Search

A key component of the Conservative Party of Canada's (CPC) electoral strategy in 2011, 2015 and 2019 was to court the country's "ethnic vote". Under the leadership of Stephen Harper and Andrew Scheer, the CPC launched an aggressive outreach strategy aimed at attracting conservative ethnic populations while at the same time, continuing to appeal to the party's "old stock" base – referred to as the "populist paradox". This approach was particularly prominent in the Party's immigration and citizenship policy platform. While the CPC continuously rolled out reforms further restricting access to incoming immigrants and refugees, they framed these initiatives as a way to keep disingenuous immigrants out in order to protect the integrity of the Canadian immigration system, a system used appropriately by those immigrants from whom they were seeking support. Using Sara Ahmed's work on affect and happiness, this paper examines the CPC's construction of "good" and "bad" immigrants, specifically how these constructions are taken up in broader narratives of Canadian citizenship and belonging. In doing so, I address how the CPC uses this rhetoric to appeal to voters, both immigrant and non-immigrant alike. Un élément clé de la stratégie électorale du Parti conservateur du Canada (PCC) en 2011, 2015 et 2019 était de convoiter le ''vote ethnique'' dans le pays. Sous la direction de Stephen Harper et Andrew Scheer, le PCC a lancé une stratégie de sensibilisation agressive visant à attirer des populations ethniques conservatrices tout en continuant de faire appel à la base du ''vieux stock'' du parti – appelée ''paradoxe populiste''. Cette approche était particulièrement importante dans la plate-forme de la politique d'immigration et de citoyenneté du Parti. Bien que le PCC ait continuellement déployé des réformes restreignant davantage l'entrée aux immigrants et aux réfugiés, il a présenté ces initiatives comme un moyen de garder les immigrants de moralité douteuse à l'écart afin de protéger l'intégrité du système d'immigration canadien, un système utilisé de manière appropriée par ces mêmes immigrants auprès de qui ils cherchaient du soutien. Utilisant les travaux de Sara Ahmed sur l'insouciance et le bonheur, cet article examine la construction par le PCC des notions de ''bons'' et ''mauvais'' immigrants, en particulier comment ces constructions sont reprises de façon plus large dans des récits de la citoyenneté et de l'appartenance canadiennes. En somme, j'explique comment le PCC utilise cette rhétorique pour séduire les électeurs, immigrants et non-immigrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In response to the rise in terrorism after the turn of the millennium, multiculturalist countries such as Australia, Britain and Canada introduced policies that make it easier to revoke the citizenships of dual nationals. These policies primarily target naturalized immigrants and their descendants. Ongoing debates indicate that more countries plan to follow suit. Some scholars argue that easy revocation policies create two-tiered political communities, where one group of citizens have a stronger status security than the other. This study builds on their perspectives, and argues that majority members should be more likely to hold anti-immigrant attitudes in countries where state policies discriminate against citizens in terms of status security. To test this hypothesis, this study employs multilevel regression analysis. Data come from European Values Study (2008), European Social Survey (2014), and Eurobarometer (2015), and cover thirty European countries. Findings offer support for the proposed hypothesis. In countries where immigrants have low status security, majority members are more likely to have negative attitudes toward immigrants. The results hold not only for immigrants in general but also for Muslim immigrants in particular. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]