The Theory of Multiculturalism - Case Study Example

Introduction Multiculturalism Multiculturalism can be defined as a scenario when communities live together and interact with one another, leading to a way of life dictated by either their original norms or borrowed norms. Communities living like this value, celebrate and tolerate each other’s cultures, modes of dressing, dance and cuisines. In a multicultural community, all the cultural groups are allowed and given equal status, share superficial celebrations or festivals, food, and folk, with no deep leaning. In addition, these people stand side-by-side at times despite isolation from others. In such communities, there are no issues of power differences as they tend to focus only on representation. The underlying facets of multiculturalism become known from a speech made by former house secretary Roy Jenkins in 1966 where he described it as ‘an equal opportunity, accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance (Manning, 2011). He argued that the recognition of different individuals and communities have different requirements, and as such, if integration of policy is to be truly equal, it must take into account these different needs (Manning, 2011). Hence one can understand the theory of multiculturalism as a combination of 3 key components: policies of equality being applied in a discriminating but not a discriminatory manner, a search to create a dynamic national identity, and a two way integration involving both individuals and groups (Modood, 2011). Trevor Phillils, chair of the commission of Racial Equality (CRE) in UK, contrasted the different integration models in France and Britain (Eurative corporation, 2005). In his interview, he observed that the French Identity is Rigid and crushing (Eurative corporation, 2005). He felt that the burn of the Hijab in France was oppressive and ridiculous. He said that in France, there was one way of integration where the immigrants had to assimilate the French culture and leave their culture behind. In contrast, UK has two-way assimilation where immigrants are given some space to adapt, and on the other hand, the host adapts some of the cultures of the immigrants. However, by Britain allowing the minority to live in their own communities, it is slowly evolving towards a multicultural community. As compared to Britain, France has succeeded in having a national identity that every person can refer to. The Cantle report on Community Cohesion came up after a number of disturbances in England which involved people from different cultures that led to destruction of property and attacks on the policemen (Cantle, 2001). In their research, they visited different places. For instance, when they visited Leicester and Southall, they found that the residents had some measure of pride. They also noted that they viewed diversity as a positive thing which was evidenced by pupils learning about different cultures and religions and on the streets, all faiths were celebrated in festivals. They found that areas with high poverty levels and unemployment community cohesions were unlikely to be evidenced. In such areas, the few people who found their way to the university would relocate to other areas in search for employment. Drug dealing also seemed to be a big issue which was suggested to have resulted to some of the rioting which was a result of war between drug gangs but not racist attack. This riot was between the youths of ethnic minorities against the white youths. The report also realized that presentation of the minority groups in the work force was low. It seemed that this issue was not being taken seriously. Another discovery that was made was that there were some schools which only had a single ethnic group. There was one school among the Asian community where one had to produce a letter from the Vicar to show that their parents were regular church goers. As such, the Muslims did not take their children in that school, thus the students did not have a chance of interacting with the other students in occasions such as birthday parties and it neither did it occur to them that they needed to. According to the report, the media too was contributing to divisive attitudes. There were some instances where they published readers’ letters which seemed racist in their content, or wrote crime reports which suggested that the ethnic minorities or the blacks were responsible for many of the crimes. The report emphasized on the importance of promotion of community cohesion. Programs should be devised as part of cohesion strategy by the communities and supported at a national level to promote understanding within and between the ethnic minorities and the black, and the whites. Also, there should be more incorporation of the ethnic minorities in the work force. Interculturalism Interculturalism refers to the a situation of going against self-segregation and instead, supporting cross-cultural dialogue and trends within cultures. It goes beyond accepting each other’s culture by promoting interaction and dialogue between cultures. It rose in response to criticize multiculturalism which had divided the society into separate communities. Interculturalism was based on the recognition of both the differences and the similarities between cultures (Ewijik, 2010). Philosopher Martha Nussbaum in her work Cultivating Humanity, describes Interculturalism as involving "the recognition of common human needs across cultures and of dissonance and critical dialogue within cultures" and that interculturalists "reject the claim of identity politics that only members of a particular group have the ability to understand the perceptive of that group” (Kalapo, 2008). The concept of multiculturalism can be traced back to 1959. Multiculturalism now seems to be the past and the future is entirely Interculturalism. Interculturalism addresses five major issues that multiculturalism has left out. Below are the issues discussed in depth. Identity is a dynamic concept Multiculturalism sees identity as fixed within the boundaries of a group. In many cases; these have become bases of racism via promoting the concept of supremacy instead of breaking down boundaries and distinguishing common humanity. Today, the world of intermarriage across nations, has been immense making race a choice rather than given. Multicultural theories seem to be stack in the past conceptions of identity that are supported by the system and community leaders who have hardened and homogenized group stereotypes and boundaries. Multiculturalism revolved around race and ignored other forms of differences such as gender, sexual orientation, disability and faith. The young people are now seeing multiculturalism as a hybrid concept and it combines sexual orientation, gander, faith ethnicity and other ideas (Pampanin, 2010). National to international drivers of difference The multiculturalists assumed that the differences were driven by minority-majority relationships within the nation which was the case in 1960’s. Globalization and diversity has meant that influence of Diasporas, social media, transnational communication and international travel has resulted into creation of new relationships. The difference is no longer confined to the boundaries but there is now tension between and within the minorities. Power and political structures Globalization has come with many international agencies reacting to issues from international crime, finance, environment and many others. The method of western-deindustrialization, growth of brands and global business, and a new scale on international immigration has formed a sense of alienation and powerlessness. The claim of national identities has been weakened as people are now going towards international interdependence. Cosmopolitan and the national identities need to sit at the side of each other rather than be opposed to each other- something that multiculturalism did not acknowledge (Adams, 2013). Necessity of an interdisciplinary approach This approach is required so as to allow multiculturalism to shift from class based approach to where all-around approach is understood. All-encompassing and new learning chances require to be created to combat societies and extremist views. In the era we are living in of globalization and diversity, relationship issues are of more importance than structural divisions since there are now cross cultural relationships which arise between and within communities each day. Though multiculturalism has been employed, it has not been implemented properly. For instance, choosing to place importance on Muslims identity of Muslims in British by forming an organization that suffers from Lilliputian- like recognition by Muslim community, the government did not recognize needs of individuals within that group which differ. It decided to deal with Muslims as one rather that recognize the different kinds of Muslims (Modood, 2011). Arguments for and against multiculturalism Multiculturalism can be of great benefit as it allows people to get a glance of other peoples culture. In addition, in a community where people from various ethnic backgrounds work together, with varying may be able to come up with a well-rounded solution to an issue. Developed countries have learnt the aspect of taking advantage of the cultures that are less fortunate economically. By so doing, they give an opportunity to build their life and become prosperous. Immigrants also offer cheap labor that the locals are usually not willing to perform. Multiculturalism offers diversity in a community. For example, the people in UK benefit from the various cuisines that are prepared from different ethnic groups. Finally multiculturalism has been known to improve nation pool of athletes which brings national pride. Therefore countries with racial mix will have the advantage in sports. Those who do not support multiculturalism argue that if assimilated, it may lead to racial tensions within the society. On the other hand, embracing multiculturalism may lead to loss of cultures of a given society as it is believed that once people start coming together, original cultures get lost. Since multiculturalism allows one to practice their cultures even in a native land, this unfortunately prevents integration as one may find that a certain group has a different way of life than their neighbor. Multiculturalism denies the communities a chance of integration. Also, isolation is promoted as there are some communities that have a specified community attending school. For example the research that was done by Cantle clearly demonstrated an Asian school that Muslim never enrolled their children due to the school policies that had been instilled. In addition, in a society where each ethnic group is allowed to live their own life practicing their own cultures, then you find that this promotes parallel lives to continue. Immigrants are known to provide cheap labor; this thus reduces the chances of the locals to get jobs. Also some people feel that immigrants go to claim benefits that are supposed to be the rights of the locals. More often than not, minorities have been known to commit crimes which may be as a result of low paying jobs. There are some cases where the locals feel like foreigners as the immigrants fail to integrate into the local community. Finally, immigrants send their money to their home countries. This therefore impedes them from spending most of their earnings in their host countries. As a result they do not spend sufficient money to benefit the local economy. Cameron’s big speech on immigration that objected this theory of multiculturalism was clear that Britain only wanted people who would bring in something and not just take away from Britain. He argues that Britain only wants the best people so that it can grow its economy. He further said that the number of immigrants would be reduced to only a few individuals with the best minds. Additionally, he was not giving equal rights to the immigrants as he was denying them some of the rights that the citizens of Britain had. For instance, on the matter of national Health services, if someone is visiting UK and uses them, then they will claim back the charges from the mother country. He went on to say that they would introduce stricter charges to the immigrants for private health insurance. He also touched on the issue of housing where again the migrants were not treated fairly. He said that he was going to introduce a right where the local people would have priority in social housing system. It is clear that Britain was more interested in people who would enrich and contribute to their community. For the migrants are seen as a source of wealth creation. If community cohesion is denied opposed and prevented, there would be various consequences: Discrimination would be rampant as the majority would discriminate against the minority. Additionally, discrimination between whites and blacks would be heightened and also there would be discrimination against certain faiths. Promotion of community cohesion gives communities a chance to learn how to live with each other as well as to respect one another. Racism is almost an issue of the past now as more and more communities are gearing towards intermarriage as well as peaceful coexistence. In fact, where different ethnic groups thrive, there has been appreciation of cultures amongst them. In a community that lacks solidarity, there is heightened tension. For instance, Muslims are always associated with acts of terrorism. Hence as such, if there is no cohesion amongst all the society members, then there tension will be heightened (Cantle, 2012) Lack of unity in a community contributes to community conflict and violence. For example, the murder of Stephen Lawrence, who was murdered in 1993 in a racist attack while waiting for a bus. After his death, those that were charged were not convicted and the decision was affected by the issue of race. His murder was not only a result of racism but also it was an act of violence which had come up due to lack of community cohesion. Recommendations The local leadership in a community can be trained on importance of community cohesion and then they can be given the task of disseminating this information. Each local area can come up with their strategies of promoting community cohesion and hold local debate sessions, which should be in line with the national debates and they could both inform each other. Extensive training and education in all major agencies is required. This activity can be spearheaded by the community themselves as a way of promoting cross cultural contact. The government should set aside some funds which can be used to develop longer term approaches on community cohesion while embracing all partner bodies. The media could be used as a medium of promoting cohesion and any acts of publishing articles that otherwise jeopardize this efforts could be criminalized. Conclusion The world has been turned into a global village. The issue of intermarriage between people of different races and different faiths has increased. The desire to go to another country in search of greener pastures is also high. More than ever, community cohesion is of great importance as we all need each other in one way or another. Accepting each other’s culture and embracing them is the way to go. Information dissemination via media, schools, as well as in social events needs to be heightened so that we can all live in harmony. No community is superior to the other, and thus no community ought to be discriminated against. Bibliography Adams, J. (2013) Multiculturalism: A candid conversation on how cultural and racial diversity is destroying America. New York: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform Bernstein, P. (1995) Dictatorship of Virtue: How the Battle over Multiculturalism Is Reshaping Our Schools, Our Country, and Our Lives. New York: Vintage Besley, T. and Peters, M. (2012) Interculturalism, Education and Dialogue (Global Studies in Education). Boston: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers. Cantle, T. (2012) Interculturalism: The New Era of Cohesion and Diversity. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan Cantle, T., (2001) Community Cohesion. UK: s.n. Crowder, G. (2013) Theories of Multiculturalism: An Introduction. New York: Polity. Emerson, M. (2011) Interculturalism: Europe and its Muslims in Search of Sound Societal Models (Centre for European Policy Studies). London: Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS). Eurative corporation, 2005. EurActive.com. Available at: http://www.euractiv.com/socialeurope/commentary-french-assimilation-vs-british- multiculturalism-integration-model-europe/article-148227 .[14 May 2014] Ewijik, H. V. (2010) European Social Policy and Social Work: Citizenship- Based Social Work. London: Routledge publishers. Goldberg, D. G. (1995). Multiculturalism: A Critical Reader. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell Gottfried, P. (2004) Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt: Toward a Secular Theocracy. Missouri: University of Missouri. Gundara, J. (2001) Interculturalism, Education and Inclusion. Boston: SAGE Publications. Hae-kyung, U. (2006) Diasporas and Interculturalism in Asian Performing Arts: Translating Traditions. New York: Routledge-Curzon-Iias Asian Studies. Kalapo, F. J., (2008) Immigrant Academics and cultural challenges in a global environment. New York: Cambria Press. Knowles, R. (2010) Theatre and Interculturalism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan Lott, B. (2009). Multiculturalism and Diversity: A Social Psychological Perspective. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley- Blackwell. Manning, A. (2011) Politics and policy. Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/2011/04/14/multiculturalism-immigration-support- white-population/ [15 May 2014]. Modood, T. (2011) Defining Multiculturalism: A Guide for the Movement. London: Book Marks Publication. Murphy, M. (2012) Multiculturalism: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge Contemporary Political Philosophy. Pampanin, G. (2010) Interculturalism, Society and Education. Rome: Sense Publishers. Phillips, A. (2009) Multiculturalism without Culture. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rattansi, A. (2011) Multiculturalism: A Very Short Introduction. Londong: Oxford University Press. Taylor, C. and Appiah, K. (1994) Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Read More