Can Multiculturalism Be Assimilatory? Immigrant Political Incorporation and the Role of Government in the United States and Canada.

Adopting a model of ?structured mobilization,? this paper argues that Canadian and American variants of multiculturalism have divergent effects on immigrants? political incorporation. Although Canadians like to contrast their ?multicultural mosaic? with the perceived American ?melting pot,? both countries embrace a form of multiculturalism that celebrates diversity. There are, however, two important differences that affect political integration. First, Americans? support for cultural diversity is social rather than political. There is no ?official? policy of cultural diversity in the United States whereas in Canada the state has officially endorsed multiculturalism, both symbolically and through funding or other material support. I find that government intervention engenders a greater sense of political standing and obligation to participate among Portuguese and Vietnamese immigrants in Toronto than in Boston, and this holds true for both ordinary community members and community leaders. Second, political multiculturalism in the United States is race-based while in Canada it is largely centered on ethnicity, usually defined by country of origin. Canadian multiculturalism makes it somewhat harder to address racial barriers to integration, but it appears to provide a more inclusive starting point for inter-group dialogue than in the United States. I make this argument based on documentary evidence and 147 qualitative interviews with members of the Vietnamese and Portuguese communities of Boston, MA and Toronto, ON. Focusing on the symbolic and material resources provided by government helps explain why, since 1970, Canada has been more successful in the political incorporation of newcomers than the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]