1 An exception, which is referenced below, is Wilson's, PaulImmigrants and Politics (Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1973).Google Scholar

2 This decline is well documented in Cook, Timothy E., “The Bear Market in Political Socialization and the Costs of Misunderstood Psychological Theories,” American Political Science Review 79 (1985), 1079–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 A total of 287 recently-arrived immigrants were surveyed, many in languages other than English. For a brief description of the survey's methodology see Black, Jerome H. and Leithner, Christian, “Patterns of Ethnic Media Consumption: A Comparative Examination of Ethnic Groupings in Toronto,” Canadian Ethnic Studies 19 (1987), Appendix A. See also Jerome H. Black, “Confronting Canadian Politics: Some Perspectives on the Rate of Immigrant Political Adaptation,” a paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Guelph, 1984; this paper is available from the author upon request.Google Scholar

4 Categorization was determined by the standard question: “To which ethnic or cultural group did you belong on first coming to this continent, North America?” In about 90 per cent of the cases, the ethnic response matched the relevant country of origin associated with the individual's ethnic group. (The “relevant” country is termed the “former country” in the survey and is defined in footnote 14.) Thirty-nine British recent arrivals were surveyed, as were 68 South Europeans (53 Portuguese, 11 Italians and 4 Greeks). East European ethnicities were determined according to post-Second World War East-West political divisions, but included many subnationalities (for example, Croatian and Slovakian). Of the 96 interviewed, the largest group by far was the Poles (59), followed by 19 Russians (including 7 Russian Jews), and 5 Yugoslavs, with the remainder spread over a dozen or so other ethnicities. Of the 83 British West Indians polled, the modal response was “West Indian,” given by 27 immigrants, of whom 14 were Jamaican. Nineteen others indicated “Jamaican” by itself; 15 and 7 claimed ethnicities associated with British Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago, respectively.

5 Some of the following arguments have been indicated in an earlier study although, again, the discussion there centred on the difficulty that immigrants in general might have in becoming involved in Canadian politics. That study also cites references supporting this negative view. See Black, Jerome H., “Immigrant Political Adaptation in Canada: Some Tentative Findings,” this JOURNAL 15 (1982), 3–27Google Scholar. Also see Kelley, Jonathan and McAllister, Ian, “Immigrants, Socio-Economic Attainment, and Politics in Australia,” British Journal of Sociology 35 (1984), 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Some might argue that even in the context of this more extended time frame, there would still be limited transference resulting from the initial years of non-involvement. In other words, stalled political involvement could prove “costly,” tempering the levels of activity that ultimately emerge. However, research already undertaken suggests that immigrants are not so penalized and, in fact, they start to become involved in Canadian politics during their first years in the country. See Black, “Immigrant Political Adaptation” and, by the same author, “Confronting Canadian Politics.”

7 Lane, Robert E., Political Life (New York: Free Press, 1959), 267.Google Scholar

8 This perspective, a “gradual learning model of political activity,” is found in Verba, Sidney and Nie, Norman H., Participation in America (New York: Harper and Row, 1972); quotation at 148.Google Scholar

9 For a discussion of the idea of “start-up,” at least in connection with life cycle effects, see Nie, Norman H., Verba, Sidney and Kim, Jae-on, “Political Participation and the Life Cycle,” Comparative Politics 6 (1974), 319–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Wilson, , Immigrants and Politics, 15–16Google Scholar.

11 Sigel, Roberta S. and Hoskin, Marilyn B., “Perspectives on Adult Socialization—Areas of Research,” in Renshon, Stanley A. (ed.), Handbook of Political Socialization (New York: The Free Press, 1977), 287–88.Google Scholar

12 See, for instance, Portes, Alejandro, Parker, Robert Nash and Cobas, Jose A., “Assimilation or Consciousness: Perceptions of U.S. Society Among Recent Latin American Immigrants to the United States,” Social Forces 59 (1980), 200–24. For a Canadian statement about such a possibility, see Raymond Breton, “The Ethnic Community as a Resource in Relation to Group Problems: Perceptions and Attitudes,” Research Paper No. 122, Centre for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Thanks are due to one of this JOURNAL'S assessors who raised this possibility.

14 All respondents were asked if they had ever contacted public officials in their previous country, attended a political meeting, or been a member of a political party. Those from an East European country were asked if they had ever participated in meetings that nominated candidates for political office, written letters to newspapers about public issues, or been members of municipal, workers' or housing councils. Non-Eastern Europeans were asked about vote proselytizing, working for a party or a candidate, signing a petition, and taking part in a protest demonstration. Respondents were assigned a score of 1 for each positive response. Questions about political involvement in the former country were asked only of those who were at least 16 years of age when they immigrated. “Former country” referred to the country where the respondent had mostly lived in the “last ten years before immigrating to Canada.”

15 The question in full is as follows: “When living there, how interested were you in politics and public affairs—were you very interested, somewhat interested, slightly interested, or not at all interested?” This variable was scored 3, 2, 1 and 0, respectively.

16 The party identification (partisanship) measure was created as follows: Individuals who indicated that they identified “very strongly” with a Canadian federal party were assigned a score of 3, those who indicated a “fairly strong” identification were given a score of 2, and those who claimed either to feel “not very strongly” or only to lean toward a party, a score of 1. All others were assigned a value of 0, including those who said they were “independent” or who responded “don't know” to the question. Given the present focus, it seemed advisable to treat the latter response as valid information, indicative of unfamiliarity with the political parties. The Canadian interest measure is similar in wording and scoring to the former-country political interest measure.

17 The former participation item was worded, “Have you ever worked with others in Toronto to try to solve some community problem?” and the latter, “Have you ever personally gone to see, or spoken to, or written to, any politician or public official about some need or problem?” On each item, individuals received a score of 1 if they had participated in such manner, 0 otherwise.

18 The political knowledge measure used was based on the following five questions: (a) Which political party has the most members in the federal Parliament? (b) Who is the premier of Alberta? (c) Which level of government is responsible for educational matters? (d) Who was John A. Macdonald? and (e) Which political party is in power provincially in British Columbia? Respondents received a score of 1 for each correct answer.

The choice of all these somewhat “standard” indicators, representing particular kinds of learning about Canadian politics, constitutes a point of departure only and is not meant to imply that other kinds of learning cannot occur. Certainly, it is not inconceivable that previous politicization could be transferred to “unconventional” political behaviour or be related to alienated feelings about the Canadian system; these more complicated facets will be considered in future work. At the same time, these kinds of reactions would not be totally unrelated to those considered here. Protest behaviour may be associated with high levels of political interest and alienation possibly with high levels of political knowledge. For an analysis of how immigrants may become skeptical and critical of their host country, see Alejandro Portes et al., “Assimilation or Consciousness.”

19 Justification for the incorporation of these control variables into the analysis is given in Black, Jerome H., Niemi, Richard G. and Powell, G. Bingham Jr., “Age, Resistance, and Political Learning in a New Environment: The Case of Canadian Immigrants,” Comparative Politics 20 (1987), 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Ibid.; Black, “Confronting Canadian Politics: Some Perspectives on the Rate of Immigrant Political Adaptation.”