I spend a considerable amount of time in places which are overwhelmingly British Isles origin, think 98% or so and not even that far from Toronto. The overwhelming impression one gets in those places is that although they have a sense of place they still have to compromise in certain areas of their lives due to the immense population influence of other areas. Thats why places like Newfoundland still have to deal with French on their cereal boxes and why some conservative prairie towns will have to deal with gay marriage rights. Were forced to compromise across this country whether we like it or not due to not having any majority ethnic group. Australia, where i also nominally reside is a different beast altogether.

Makes sense to me. Now I'm curious to spend an extended period in Australia and see what that's like.

Think rural Northern England, but friendlier and happier. Their big cities are similar to mid sized Canadian cities though feel richer and sunnier.

I think the most obvious answer is slightly complex, but if you see nativism as a reactionary movement, then Canada does not have a history of events which would normally be a precursor to it. We are also, mostly a country of diverse immigrants, and with a mostly left wing or centrist liberal political tradition, but also with, arguably, a weak national identity. The fact that our economy has done relatively well for the past few years, or even decades, and we have had balanced liberal education systems, and mostly adequate social systems means there is less fertile ground here for any nativist movement.

Furthermore, what national identity we do have (or at least a large subset of the population) is strongly tied to multiculturalism.

Multiculturalism is, in a sense, the opposite of national identity, making it much less likely that any nativism emerges. Also, racial diversity (which can cause American style racial divisiveness) is not the same as multiculturalism.

The 80% of Canadians of European ancestry (i.e. white) might be surprised to learn this. We're not likely to target the Irish (again), the future risk, if it exists relates to visible minority communities be they ethnic or religious.

I think the British Isles population is often greatly underplayed in Canada outside Quebec. What with the Canadian ethnic origin mixing things up for several census periods now, it's impossible to tell just how many people are English-Irish-Scottish in origin.

My sense is that the British group might still be a bare majority even in BC and Ontario. Though not in Saskatchewan interestingly enough. SK is the only anglo majority province where British origin people are not the largest ethnic origin group. It's been that way for quite some time. I think Germans are the largest group there.

It will also be disputed by some on here but I would suspect that British origin people are still pluralities in the Greater Vancouver and Greater Toronto areas. Probably in the 40% range. Again, with Canadian ethnic origin etc. it's really hard to know. But there is no shortage of white anglos is either of those cities, in spite of what people say. It's not like Miami or Detroit.

None of this is going to last forever I agree. Either for BC and Ontario or for Toronto or Vancouver.

Regardless, this group does not appear to have hardly any nativist tendencies at the moment in Canada.

Canada looks pretty good right now it's true but one thing I was thinking about was how great some northern European countries looked on this front when I first visited them 25 years ago. I am thinking of the Netherlands and the Nordics. They were often cited as models of harmonious diversity and the M-word (multiculturalism) was heard very often as well there.

Not saying they inevitably will for Canada but things can and do change sometimes. It can happen fast too.

It's always interesting reading about multiculturalism in Canada. From my observations it's a phenomenon of the larger cities while in much of the rest of Canada it's a foreign concept. You don't have to drive that far out of Toronto to find homogeneous white communities. When I lived in Kingston, multiculturalism was literally something you only saw on TV.

Since moving to Toronto, Kingston literally feels like an entirely different country. There really are two Canadas - a dense urban multicultural society and a rural/medium urban white society.

For much of Canada, "multiculturalism" amounts to ethnic food, folk dancing and, one hopes, a modicum of tolerance. Where the multicultural crosses over into the Canadian mainstream, it's pretty much Canadian mainstream as far as I can tell.

I think you are overstating the levels of white nationalism or solidarity. The interests of French canadians, English Canadians, Ukrainians and Italian Canadians are far less racial than you state. Attempts to create a white nationalist platform is bound to alienate a majority of Italian, Irish and French Canadians if not a majority of Anglo Canadians themselves. The white nationalist movement in this country is miniscule and declining. Most of the biggest proponents of a multiethnic society in this country are "white" themselves.

That's a fairly contemporary view of things, and not necessarily shared across the country. Even when I was a kid in the 70s, the Coles Notes version of the Canadian identity would still have been mostly English-French, plus some aboriginals that we didn't really think about much.

Not to call you out personally, but the idea that multiculturalism was always part of Canada's identity and what Canada was all about, doesn't really have any basis in fact.

Isn't Denmark facing significant backlash over its refugee policies?

As for Canada, it wasn't that long ago when Quebec's Charter of Values was a significant issue.

What are these medium urban white communities? Maybe that's an east coast thing? Surrey or Richmond, for example, would not be considered medium urban white communities.

BC doesnt have too many medium sized centers outside Greater Vancouver. I believe he is referring to medium sized urban centers outside the immediate commuter suburbs of major cities. Victoria would be considered medium urban, as would Sherbrooke, London, Oshawa, Halifax, Kitchener, Quebec City, Regina, etc.

Denmark is another good example of a country thats is behind Canada and Australia when it comes to having a more modern effective immigration policy. Despite the various real flaws in our immigration strategy, it is far more effective and a couple decades ahead of Western Europe.

I think you're partly right in the sense that the risk is low (though one never knows).

But there is an ''us'' of white people in Canada that is comprised of people with names like Smith, Wilson, Mackenzie, Yaremchuk, Van Dyke, Schneider, Gagnon, Nilsson, Antonelli, etc. They're not radicalized or even mobilized in that collective identity, but it still exists. They're also open to people with different colour skin or facial features with names like Srivastava, Wong or Nkrumah who want to join their ''us".

There is also a parallel us with people who have names like Tremblay, Pelletier, Dupont, Lapointe, Mercier, Ross, Harvey, Smith, Flynn, Calliari, Lopez, Pacheco, etc. They are somewhat more mobilized as an "us" than the group above but they are also open to people with different colour skin or facial features with names like Ndiaye, Haddad or Nguyen who want to join their "us".

These groups are not significantly different from the ''non-hispanic white anglo" group in the US.

I think many bien pensant Canadians would be shocked at how easily and naturally we would break into us vs. them groups if the type of tensions other countries are seeing were to surface here.

I never claimed it always a part of our identity. It's very much a post-Trudeau thing, I think.

You're right, and that's why I said it wasn't about you. But you hear people talk about it sometimes as if it was foundational or something.

Canadian Exceptionalism. Even our right-wing populists have accepted multiculturalism.

The most fertile place for a Trump/UKIP-type politics is Quebec.