Multiculturalism and Assimilation - Two Different Approaches to Immigrant Populations - Assignment Example

MULTICULTURALISM AND ASSIMILATION (Two Different Approaches to Immigrant Populations) of Introduction Immigration is the movement of people from one country or region to another place of which they are not the native population. People immigrate for a variety of reasons, foremost of which are for economic betterment, political asylum, and religious freedom, although there are many more justifications for a serious move in which the desire is to re-settle permanently. There are approximately 192 million immigrant people throughout the world today, of which about 115 immigrants choose to live in the developed countries, primarily the United States of America and in Europe. The rate of immigration has doubled in the last five decades alone, accounting for the greater proportion of workers in the industrialized nations of the world. The estimated number of international immigrants represented about three percent of the global total population. Many of these immigrants either came from Asia or Africa, and most of them are undocumented migrant workers using illegal means or channels to gain entry. Half of all immigrants are women; other than the reasons cited earlier, immigrants also choose to leave their own countries due to ethnic persecution (if they belong to a minority), avoidance of military or armed conflicts, and political harassment. A new reason recently cited as a driver for the new increases in immigration is increased globalization, in which their original home countries had suffered due to open trade policies, making them losers due to greater economic inequality. Some people also immigrate for better educational opportunities while others do so for a good retirement place in another country, such as a warmer climate and lower costs of living. An improvement in transportation technologies, cheaper travel rates, and shorter travel times have in many ways also contributed to the heightened phenomenon of global immigration today. Discussion The United Nations considers international migration as one of the basic human rights, and the sacred right to freedom of travel and movement is included in its Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Relatedly, basic human rights apply to everybody, whether as an immigrant or not; the U. N. agency charged with carrying out this mandate is the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (or UNESCO) to encourage all member states to respect all rights of immigrants at par or level with that of its own native citizens (Ban, 2007, para. 1) and to promote the speedy, orderly, and peaceful integration of migrants to society in general. It is quite ironic how many Western countries had previously urged Russia and China, in the past decades, to allow their citizens to move freely and migrate if they want to go, but now these Western countries are reluctant to accept more migrants and put up hindrances, controls, or new laws to limit immigration. Admittedly, there are benefits to free immigration such as lower labor costs that help the host country, contribute to cultural diversity of society, enhance mutual understanding, alleviate labor shortages, and increase the talent pool of the nation (Fassi, 2011). Moreover, countries with declining populations also benefit with new people. But on the other hand, some people also resist immigrants because of competition for scarce jobs, cultural adulteration or influences, social adjustments, increased demands on social services like health care, policing, sanitation, food, housing, educational facilities, welfare and pension benefits, among others (Sterba 2009). In some European countries, a new element of the drawbacks of immigration has been added, that of cultural conflicts, social intolerance, and religious extremism. Some immigrants resist integration, and prefer ethnic segregation. Precisely due to these existing and other incipient problems related to new immigrants, various countries have tried several approaches towards achieving faster integration into society. An offshoot of these immigration problems are the popularity of nativism and rise of nationalism when native people of a certain country express strong feelings of national, cultural, or religious identities with the often unstated phobia of how the new immigrants will spoil their social values. However, nativism as an academic technical term is associated with the negative aspects of anti-immigration sentiment, such as armed ranchers, vigilantes, and militias (Navarro, 2008). Nativism is closely related to nationalism, which is the larger version of this concept, in that it encompasses a strong identification by a group of individuals with their nation as a whole. In other words, it is much broader although the objectives are virtually the same, which are to reduce the legal status of immigrants, and thereby also limit their political, economic, and social rights as well in their new host country. Advocates of nationalism cite a number of reasons why immigrants should be limited to certain quotas only, such as increased crime rates, prostitution, alcoholism, and juvenile delinquency among the immigrant population (Perea, 1997). As a consequence, approaches to enlightened immigration policies, such as assimilation and multiculturalism gained traction or popularity among academics, sociologists, politicians, and members of civil society to help immigrants integrate seamlessly into their new homelands. Multiculturalism pertains to the ideal of maintaining several distinct ethnic or minority cultures within the larger canvas of the nation-state. The hope is that peoples of different backgrounds in cultural practices, beliefs, and social norms can co-exist peacefully. Assimilation is absorbing or fully integrating ethnic groups into the single most-dominant national identity (Schaub, 2005). Multiculturalism – this political and social concept refers to multiple cultures within the community. It is characterized by the famous Latin phrase ““e pluribus unum” or translated into the familiar “one out of many” to signify ethnic, cultural, and religious unity in diversity.The hope is that people can learn to live together peacefully and harmoniously despite all these differences and make their community a nice and safe place to live in and raise kids. However, multiculturalism has a mixed record in countries where it was implemented. This had been the sad experience in Australia, Germany, France, and elsewhere in the European Union. Many politicians had given up on multiculturalism as simply unworkable, that a “salad bowl” is an unstable societal organization because of lingering biases of the majority (Dempsey 2010). Racial prejudice and ethnic bias lead to stereotypes; prejudice is the preconceived ideas regarding a certain person belonging to an ethnic group that is often unfavorable, without basis, and unusually resistant to reason and logic, despite experience to the contrary. Bias is the partial preference for a person or object due to a partial knowledge or perspective. This is a dangerous attitude because it in turn leads to stereotypes, which are thoughts and ideas used to categorize or classify people into general types. It is exemplified by the case of black journalist Brent Staples, when a white young woman she encountered in a dark street at night was frightened of his very presence, thinking he is a criminal or rapist or worse (Staples, 1986), and soon ran away. A chief criticism against multiculturalism is it leads to a fragmented society; moreover, it fosters a “rights mentality” among immigrant groups, instead of a “responsibilities mentality.” Countries like France and Great Britain had declared this policy to be a failure (Burns 2011); the two countries noted it fostered “segregated communities” separated from mainstream society. Assimilation – due to the perceived problems regarding multiculturalism, advocates of immigrant integration prefer assimilation. It is the process by which a unique minority culture is fully integrated into the dominant culture of a country. There are advantages to this approach, as it allows for greater political, civil, economic, and social rights to the minorities once fully integrated. The immigrants are expected to acquire the language, customs, and ideologies of the dominant social group, thereby making them virtually indistinguishable. Immigrants can change their names and be fully accepted as new citizens through the legal process of naturalization. It also addresses the main arguments used to denigrate multiculturalism, which critics say promote a myopic view of local allegiance instead of pledging oneself to a national identity or loyalty. A benefit of assimilation is a full equality in rights that can result in progress (Belmessous, 2013). This “melting pot” approach helps to prevent the “politics of differences, recognition, identities, special interests, and political power which can lead to fragmentation, and in extreme cases, can even threaten national security because of some perceived divided loyalties. Some of the bad examples of the failure of multiculturalism is religious extremism fostered by a divided society based on original ethnic, religious or racial affiliations. Radicalization and terrorism are oftentimes the result of the feelings of alienation, more so among the youth (Malik 2011). Countries which had pursued assimilation as a matter of national policy include that of Malaysia and Australia. The latter had used assimilation with regards to its Aborigines but it had disastrous results, so Australia later on experimented with multiculturalism, especially in view of its acceptance of various immigrants, primarily that of Vietnamese boat people in the mid-1970s. Malaysia is attempting full assimilation, that will result into a single Malaysian race by 2020. Although the United States has a vast experience with regard to immigrant assimilation, its social problem of racism and racial discrimination still persists even today. Originally, blacks were imported into America during the slave trade to work in agricultural plantations in various areas to cultivate sugar, tobacco, hemp, and other commercially-viable crops. The Civil War was fought because of slavery; and although it had been abolished, various discriminatory practices, laws, and behaviors still exclude many black Americans from socio-economic and educational opportunities. The Civil Rights Movement achieved a lot to improve the lot of black Americans, and the movement was in retrospect a fight for assimilation. Martin Luther King termed his new mass movement as the unfinished fight which was started in the Civil War, as many Americans of black descent are still marginalized. Jim Crow laws were still prevalent in the South even in the late 1960s until the administrations of presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. It took protest marches, sit-ins, and freedom rides (the three approaches by Martin King) together with vigils, picket lines, and voter registrations before the whites finally relented (King 1958). Conclusion Whether it is multiculturalism or assimilation, it all boils down to the people to find the ways by which to live harmoniously despite their differences through interculturalism, a frequent exchange of interactions by communications, language, and other daily contacts to dispel doubts, prejudices, biases, and stereotypes. There is hope for America, as a black person can hail a taxi now in New York (Steele, 2001) without being ignored deliberately by the taxi driver. It is also very necessary to resist racial profiling, such as that certain bi-racial American kids as inherently more intelligent or studious than their peers, to be seen as geniuses or geeks (Gup, 1997). Estimated word count = 1,785 Reference List Ban Ki-Moon (2007, July 10). “International migration and multicultural policies.” UNESCO. Retrieved April 08, 2013 from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/international-migration/ Belmessous, S. (2013). Assimilation and empire: Uniformity in French and British colonies, 1541-1954. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Burns, J. F. (2011, February 5). “Cameron criticizes multiculturalism in Britain.” The New York Times. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/world/europe/06britain.html Dempsey, J. (2010, October 18). “Germany: After Merkels comments, president makes trip to Turkey.” The New York Times. Retrieved April 10, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/world/europe/19briefs-TURKEY.html?_r=0 Fassi, L. (2011). Long term benefits of immigration: An econometric study on population age structures. Saarbrucken, Germany: Lambert Academic Publishing. Gup, T. (1997, April 21). “Who is a whiz kid?” Newsweek Magazine. King, M. L. (1958). “Three ways of meeting oppression: In stride towards freedom.” New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers. Malik, K. (2011, July 6). “Assimilations failure, terrorisms rise.” The New York Times. Retrieved April 8, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/opinion/07malik.html?pagewanted=all Navarro, A. (2008). The immigration crisis: Nativism, armed vigilantism, and the rise of a countervailing movement. Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira. Perea, J. F. (1997). Immigrants out!: The new nativism and the anti-immigrant impulse in the United States of America. New York, NY: New York University Press. Schaub, T. (2005). The problems of immigration and assimilation in a multicultural society. Norderstedt, Germany: GRIN Verlag. Staples, B. (1986). “Just walk on by: Black men and public space.” Ms. Magazine, 1-2. Sterba, J. P. (2009). Ethics: The big questions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons. Steele, S. (2001). “Hailing while black.” Time Magazine. Retrieved April 10, 2013 from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1000422,00.html Read More