Letters to the Editor

Good Day Everyone,

“I am not sure how safe it will be living in Cornwall especially if the city welcomes some Syrian refugees”. I was having coffee Saturday morning (12 December), at 7 am at Tim Hortons near Food Basics on Brookdale Ave, and I heard a group of people discussing and saying, “We should shoot them all” referring to the Syrian refugees and the menacing comments went on and on. How can anyone be so racist and ignorant?

I was so upset and wondered what this country would be like if the Native refused entry to our ancestors to Canada. The natives not only welcomed them but also taught them how to survive in this new world.

I can only blame this on the lack of education. It is too bad our ancestors did not leave “greed, jealousy and racism” behind when they arrived.

I remembered the article about Multiculturalism written years ago (attached) by Ludwik Piotrwoski, a citizen of Cornwall. Ludwik is a great writer and educator. I even translated the article because I believe it is that important to pass on.

It is hard to educate people who have no feelings for other human beings just because he or she came from another country in the recent years. However, this is not a reason to stop trying. I am positive the elected leaders of this community would come up with ideas to educate the citizens so they can stop being afraid of what they do not know. Part of the plan to educate people is to use Canadian analogies about our own murders and lawbreakers to make our citizens understand that we do not hurt the families, friends and neighbors of these evil people within our community as a result the actions.

I am willing to help in any education endeavour if it can make a difference and I am sure I would not be the only one willing to do so.

Cornwall: a world of possibilities! Show me.

Marie Morrell

MULTICULTURALISM

Tolerance is anything but passive. Tolerance requires courage, conviction and a commitment to freedom — key characteristics of a confident and active public ethos. Tolerance upholds freedom of conscience and individual autonomy. It affirms the principle of non-interference in people’s inner lives, in their adherence to certain beliefs and opinions. And so long as an act does not harm others or violate their moral autonomy, tolerance also demands no constraints on behavior that is related to the exercise of individual autonomy. From this perspective, tolerance represents the extent to which people’s beliefs and behaviors are not subject to institutional and political interference or restraint.

It is not easy to be tolerant. It requires a willingness to tolerate views that one considers offensive, and a preparedness to accept that no idea should be beyond question. Tolerating beliefs that are hostile to ours demands a degree of confidence in our own convictions and also a disposition to take risks. Tolerance encourages the freedom of individuals to pursue certain beliefs, and it gives society more broadly an opportunity to gain insights into the truth through encouraging a clash of ideas.

A way of avoiding making difficult moral choices

Multiculturalism has nothing to do with true tolerance. Multiculturalism demands not tolerance but indulgent indifference. It relentlessly promotes the idea of ‘acceptance’ and discourages the questioning of other people’s beliefs and lifestyles. Its dominant value is nonjudgmentalism. Yet judging, criticizing and evaluating are all key attributes of any open- minded, democratic society worth its name. While a reluctance to judge other people’s behavior has some attractive qualities, all too often it turns into shallow indifference, an excuse for switching off when others talk.

The confusion of the concept of tolerance with the idea of acceptance of all lifestyles is strikingly illustrated by UNESCO’s Declaration on the Principles of Tolerance. It says:

‘Tolerance is respect, acceptance and appreciation of the rich diversity of our world’s cultures, our forms of expression and ways of being human.’ UNESCO also claims that tolerance is ‘harmony in difference’. For UNESCO, toleration becomes an expansive, diffuse sensibility that automatically offers unconditional respect for different views and cultures.

The reinterpretation of tolerance as non-judgmentalism is often seen as a positive thing. In truth, the gesture of affirmation and acceptance can be seen as a way of avoiding making difficult moral choices, and a way of disengaging from the challenge of explaining which values are worth upholding. That is probably why the indulgent indifference of multiculturalism has gained so much traction in recent decades: in America, Canada and many other European societies, multiculturalism has spared governments the hassle of having to spell out the principles underpinning their way of life.

To his credit, after noting that state multiculturalism has encouraged the segregation of different cultures, Politician touched upon an uncomfortable truth — which is that “we have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong”. The absence of such a vision is not accidental, since multiculturalism requires that no system of values be regarded as superior to any other or looked upon as the desirable norm. In the multicultural outlook, the absence of a vision for society is not a failure, but an accomplishment.

In any serious discussion of the problem of cultural integration, the focus should surely be on the failure to outline, and give meaning to, the values that bind society together. It is always tempting to point the finger of blame at professional extremists for radicalizing young Muslims, for example. But what is often overlooked is that it is not so much the lure of radicalism that causes these problems as it is society’s own reluctance to engage with and inspire its citizens.

Society’s crisis of values and meaning

For some time now, many Canadian, American and European societies have found it difficult to forge a consensus through which they might affirm past achievements and the basic values they uphold. Traditional symbols and conventions have lost much of their power to enthuse and inspire; in some cases they have become irrevocably damaged. This is strikingly illustrated in the constant controversy that surrounds the teaching of history. When the leading generation senses that the stories and ideals it was brought up on have ‘lost their relevance’ in our changed world, it finds it very difficult to transmit those stories and ideals with conviction to its children.

Nevertheless, policymakers and educators intuitively recognize that this question needs to be addressed. Yet the provision of ‘relevant’ values, on demand, rarely succeeds — because unlike the conventions that were organically linked to the past, these values tend to be artificial, if well-meaning, constructs that are open to challenge. Unlike customs and conventions that are held sacred, constructed values must be regularly justified.

There is little point in continuing to blame multiculturalism for the profound problems we face today. By all means let’s put an end to state-sponsored multiculturalism, because that would at least allow us to face up to the underlying problem: society’s crisis of values and of meaning. But let’s not diminish our commitment to the pursuit of tolerance. Tolerance remains an important virtue because it takes human beings very seriously.

Ludwik Piotrowski