intergroup relations. Canada’s multicultural policies and the objective of cohesion and societal harmony are often associated with addressing problematic relationships. Below, we examine the perceived state of six relationships that are generally considered the most challenging when attempting to build cohesion. These relationships look at religion, visible minority status, language, aboriginality and class. It is in these areas where some observers have spoken about “fault lines” that require response.
An important share of Canadians appears concerned with all the relationships identified here and they are most pessimistic when it comes to Muslim and non-Muslim relations, relations between the wealthier and poorer segment of the population and aboriginal and non-aboriginal. On the other hand Canadians appear least concerned about relations between the country’s visible minorities and whites.
Francophonesseem more concerned about relations between Jews and non-Jews than do other Canadians. They are also far more positive about relations between Francophone and non-Francophone Canadians than Anglophones
In Canada, the USA and the UK it is relations between Muslims and non-Muslims that represent the population’s main concern. Relations along class lines a concern to continue monitoring
Atheists Better Appreciated in Canada and the UK than in the US. Immigrants Fare Poorly in UK. Atheists perceived less well than Muslims in the US
Conclusion: Are the fault lines shifting what we expected? • The survey results suggest a shifting paradigm when it comes to perceptions about relations between visible minorities and whites as the basis for the major challenge going forward in addressing societal cohesion and cross-cultural understanding. Whereas as in the United States, concerns about the relations between African-Americans and Whites have been at the very centre of that country’s history. In Canada, relations between English and French have been seen as the principal challenge relative to achieving cohesion and stability. While that still remains a concern for many Canadians-more Anglophone than Francophone-it is the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims and Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals that have emerged as greater concerns in the 21st century. Relations on the basis of class have also emerged as a very central concern, a condition not confined to Canada as it is also a serious concern in the United States (where the “occupying Wall Street Movement is getting more attention) and even more so in the UK. In all three countries, it is relations between Muslims and non-Muslims that represent the population’s dominant concern.
Conclusion: Is Visible Minorities Relevance as a concept in decline? • The results of the survey in Canada raise yet further issues about whether the concept of visible minorities which rolls together multiple groups remains pertinent as a means for understanding the collective perception and/or condition of persons that are not “white”. The categories are far too heterogeneous to properly assess the nature of the relationship and the very use of the concept may no longer provide meaningful insight into group vulnerabilities or prejudices. The ongoing vulnerability of persons of African descent and others may be diluted within that categorization as is to some degree that there is a cohesive non visible minority population. Prejudice on that basis of groups identified as visible minorities may also be shifting and that too might risk misleading us into dismissing the vulnerability of particular groups in a situation where relationships on the basis of class area growing concern.
