How do we mobilize people to work for the kinds of “new actions in legislation, policy and process” called for by Sherri Torjman through the lens of social inclusion? How do we reconcile the inherent divisiveness of a rights-based model with the more positive and all-embracing rhetoric of inclusion? What was wrong with rights?
“People don’t say ‘I want to be included,’” said Ed Broadbent, who galvanized the conference with his strong disagreement with Social Inclusion as a strategy or as rhetoric. “They say ‘I want housing,’ or ‘I want transportation.’” The concept of positive citizenship still rings true, he explained, but the concept of social inclusion won’t capture the hearts and minds of Canadians. Broadbent agreed with Josephine Grey’s notion that rights in this country are “malnourished,” with guarantees of economic, social and cultural rights the vital missing half of the equation.
Other voices stressed how rights-based victories are often hollow. Michael Bach gave the example of how a ten-year legal battle to win rights recognition often results merely in a “cheque being written,” without any real or lasting change. Jean Lock Kunz echoed this disconnect between rights and a real sense of valued recognition. Despite many years of affirmative hiring policies and a climate of political correctness in this country, it’s still true that “the higher the ladder, the lighter the skin tone.”
Bach looks to social inclusion to add the missing piece of the recognition puzzle. “Our current political culture doesn’t ground rights in ways that make them sufficiently real,” he maintained, so a disabled student may win the right to access to a regular classroom but remain a prisoner of his own difference within it. Social inclusion presents the chance for the “democratization of democracy” according to Anver Saloojee, and puts validation at the centre. At the same time Saloojee acknowledges that speaking from the stance of the excluded allows one to tap into the incredible mobilizing power of the discourse of oppression.
Alex Munter maintained that concepts of self-reliance, compassion and investment, “core values” of Canadians as identified by Judith Maxwell, could help in the struggle to mobilize for change. If Mike Harris can rally Ontarians around the value of self-reliance, he said, why can’t Canadians mobilize around values of compassion, community and collective action?
[ Conference Page ][ CCSD Home Page ] [ The Laidlaw Foundation ]