Being Canadian: Citizenship in Canada

This article analyses interviews conducted in 1996–97 with 78civic leaders in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. In part, the interviews focused on what it means to respondents to be Canadian. Among the respondents were 36 immigrants and 23 persons not of European ancestry, including four aboriginal people. The article addresses the challenge of creating a sense of citizenship—a moral sense of belonging—among a population of increasingly diverse origin in anglophone Canada. The argument proposed is that despite the diverse ancestral and geographical origins of the inhabitants of the country, Canadianness exists. Canadians, both native‐born and immigrants, recognize themselves as Canadians. They do so because they recognize the opportunities and freedoms available to them in Canada, and the day‐to‐day respect they enjoy. To be Canadian and recognized as such by others is meaningful. Even very recent immigrants do not define themselves primarily as members of their ancestral cultural communities. Spinner's concept of pluralistic integration seems a better way to describe Canadian society than the popular concept of multiculturalism.     

Hegemony and Autonomy

This article analyzes the concept of hegemony and examines its relationship to power and autonomy. Refuting the conventional belief that it is ideology that distinguishes hegemony, the article argues that it is autonomy that constitutes the distinguishing characteristic. Although hegemons tend to evolve into imperialists, hegemony involves leadership of an alliance, not domination by coercion. It is impossible to conceptualize hegemony without also including autonomy. In this conceptualization, the primary source of autonomy lies in a specific hegemonic system of domination that itself embodies the notion of autonomy for both the polity and its citizenry, a limiting construction that hinders the tendency toward imperialism. Such a system includes one type of autonomy that can be designated as autonomy within hegemony. In addition, the article discusses two other types of autonomy: counterhegemony and a largely power-based opposed hegemony. Thus, the article concludes, hegemony is a complex concept, with several types of manifestation, that can more usefully be understood in connection with autonomy and power than as a stand-alone concept.     

Harvard

Abstract

The following position paper was presented by a five-man delegation from the Harvard CCAS chapter to the embassy of the People's Republic of China in Paris on February 20, 1969. The group included Thomas Engelhardt, Cheryl Goodman, and Jon Livingston, all graduate students at Harvard, Neale Hunter, an Australian who spent 1965–67 teaching English in Shanghai, and Jonathan Mirsky, Director of Dartmouth's East Asia Center, who was unable to go to Paris but helped compose the statement.     

Are Power Asymmetries a Reason for the State to Intervene?

Power asymmetries between farmers and slaughterhouses have led the Swiss government to install an independent agency that evaluates the quality of pig and cattle carcasses. This case is used to explore public interventions to mitigate power asymmetries. The independent classification is described and its economic rationale explored. The positions of the most important stakeholders in the system are depicted and the counter-arguments analyzed by objective hermeneutics. It is concluded that public interventions against power asymmetries are no panacea but can be useful to create a just and effective system.