THE MULTICULTURAL MOVE TO LANGUAGE It is always worth reminding Canadians that when Pierre Elliott Trudeau introduced Multiculturalism Policy to Parliament in October 1971, it was not an attempt to change fundamental character of modern Canadian nation-state. Rather, policy's intent was to manage non-French and non-English peoples of nation, as Eve Haque clearly explains in her discussion of Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism's (B and B Commission) production of other ethnic groups of Canadian body politic (186-237). The B and B Commission's work simultaneously cemented idea that French and English/British ethnicities constituted founding races of Canada (5-8, 14, 53-56, 87-93, 140-52). Furthermore, move to language rather than ethnicity for white French and English/British was a cover to preclude racial designation as foundational to nation, all while making it fundamentally so (6, 18, 62-71, 75-78, 160-62). Indeed, late Robert Stanfield, Progressive Conservative Opposition Leader, stood to endorse policy by saying that, wish to state immediately, Mr. Speaker, that emphasis we have given to multiculturalism in no way constitutes an attack on basic duality of our country (234). The duality that was already assumed and came to be enshrined in bilingual and multicultural articulation of nation-state as fundamental to its founding was soon after enshrined in legislation and law. MULTICULTURALISM AS RACIOLOGICAL THINKING Eve Haque's Multiculturalism Within a Bilingual Framework: Language, Race and Belonging in Canada returns us to origin scene of Canadian nation-state's formation and management of its non-French and non-English/British others, to provide an account of how language, race, and culture have produced modern context of contemporary multicultural Canada. Haque's engagement with Canadian multiculturalism focuses squarely on the Preliminary Report and Books I (The Official Languages) and IV (The Cultural Contributions of Other Ethnic Groups) (7); her focus cannot be downplayed, for effects of Book IV continue to mark Canadian multicultural policy, politics, and their associated imaginaries. Haque begins her study with Jacque Parizeau's 1995 outburst that money and ethnic vote were reasons that No Campaign was narrowly successful in last referendum in Quebec (3-4, 238, 264). By beginning there, Haque pinpoints how deep structures of language, culture, and continue to shape contemporary Canadian politics, public sphere, and national imaginary. This shaping of contemporary Canadian national imaginary is fashioned through a recourse that places two languages outside boundaries of and ethnicity, only to be remarked by their accent as cultures - founding cultures of Canada. Indeed, Haque's work seeks to unmake such remarking as troubling work of and raciological thinking. Furthermore, it is Haque's argument that multiculturalism as policy usefully operated and operates in a space where public policy as biologically based racial exclusions became increasingly politically and socially disreputable (6). The disturbing impact in aftermath is how language and culture has come to stand in for and raciological thinking and in new and sustained ways more than forty years later. It is precisely manner in which language and culture appear to foreclose discussions of race and racism in Canada that makes Haque's contribution and reading of historical documents so important to contemporary debates on multiculturalism and racism. Indeed, Haque's analysis in part points to reasons why term barbaric cultural practices is currently used by Government of Canada to describe exclusively non-white cultural in Canadian citizenship guide (Zine 2012, 18). …