Dakota Jeffrey-Petts: Your Uber Eats delivery does not mean official multiculturalism works

The real measure of a successful multicultural society relies on far more than the number of different cuisines available, writes Guest Contributor Dakota Jeffery-Petts.

Dakota Jeffery-Petts is a former political activist.

Official multiculturalism in Canada is frequently emphasised through food.

Our national story, as most Canadian voters are taught, is recognised in large part by the almost dizzying variety within our culinary scene.

To many on the left, right, and centre, the curries, pho, pierogies, gyros, and the proliferation of “fusion” restaurants all serve as proof that the grand multicultural experiment is working.

They see it as a distinctly Canadian product of our government’s policies dating back to the government of Pierre Trudeau, which, as Anthony Koch wrote in the National Post, effectively re-engineered Canada. Out were the Sunday breakfasts and roast beef sandwiches of the Dominion, and in were tikka masala, pad thai, and sushi.

That equation is often sold as an intimate yet easily enjoyable symbol of how well Canada can tolerate and accommodate the differences that exist between nations and cultures, which can be fused into something new, certainly tasty, and supposedly better.

However, that notion is a great red herring. It is a pleasant yet dangerous distraction from the many examples of our failing multiculturalist project.

The vibrancy, the flavours, and the harmless nature of accessible dining enable supporters to avoid addressing the strains that mass, unmanageable cultural change has brought upon the country. Chief amongst these are the noticeable declines in social cohesion, public order, and our many social standards that help set Canada apart as a redoubt of Western civilisation.

It is never easier to support multiculturalism than when it is on a menu and your stomach is empty. How many Canadians would be prepared to give up the variety of cuisines available within a block of their homes?

But let us face it: Liberal and NDP partisans, the restaurant industry, and food media on platforms like X, TikTok, YouTube, and more have done a magnificent job of rebranding culinary diversity as an act of enlightened progressivism.

This type of appreciation is low-risk and high-reward for many, hence why it often goes unchallenged in one-on-one discussions, or the braying of the many progressive mobs.

People can travel the world with your taste buds. There is no grappling with the uncomfortable realities that stem from the friction that develops between different cultures and the very disagreeable customs and norms that created such delicacies.

In reality, it is nothing more than base satisfaction masquerading as policy success, as our governments love to do on many other topics. However, attitudes towards multiculturalism and immigration are changing in Canada.

One of the side effects of COVID-19 is short-term or long-term loss of taste and smell. Perhaps the inability to savour exotic food during the pandemic made many Canadians think twice about our lack of discourse on radical multiculturalism.

Jesting aside, the real measure of a successful multicultural society is not the number of different cuisines available. In truth, it is the ability to tolerate peoples of different racial and cultural backgrounds, practices, faiths, and views without chipping away at the legal, political, and social pillars that underpin Canadian society.

In fact, it was that distinct Canadian heritage that helped push the Western world towards a fuller embrace of progressive values like pluralism and tolerance. It should be added that, by all accounts, we have been failing to respect that truth for roughly the last sixty years. This is despite our modest success at incorporating specific aspects of different norms, practices, and identities into our own.

When supporters of multiculturalism on both sides of the aisle fixate on food, they pull the focus away from issues which demand respect and appreciation in order to uphold the best of ourselves over the long term.

Those more tangible issues require genuine political will and courage to address, and without them we are all left worse off. In fact, one could argue it threatens Confederation itself.

To be clear, the incredible culinary contributions of our diverse communities are worth celebrating, be they domestic or adopted. The culinary traditions of our neighbours and the small business owners who share them with the masses are welcome additions to our lives and our communities.

That said, people and the cultures that mould them are not inanimate produce or animal flesh. They are living beings defined by morals, traditions, their communities, their faiths, hopes, and desires. While food is an accessible means of expressing one’s cultural pride, it is one of the most superficial aspects of culture.

As such, when defenders of the status quo use “food culture” as evidence* that “multiculturalism is working,” they trivialise the concept of cultural identity and nationhood and undermine their legitimacy. Social obligations, such as respecting what came before to uphold the best of ourselves for future generations, are simplified into non-controversial questions of taste and consumption. (*And if its very delivery now requires the unrestrained importation of an entire low-skill caste system in support, those defenders and our nation are undermined further.)

If we want to more truly embrace the spirit of pluralism, we must move past the garnish and down into the core of what makes us a country and what truly defines our cultural identity. We need to stop relying on an empty-calorie narrative of food as a shield.

The real work is about ensuring that the Canadian identity survives as generations past and present have known it. It is going to take a lot more than some heat, meat, and spice to cook up that solution.

Dakota Jeffery-Petts is a former Conservative Party activist and lifelong resident of Toronto.