Do Multicultural Policies Promote Social Segregation - Coursework Example

 Multicultural policies promote social segregation Multiculturalism has become the part of governmental policies of many modern states. The proponents of the multiculturalism believe that all cultures are of equal value and that fostering multiculturalism and diversity in the nation would enhance the potentiality, unity and integration of the nation. However there are many who hold that multicultural policies ultimately promote social segregation and this paper tries to unearth how far that view can be substantiated. The essay seeks to support this argument, drawing conclusions from the prevailing evidences in the global community. Cultural disparities and diversities are the undeniable features of the entire globe and human race. Since the beginning of the human history chaos and crisis due to the cultural dominance have been tormenting the world. Democratic governments’ attempt to solve the social inequalities and discrimination are appreciable. Yet, very often the undue emphasis laid on multiculturalism in this context is suspicious of its outcomes. The policy that intends to ensure equal opportunities and participation often creates frustration and disappointment among certain groups. Many countries propagate multiculturalism with the notion that it would ensure the cohesion of our society and promote new talents, ideas, and economic wealth. Multicultural theories It is essential to have a thorough understanding of the various multicultural theories that have immensely influenced multicultural practices all over the world. The term ‘multiculturalism’ in its usual sense refers to the concept of racial, cultural and ethnic diversity within a society or a nation. Many of the democratic countries have defined their own multicultural policies in order to maintain and promote the cultural diversity and national integrity. Admitting the cultural, religious, racial and ethnic diversity as an undeniable part of the society the governments have relied on the concept of multiculturalism which they believe would bring cultural equality and cohesion. Yet many of the policies enacted on this concern have brought controversies too. The critics argued that the so called equality doctrine would promote social segregation instead of cultural tolerance. Thinkers like Horace Kallen, James Banks, Bill Martin, Martin J. Beck Matustik and Judith M Green are some of the advocates of multiculturalism. They generally believed that every culture of a society has its own uniqueness and there is a strong necessity to promote and cherish this uniqueness among the members, a strong feeling of belonging to this uniqueness, for the benefit of the society as a whole. The term ‘Cultural Pluralism’ was introduced by Horace Kallen to refer the culture of a nation having multi facets, values etc. According to his theory, all small groups in a large society are important and their uniqueness and variety contribute to the culture of a nation; unlike other theorists, he also purports that the dominant culture in the society must be recognized (Ardoin 2000). Green (1998) was another major proponent of multiculturalism. According to him all countries have accommodated cultures of other groups for the benefit they brought the dominant group. He continues that by teaming, groups have gained strength and power bringing on changes like wage increase and employment security and women and minorities have advanced due to increased economic opportunities (Green 1998). Similarly, Maltustic says that “the culture, political and economic wars turn on how and through whom to tell the multicultural story.” According to him we must create a new multicultural enlightenment “a corporate, globally local multiculturalism, as opposed to a national monoculture” (Matustik, 1998). Martin (1998) is of the opinion that if multiculturalism as a social and political agenda, is to be more than a banner in which diverse groups pursue their piece of the pie, then it must indeed be a matter of a gathering one that aims to, through the enactment of a radical diversity, bring together a radical confluence of possibilities for all humankind (Martin, 1998, p.128). The theoretical contributions made by all these multicultural theorists have influenced and acted as the strong pillars for multicultural practices across the world. Multicultural policies Modern countries have interpreted their own multicultural policies and laws to ensure the integrity of the nation considering various factors that would affect the sentiments and interests of its different social segments and groups. Among them, India is the largest democracy with extreme diversity which has been indulged in a Herculean task to align its array of ethnic, religious, linguistic communities. India like many other multicultural nations cherishes ‘unity in diversity’ as its slogan. The dramatic changes in the immigrant population in many of the western nations that have been caused by globalization and other factors have created a situation which demands the review of present policies. Britain must be the leading one confronted with this issue more than any other western countries. The present social scenario of Britain is entirely different from that of the past decades. As Vertovec observes, the policy makers had considered the British society comprised of fewer communities mainly Asian and African-Caribbean; however immigration to Britain between 1991-2001 include people from a wide range of countries (Vertovec 2005). Multiculturalism impact on welfare state The impact of multiculturalism on the welfare states has been a matter of debate for the recent years. Many of the western nations like Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Britain are heaving with the immigrant population. It has become difficult for the governments to align the increasing diversity for the welfare of the nations. The rampant growth of the minorities has created xenophobic or misanthropic feelings among the natives. Many thinkers are of the opinion that uniting different cultures under the state policies have been of fruitless effort. Besides there is disagreement between the policy makers regarding the parameters of recognizing the social groups as minority or majority. Few countries could equally meet the requirements of every culture. The system is often accused for spoiling the uniqueness of every culture. Moreover certain unhealthy practices of particular societies might cause bad influence on the others and gradually those acts also become the part of the heterogeneous culture. Communal riots and cultural clashes have become the hall mark of many multicultural nations. Huge sum of money and man power have been spend to suppress the outrage. There have been great disparities in the adoption of multicultural policies among world nations: “In Canada, Australia and New Zealand the policy was officially marked by the declaration of a multicultural policy by the central government whereas the US does not have an official policy of multiculturalism at the federal level. But in lower levels of government such as states or cities a broad range of multicultural policies can be seen” (Kymlicka & Banting, 2006, p. 55). Britain’s philosophy of integration The United Kingdom is renowned to be the nation with the highest rate of immigration in Europe. It has accommodated people from all its former colonies which have resulted in social segregation based on religion and race. The post-war global political conditions made UK one of the major places for migration with people from different parts of the world. The nation has also been immensely benefited from its migrants in every aspect and developed its own multicultural integration policy. The observation made by Studzinski in this respect is worth quoting: “The motive of British integration policy is the promotion of inter-ethnic relations- race relations- on the basis of a liberal tradition that encourages the ideas of individual freedom and cultural difference. In this context, one has to see the fact that in national debates the term ethnic minorities is often given a preference to the term ‘immigrants’. The toleration of the other despite their cultural differences becomes a deep rooted value of the British society as well. Equally important is the aspect of Britain’s geographical situation. As an island Britain has developed an island-bound multiculturalism (Studzinski). Social segregation The term segregation could be understood as the policy or practice of secluding people of different race, religion, sex, ethnic groups, classes etc. which in broad sense, create a kind of discrimination (Segregation 2009). The social segregation occurs due to different reasons. As an emerging global trend people of same ethnic group or religion form their own legal or illegal groups. Sometimes as the critics of multicultural policies argue, certain governmental policies segregate the people as minorities or majority which promote social inequality. Segregation- law promoted and other- can be seen with every modern society despite its multicultural policies. Multiculturalism has been imposed as a tool to promote the cultural dialogue and to ensure the social equality and justice which presumably add to cohesion. On the contrary, the increasing national, international tension due to ‘segregation’ draws the attention of governments and political thinkers to seek for some other advanced social policies. Though the term multiculturalism has been cherished for decades by the modern democratic governments as their major propaganda, there are many thinkers who believe that multicultural policies are to be reconsidered. Some of them argue that all cultures do not deserve the equal respect and dignity for the particular inhuman practices they used to follow (Alvin 1997). The writer argues that if the cultures are equal no one can make a logical objection to the particular cultures which had their own peculiar or horrible practices; for example, the Hindus of India who practiced ‘sati’, burning a widow in her husband’s funeral pyre, or the Neo –Nazis, and the culture of the Ku Klux Klan. Tolerating other cultures just for the sake of maintaining peace is entirely different from the multicultural concept of social integration. This must be the sort of social adjustment maintained in many of the European nations today. Moreover such an unwilling adjustment will lead to unpredictable adversity splitting communities into aggressive groups as the world has been experiencing recently. According to some writers, (West, Patrick 2005) the past three decades of tolerance insisted by the state multicultural policies have increased “racial inter racial tension and inter racial sectarianism.” As an example they accuse that “the London suicide bombers of 7 July and the would be bombers of 21 July 2005 were born and bred in Britain – and encouraged by the state to be different- illustrates that hard multiculturalism has the capacity to be not only divisive but decidedly lethal” (West). The opponents of multiculturalism therefore believe that the emergence of new social groups on the basis of race or religion intended to dominate the majority or vice versa is the intimidating reality found with every multicultural society. Britain is not an exception. “the counter modern tendencies of social groups who attempt to construct strong boundaries against and encroaching the other for example, in the form of poor white communities feeling under threat from non-white neighbouring communities or in the widespread fear and loathing at asylum seekers are seen as a serious problem of community cohesion directly related to the failure of multicultural integration strategies” (McGhee, 2005, p.6). Multiculturalism and women Multicultural policies have not adequately contributed to protecting the rights of women. The various policies introduced to uplift the minority groups have considered only the group as a whole often in favour of male chauvinists. The women who were deprived of their rights to equality and dignity within their own community were forgotten by almost all multicultural policies. The governmental policies usually consider women as group instead of examining the inequalities they experience in their own social groups. The traditional Hindu or the Muslim system of keeping women secluded and polygamy can be an example. In the opinion of Susan Moller Okin, “When liberal arguments are made for the rights of groups, then, special care must be taken to look at within-group inequalities. It is especially important to consider inequalities between the sexes, since they are likely to be less public, and less easily discernible. Moreover, policies aiming to respond to the needs and claims of cultural minority groups must take seriously the need for adequate representation of less powerful members of such groups” (Okin 1999). Multiculturalism does not promote segregation Multiculturalism has been adopted as the remedial measure for the incessant cultural conflicts of post-war democratic arena throughout the world. The oppressed minorities and the discriminated classes and races have been brought to the frontier to the social and political participation. Governments introduced various social reformations on the basis of secular multicultural concepts to eradicate the social injustice and inequality. All cultures have been recognized and praised for their uniqueness and for their role in contributing to the growth and integrity of the nation. Discrimination in any form will be an offence according to laws and social harmony and healthy interaction between the communities tend to be promoted more than ever before. People began to mingle with every culture despite their race or religion which consequently eased the social tension. For example the rigid concept of castes and social segregation prevailed in India have tremendously changed its social setup due to the application of multicultural policies. Today despite the caste or race people of every culture enjoy the fundamental rights provided by the constitution. As researchers have pointed out, “Multiculturalism in India ensures that all citizens can keep their identities, can take pride in their ancestry and have a sense of belonging” and this “acceptance gives each Indian a feeling of security and self confidence, making them more open to and accepting of diverse cultures” (Mishra, Palai, & Das, 2006). Multiculturalism promotes social segregation Considering the other side of the coin one would see various reasons and examples to assess that multiculturalism would promote social segregation. Communal reservation and subsidies given to the particular segments with the vision of promoting the equality, often creates criticism Moreover many qualified and potential candidates from the dominant cultures might be deserted due to these kinds of special privileges. In other words the justice and rights of the dominant class is questioned by the justice of minorities. Besides, the special communal reservations often promote hatred and frustration among the people of dominant cultures toward the inferior groups. People in particular social groups or religion would form their own political parties or subversive groups which might challenge the national harmony. Thus the law promoted multiculturalism leads to the feeling of intolerance and to resist or to defend various ethnic groups get segregated. This is very well suggested by Creppel (2003) when the author states that “the current interest in toleration comes from negative reasons more than positive ones: rampant genocide in the twentieth century; religious fundamentalism around the world; continued Israeli – Palestine, Catholic- Protestant, and Hindu- Muslim conflict; ethnic and religious wars in Eastern Europe; outbreaks of mass killing in Africa and other regions. In every day life in developed countries racism and intolerance of gays, Jews and Muslims continue to be major issues” (McGhee, 2005, P.8). Conclusions Hence in the final analysis multicultural policies need to be reviewed and a better vision of equality, unity and respect should be the vital issue for the modern world. Multicultural policies in the present democratic political scenario create more problems than it solves because instead of uniting them under the national integrity the concept is actually segregating people under different race, culture, geography etc. The concept of equality and fraternity can not be promoted by the multicultural policies because the more the minority groups are emphasized the more they become socially isolated. The reality should be admitted that people are different because of different geography, race, and different accessibilities of their own. By providing any kind of relaxation, special privileges and offers multicultural policies have been encouraging the social segregation. Thus the particular social groups are bound to stay within the limited political privileges allotted for them. The recent global changes taking into account we can assume that the time is up to break the barriers of segregation considering oneself as the global citizen. To achieve this, multicultural policies should be reformed by an egalitarian concept of equality. References Alvin, Schmidt 1997, The Menace of Multiculturalism, Westwood: Greenwood. Ardoin, Beth 2000, Horace Kallen: Theories, Start-at-Zero.com. Available from: [21 March 2009]. Green, J. M 1998, Educational Multiculturalism, Critical Pluralism, and Deep Democracy, In Cynthia Willett (Ed.), Theorizing Multiculturalism: A Guide to the Current Debate (pp 422-448), Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, Inc. Kymlicka, W & Banting KG 2006, Multiculturalism and Welfare State, Oxford University press. Martin, B 1998, Multiculturalism: Consumerist or Transformational? In Cynthia Willett (Ed.), Theorizing Multiculturalism: A Guide to the Current Debate (pp 121-150), Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, Inc. Matustík, M.J.B 1998, Ludic, Corporate, and Imperial Multiculturalism: Impostors of Democracy and Cartographers of the New World Order. In Cynthia Willett (Ed.), Theorizing Multiculturalism: A Guide to the Current Debate (pp 100-117), Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishers, Inc. McGhee, Derek 2005, Intolerant Britain? Hate, Citizenship and Difference, Open University press. Mishra , M, Palai, N & Das K 2006, Social cleavages, Multiculturalism and emerging space for state in India under Globalisation Regime, paper presentation for the International Economic History Congress, Session 22, Helsinki. Okin SM, Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?, Available from: < http://www.exclusion.net/images/pdf/89_sanom_Okin_inglese.pdf> [21 Mar. 09]. Segregation 2009, The Free Dictionary, Farlex, Inc, Available from: [21 Mar. 09]. Studzinski, JV, Identity in the global era: British Multicultural Policy in Transition, Available from: http://www.euroculturemaster.org/pdf/groep4_2/VonStudzinksi.pdf> [21 Mar. 09]. Vertovec, Stephen, Opinion Super Diversity Revealed, University of Oxford, BBC News, Available from: < http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4266102.stm > [21 March 2009]. West, Patrick, Multiculturalism can be fatal: 'The revolt of the civilised against civilisation', Civitas, Available from: [21 Mar. 09]. Read More