|
Article Excerpt
IN A RECENT COMMENTARY (hereafter referred to as the commentary), Professor Michael Carroll suggests that ideology, rather than evidence, has influenced work by us, S.M. Lipset, and others on Canada-U.S. comparisons. His interpretation is that ideology has led us to portray English Canada and other English-speaking democracies as essentially the same and "the best." We think it likely that this interpretation of our work stems from some misunderstandings and unfortunate oversights. In the limited space available here, we briefly clarify our findings and our views on some of the key points at issue. We are grateful to Professor Carroll and the CRSA editors for giving us this opportunity to do so. We must leave it to the other subjects of the commentary to respond regarding their work. (1)
Concerning the Argument That We Believe the English-Speaking Nations Are "Best"
It is suggested in the commentary (279) (2) that we believe "the sort of democratic systems found in England and former English colonies are best." However, it is evident from our work that this is not our view. In Regions Apart (Grabb and Curtis, 2005: 51), for example, we explicitly reject any claims of English "superiority." We do conclude, like many scholars, that English-speaking societies are different from others in certain respects. The list of researchers who draw this same conclusion is long, and includes Montesquieu, Tocqueville, Bryce, Weber, Hartz, Dahrendorf, Goldstone, Hopcroft, and numerous others (see Grabb and Curtis, 2005: 46-53).
The substance of our research provides the clearest evidence of what democratic nations we think are "best." Our published work reflects the belief that the best societies are those that are more socially inclusive, have more civic participation, are more apt to promote equality of both opportunity and condition, are relatively free of violent and other crimes, and have better health and life expectancy profiles (e.g., Curtis, Grabb and Guppy, 2004 [and earlier editions]; Tepperman and Curtis, 2004). Even if confined to the small number of our studies that are mentioned in the commentary, we demonstrate that several non-English nations, including European social democracies (e.g., Sweden and Holland), generally surpass English-speaking societies on such criteria (e.g., Curtis, Grabb and Baer, 1992; Curtis, Baer and Grabb, 2001). In Regions Apart, we show that the one clearly non-English region, Quebec, ranks highest on most of these indicators of the best society. In short, neither our international studies nor our four regions analyses support the conclusion that we portray the English-speaking societies as the best.
Studying the English-speaking countries is one part of our broader cross-national research, and stems from: 1) the fact that Canada is included among them; 2) the wish to comprehend Canadian social structures and culture; and 3) the belief that Canada, like any society, is best understood if studied comparatively. Hence, notwithstanding suggestions in the commentary (269), our continuing research comparing Canada and the U.S. (and many other nations) is not driven by "a long-running debate" with Professor Lipset over "incompatible ideological claims." Instead, our work is motivated by the desire to understand relationships among nations over the longer term. Clearly, the only way to map and account for the trajectory of these relationships is by studying them comparatively over time, and not doing so would mean that any important changes would go undetected. Such studies go back at least to Montesquieu and Tocqueville, and comprise a large and diverse contemporary literature. Included here are the more than 700 books, articles and other sources we cite in Regions Apart, written by authors with a variety of perspectives. Undoubtedly, researchers will continue this work well into the future, given the abiding interest in comparing patterns of change across nations.
Concerning our Canada-U.S. Comparisons of Contemporary Social Structure
In the commentary, it is stated (269) that we "fail to ... [show] significant differences between Canadians (outside Quebec) and Americans on attitudinal and behavioural measures relevant to the Lipset thesis." Actually, along with similarities, our research results show some marked Canada-U.S. differences, and numerous smaller but significant differences, many of which are the reverse of Professor Lipset's predictions. For example, in chapters 7-11 of Regions Apart alone, we compare contemporary Canada and the U.S. on approximately 90 separate dependent measures, and report significant differences in fully two thirds of these comparisons. (3) Some of the largest differences are that Americans are "more religious than Canadians according to virtually all measures," are "more conservative on ... family values and sexuality," and "experience much higher homicide rates" (Grabb and Curtis, 2005: 242-43). Among many other differences detailed in Regions Apart, we find that, compared with Americans, Canadians are more likely to: vote, support...
|
