Canadian Public Opinion on Official Bilingualism: Ambivalent Consensus and its Limits

2021 ◽  
Vol 59 ◽  
pp. 29-49
Author(s):  
Michael MacMillan

With the 50th anniversary of the passage of the Official Languages Act celebrated in 2019, the question of its degree of acceptance by the Canadian public is in order for review. When the national policy on official bilingualism was first advocated by the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, it frankly acknowledged that it was highly controversial and opposed by substantial portions of the Anglophone public. Nevertheless, they insisted that the policy was necessary for the survival of the country and maintained that the firm resolve of united political elites at federal and provincial levels eventually would generate political success for the policy. While elite unity was elusive and only partially realized, the essential elements of official bilingualism were adopted, expanded and have survived to celebrate its 50th anniversary. The evolving pattern of public opinion over the past three decades demonstrates that official bilingualism is accepted as an essential component of Canadian political life, but that acceptance is hedged by some important qualifications, and indications that any further expansion would not enjoy public support. Nevertheless, it is firmly established as a core operating principle of Canadian public policy.

Author(s):  
Catherine E. De Vries

The European Union (EU) is facing one of the rockiest periods in its existence. At no time in its history has it looked so economically fragile, so insecure about how to protect its borders, so divided over how to tackle the crisis of legitimacy facing its institutions, and so under assault by Eurosceptic parties. The unprecedented levels of integration in recent decades have led to increased public contestation, yet at the same the EU is more reliant on public support for its continued legitimacy than ever before. This book examines the role of public opinion in the European integration process. It develops a novel theory of public opinion that stresses the deep interconnectedness between people’s views about European and national politics. It suggests that public opinion cannot simply be characterized as either Eurosceptic or not, but rather that it consists of different types. This is important because these types coincide with fundamentally different views about the way the EU should be reformed and which policy priorities should be pursued. These types also have very different consequences for behaviour in elections and referendums. Euroscepticism is such a diverse phenomenon because the Eurozone crisis has exacerbated the structural imbalances within the EU. As the economic and political fates of member states have diverged, people’s experiences with and evaluations of the EU and national political systems have also grown further apart. The heterogeneity in public preferences that this book has uncovered makes a one-size-fits-all approach to addressing Euroscepticism unlikely to be successful.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-29
Author(s):  
Nic Cheeseman ◽  
Sishuwa Sishuwa

Abstract Democracy is one of the most contested words in the English language. In Africa, these complexities are compounded by the question of whether democracy is a colonial imposition. Cheeseman and Sishuwa provide a historiography of debates around democracy, track how these narratives have developed over time, and argue that there is widespread public support for a form of what they call “consensual democracy.” This is not to say that democracy is universally loved, but despite the controversy it remains one of the most compelling ideals in political life, even in countries in which it is has yet to be realized.


Author(s):  
Michael Tomz ◽  
Jessica L P Weeks

Abstract How do military alliances affect public support for war to defend victims of aggression? We offer the first experimental evidence on this fundamental question. Our experiments revealed that alliance commitments greatly increased the American public's willingness to intervene abroad. Alliances shaped public opinion by increasing public fears about the reputational costs of nonintervention and by heightening the perceived moral obligation to intervene out of concerns for fairness and loyalty. Finally, although alliances swayed public opinion across a wide range of circumstances, they made the biggest difference when the costs of intervention were high, the stakes of intervention were low, and the country needing aid was not a democracy. Thus, alliances can create pressure for war even when honoring the commitment would be extremely inconvenient, which could help explain why democratic allies tend to be so reliable. These findings shed new light on the consequences of alliances and other international legal commitments, the role of morality in foreign policy, and ongoing debates about domestic audience costs.


2005 ◽  
Vol 4 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 261-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Andersen ◽  
Anthony Heath ◽  
David Weakliem

AbstractThis paper examines the relationship between public support for wage differentials and actual income inequality using data from the World Values Surveys. The distribution of income is more equal in nations where public opinion is more egalitarian. There is some evidence that the opinions of people with higher incomes are more influential than those of people with low incomes. Although the estimated relationship is stronger in democracies, it is present even under non-democratic governments, and the hypothesis that effects are equal cannot be rejected. We consider the possibility of reciprocal causation by means of an instrumental variables analysis, which yields no evidence that income distribution affects opinion.


1987 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 1139-1153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory A. Caldeira

I show the intimate connection between the actions of the justices and support for the Supreme Court during one of the most critical periods of U.S. political history, the four months of 1937 during which Franklin D. Roosevelt sought legislation to “pack” the high bench with friendly personnel. Over the period from 3 February through 10 June 1937, the Gallup Poll queried national samples on 18 separate occasions about FDR's plan. These observations constitute the core of my analyses. I demonstrate the crucial influence of judicial behavior and the mass media in shaping public opinion toward the Supreme Court. This research illuminates the dynamics of public support for the justices, contributes to a clearer understanding of an important historical episode, shows the considerable impact of the mass media on public attitudes toward the Court, and adds more evidence on the role of political events in the making of public opinion.


2010 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew A. Baum ◽  
Tim Groeling

AbstractPrevailing theories hold that U.S. public support for a war depends primarily on its degree of success, U.S. casualties, or conflict goals. Yet, research into the framing of foreign policy shows that public perceptions concerning each of these factors are often endogenous and malleable by elites. In this article, we argue that both elite rhetoric and the situation on the ground in the conflict affect public opinion, but the qualities that make such information persuasive vary over time and with circumstances. Early in a conflict, elites (especially the president) have an informational advantage that renders public perceptions of “reality” very elastic. As events unfold and as the public gathers more information, this elasticity recedes, allowing alternative frames to challenge the administration's preferred frame. We predict that over time the marginal impact of elite rhetoric and reality will decrease, although a sustained change in events may eventually restore their influence. We test our argument through a content analysis of news coverage of the Iraq war from 2003 through 2007, an original survey of public attitudes regarding Iraq, and partially disaggregated data from more than 200 surveys of public opinion on the war.


2020 ◽  
pp. 002242782095320
Author(s):  
Alexander L. Burton ◽  
Justin T. Pickett ◽  
Cheryl Lero Jonson ◽  
Francis T. Cullen ◽  
Velmer S. Burton

Objectives: The recurring mass murder of students in schools has sparked an intense debate about how best to increase school safety. Because public opinion weighs heavily in this debate, we examine public views on how best to prevent school shootings. We theorize that three moral-altruistic factors are likely to be broadly relevant to public opinion on school safety policies: moral intuitions about harm, anger about school crime, and altruistic fear. Methods: We commissioned YouGov to survey 1,100 Americans to explore support for a range of gun control and school programming policies and willingness to pay for school target hardening. We test the ability of a moral-altruistic model to explain public opinion, while controlling for the major predictors of gun control attitudes found in the social sciences. Results: The public strongly supports policies that restrict who can access guns, expand school anti-bullying and counseling programs, and target-harden schools. While many factors influence attitudes toward gun-related policies specifically, moral-altruistic factors significantly increase support for all three types of school safety policies. Conclusions: The public favors a comprehensive policy response and is willing to pay for it. Support for prevention efforts reflects moral intuitions about harm, anger about school crime, and altruistic fear.


2013 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 29-49
Author(s):  
Anna Krzynówek-Arndt

In the concept of revolution there are two essential elements of political life. The first one is the fragility and sensitivity of the world of things created by human beings, lack of durability and strong support of the political order. The other element is the human ability to create and build a new order with hope for its survival. However, a more adequate approach to understand these elements is conceptualization of politics and political actions that anticipate the opening of the public sphere to the traditional and religious arguments (desecularization of religion as an impress of the postmodern epoch), and also to the problems of dignity of human work. What is also important is the awareness that it requires redefinition of the  anthropological assumptions and a radical broadening of understanding how humans act according to what Hannah Arendt proposes. Moreover, it is important to understand that the redefinition means something more than just retouching as it is defined by  Habermas, who believes in “laic communicative power” even in spite of mentioning “complementary learning process” of religion and secular outlook from yourself.


Problemos ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvydas Jokubaitis

Straipsnis skirtas šiuolaikinės politinės filosofijos nuošalyje likusiai sąmokslo problemai. Sąmokslas yra didelis iššūkis pozityvistinei mokslo sampratai. Karlo R. Popperio sąmokslo teorijos kritika prieštarauja pagrindinėms šio autoriaus metodologinėms nuostatoms. Popperio požiūris į sąmokslo teoriją gali būti apibūdintas kaip nenuoseklus ir vienpusiškas. Sąmokslas yra didelis iššūkis liberalizmo politinei filosofijai. Daugelis autorių mano, kad sąmokslas yra mažai reikšmingas liberalios visuomenės gyvenimo elementas. Tai menkai pagrįstas požiūris. Net pačioje liberaliausioje visuomenėje veikia daugybė slaptų susitarimų, viešai nematomų politinio gyvenimo subjektų ir manipuliacijų viešąja nuomone. Kai kurie dabartinių liberalių visuomenių politinio gyvenimo reiškiniai verčia naujai pažvelgti į sąmokslo fenomeną.Reikšminiai žodžiai: sąmokslas, sąmokslo teorija, pozityvizmas, liberalizmas. CONSPIRACY AS A PROBLEM OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND LIBERAL SOCIETYAlvydas Jokubaitis Summary The article discusses the concept of political conspiracy. This concept is a great challenge to a positivistic understanding of political science. The criticism of conspiracy theory proposed by Karl Popper contradicts the main methodological ideas maintained by the author. His view on conspiracy theory may be described as incoherent and one-sided. Conspiracy is an ambitious challenge to contemporary liberal political philosophy. It is widely asserted that conspiracy is an insignificant element in the political life of a liberal society. This view is hardly substantiated. Even in the most liberal society there are a lot of clandestine agreements, undercover subjects of political life and manipulations of public opinion. Many phenomena of contemporary liberal society encourage us to regard conspiracy from a different perspective.Keywords: conspiracy, conspiracy theory, positivism, liberalism.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nate Breznau ◽  
Carola Hommerich

Does public opinion react to inequality, and if so, how? The social harms caused by increasing inequality should cause public opinion to ramp up demand for social welfare protections. However, the public may react to inequality differently depending on institutional context. Using ISSP and WID data (1980-2006) we tested these claims. In liberal institutional contexts (mostly English-speaking), increasing income inequality predicted higher support for state provision of social welfare. In coordinated and universalist contexts (mostly of Europe), increasing inequality predicted less support. Historically higher income concentration predicted less public support, providing an account of the large variation in inequality within the respective liberal and coordinated contexts. The results suggest opinions in liberal societies – especially with higher historical inequality – reached the limits of inequality, reacting negatively; whereas in coordinated/universalist societies – especially with lower historical inequality – opinions moved positively, as if desiring more inequality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document