Minority Group and Multiculturalism Essay

This research was commissi nonpareild by the Transatlantic Council on Migration, an orifice of the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), for its s blushth plenary meeting, held November 2011 in Berlin. The meetings theme was field of study Identity, immigration, and neighborly Cohesion (Re)building Community in an Ever-Globalizing World and this publisher was one of the reports that in craped the Councils discussions. The Council, an MPI initiative undertaken in cooperation with its policy break dancener the Bertelsmann Stiftung, is a comical deliberative body that examinesvital policy issues and in cultivates migration policy fashioning processes in North America and Europe. The Councils work is generously supported by the following foundations and goernments Carnegie Corporation of naked York, Open Society Foundations, Bertelsmann Stiftung, the Barrow Cadbury Trust (UK Policy Partner), the Luso-Ameri hobo Development Foundation, the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, and the gove rnments of Germ wholly, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. For to a greater extent on the Transatlantic Council on Migration, please visit www. migrationpolicy. org/transatlantic. 2012 Migration Policy Institute.All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Migration Policy Institute. A full-text PDF of this document is available for free transfer from www. migrationpolicy. org. Permission for reproducing excerpts from this report should be directed to Permissions Department, Migration Policy Institute, 1400 16th Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20036, or by contacting communicationsmigrationpolicy.org. Suggested citation Kymlicka, Will. 2012. Multi ethnicism Success, Failure, and the prox. Washington, DC Migration Policy Institute. Table of Contents Executive Summary. 1 I. inlet.. 2 Th e Rise and F all(prenominal)(prenominal) of Multi culturalism.3 . II. What Is Multiculturalism?.. 4 A. Mis top offing Model. 4 . B. Multiculturalism in mount 5 . C. The Evolution of Multiculturalism Policies.. 7 III.Multiculturalism in Practice. 10 A. The Canadian Success Story 10 B. The European Experience. 13 . IV. The Retreat from Multiculturalism.. 14 A. Rhetoric versus Reality ..14 B. Proliferation of Civic integrating Policies. 15 . V. ConclusionThe Future of Multicultural Citizenship. 21 Appendices 26 Works Cited28 About the rootage.. 32 MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE Executive Summary Ideas nearly the legal and semipolitical accommodation of cultural potpourri commonly termed multiculturalism emerged in the West as a vehicle for replacing older forms of pagan and racial hierarchy with peeled relations of participatory citizenship. Despite substantial evidence that these policies atomic number 18 making progress toward that goal, a chorus of political leaders has de cl bed them a failure and heralded the ending of multiculturalism.This popular cover narrative is problematic because it mischaracterizes the spirit of the experiments in multiculturalism that sacrifice been undertaken, exaggerates the extent to which they swallow been abandoned, and misidentifies non only the accredited difficulties and limitations they feel encountered precisely the options for mouthing these problems. Talk about the retreat from multiculturalism has obscured the fact that a form of multicultural integration remains a live option for westbound democracies. This report challenges four goodish myths about multiculturalism. First, it dis redactes the caricature of multiculturalism as the uncritical celebration of diversity at the expense of shout outing grave social problems such as unemployment and social isolation. Instead it offers an account of multiculturalism as the pursuit of new relations of democratic citizenship, inspired and constrained by hu man-rights ideals. Second, it contests the idea that multiculturalism has been in wholesale retreat, and offers instead evidence that multiculturalism policies (MCPs) rich person persisted, and have even gr own stronger, over the past ten years. Third, it challenges the idea that multiculturalism has failed, and offers instead evidence that MCPs have had tyrannical effects. Fourth, it disputes the idea that the spread of civic integration policies has displaced multiculturalism or rendered it obsolete. The report instead offers evidence that MCPs are full consistent with certain forms of civic integration policies, and that indeed the combination of multiculturalism with an enabling form of civic integration is both normatively desirable and empirically effective in at least some cases. To help address these issues, this paper draws upon the Multiculturalism Policy Index.This world power 1) identifies eight concrete policy areas where liberal-democratic states faced with a cho ice unyielding to develop more multicultural forms of citizenship in relation to immigrant conventions and 2) measures the extent to which countries have espoused some or all of these policies over time. While there have been some high-profile cases of retreat from MCPs, such as the Netherlands, the general number from 1980 to 2010 has been one of modest strengthening. Ironically, some countries that have been vociferous about multiculturalisms failure (e. g. , Ger legion(predicate)) have not actually near an active multicultural strategy.Talk about the retreat from multiculturalism has obscured the fact that a form of multicultural integration remains a live option for Western democracies. However, not all attempts to see new models of multicultural citizenship have taken root or succeeded in achieving their intended effects. There are several factors that puke either facilitate or impede the successful implementation of multiculturalism Multiculturalism Success, Failure, an d the Future 1 MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE Desecuritization of ethnic relations. Multiculturalism works best if relations surrounded by thestate and minorities are seen as an issue of social policy, not as an issue of state security system. If the state perceives immigrants to be a security threat (such as Arabs and Muslims after 9/11), support for multiculturalism will drop and the space for minorities to even section multicultural claims will diminish. Human rights. Support for multiculturalism rests on the assumption that there is a shared committedness to human rights across ethnic and religious lines. If states perceive certain groups as unable or opposed to see human-rights norms, they are unlikely to accord them multicultural rights or resources.Much of the backlash against multiculturalism is fundamentally operate by anxieties about Muslims, in particular, and their perceived unwillingness to embrace liberal-democratic norms. Border control. Multiculturalism is more controversial when citizens consternation they lack control over their borders for instance when countries are faced with large numbers (or unexpected surges) of wildcat immigrants or asylum seekers than when citizens feel the borders are secure. Diversity of immigrant groups. Multiculturalism works best when it is genuinelymulticultural that is, when immigrants be from many source countries rather than coming overwhelmingly from just one (which is more likely to lead to polarized relations with the majority). Economic contributions. Support for multiculturalism depends on the perception that immigrants are holding up their end of the agreement and making a good-faith effort to contribute to society particularly economically. When these facilitating conditions are present, multiculturalism can be seen as a low- take a chance option, and indeed seems to have worked well in such cases.Multiculturalism tends to lose support in wondering(a) situations where immigrants are se en as predominantly illegal, as potential carriers of illiberal practices or movements, or as net burdens on the welfare state. However, one could argue that rejecting immigrant multiculturalism under these circumstances is in fact the higher-risk move. It is precisely when immigrants are perceived as illegitimate, illiberal, and burdensome that multiculturalism may be most involveed. I. Introduction Ideas about the legal and political accommodation of ethnic diversity have been in a state of flux around the gentlemans gentleman for the past 40 years.One hears much about the rise and belittle of multiculturalism. Indeed, this has become a mixture of insure narrative, widely invoked by scholars, journalists, and policy guessrs alike to explain the evolution of contemporary debates about diversity. Although people dissent about what comes after multiculturalism, there is a surprising consensus that we are in a post-multicultural era. This report contends that this master narra tive obscures as much as it reveals, and that we need an alternative framework for thinking about the choices we face.Multiculturalisms successes and failures, as well as its level of public acceptance, have depended on the nature of the issues at place and the countries involved, and we need to understand these variations if we are to identify a more sustainable model for accommodating diversity. This paper will argue that the master narrative 1) mischaracterizes the nature of the experiments in multiculturalism that have been undertaken, 2) exaggerates the extent to which they have been abandoned, and 3) misidentifies the genuine difficulties and limitations they have encountered and the options for addressing these problems.2 Multiculturalism Success, Failure, and the Future MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE Before we can decide whether to celebrate or lament the fall of multiculturalism, we need first to make sure we know what multiculturalism has meant both in speculation and in pra ctice, where it has succeeded or failed to meet its objectives, and under what conditions it is likely to thrive in the future. The Rise and Fall of Multiculturalism The master narrative of the rise and fall of multiculturalism helpfully captures important features of our current debates.Yet in some see it is misleading, and may obscure the palpable challenges and opportunities we face. In its simplest form, the master narrative goes like this1 Since the mid-1990s we have seen a backlash and retreat from multiculturalism. From the 1970s to mid-1990s, there was a clear trend across Western democracies toward the change magnitude recognition and accommodation of diversity through a range of multiculturalism policies (MCPs) and minority rights.These policies were endorsed both at the internal level in some states and by inter field of study organizations, and involved a rejection of earlier ideas of unitary and resembling nationhood. Since the mid-1990s, however, we have seen a backlash and retreat from multiculturalism, and a reassertion of ideas of nation building, common values and identity, and unitary citizenship even a call for the return of assimilation. This retreat is partly driven by fears among the majority group that the accommodation of diversity has gone too far and is threatening their way of life.This fear frequently expresses itself in the rise of nativist and populist right-wing political movements, such as the Danish Peoples Party, defending old ideas of Denmark for the Danish. But the retreat also reflects a belief among the center-left that multiculturalism has failed to help the intended beneficiaries namely, minorities themselves because it has failed to address the underlying sources of their social, economic, and political censure and may have unintentionally contributed to their social isolation.As a result, even the center-left political movements that initially championed multiculturalism, such as the social democratic par ties in Europe, have backed 1 For influential academic statements of this rise and fall narrative, claiming that it applies across the Western democracies, see Rogers Brubaker, The Return of Assimilation? social and Racial Studies 24, no. 4 (2001) 53148 and Christian Joppke, The Retreat of Multiculturalism in the Liberal State possibleness and Policy, British Journal of Sociology 55, no. 2 (2004) 23757.There are also many accounts of the decline, retreat, or crisis of multiculturalism in particular countries. For the Netherlands, see Han Entzinger, The Rise and Fall of Multiculturalism in the Netherlands, in Toward Assimilation and Citizenship Immigrants in Liberal area-States, eds. Christian Joppke and Ewa Morawska (London Palgrave, 2003) and Ruud Koopmans, Trade-Offs between Equality and Difference The Crisis of Dutch Multiculturalism in Cross-National Perspective (Brief, Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen, declination 2006).For Britain, see Randall Hansen , Diversity, Integration and the Turn from Multiculturalism in the United Kingdom, in Belonging? Diversity, Recognition and Shared Citizenship in Canada, eds. Keith G. Banting, Thomas J. Courchene, and F. Leslie Seidle (Mont tangible Institute for Research on Public Policy, 2007) Les Back, Michael Keith, Azra Khan, Kalbir Shukra, and John Solomos, pertly Labours clean-living Heart Politics, Multiculturalism and the Return of Assimilation, Political Quarterly 73, No. 4 (2002) 44554 Steven Vertovec, Towards post-multiculturalism?Changing communities, conditions and contexts of diversity, International Social Science Journal 61 (2010) 8395. For Australia, see Ien Ang and John Stratton, Multiculturalism in Crisis The New Politics of washout and National Identity in Australia, in On Not Speaking Chinese Living between Asia and the West, ed. I. Ang (London Routledge, 2001). For Canada, see Lloyd Wong, Joseph Garcea, and Anna Kirova, An Analysis of the Anti- and Post-Multiculturalism Di scourses The Fragmentation Position (Alberta Prairie Centre for Excellence in Research on Immigration and Integration, 2005), http//pmc.metropolis. net/Virtual%20Library/FinalReports/Post-multi%20FINAL%20REPORT%20for%20PCERII%20_2_. pdf. For a good overview of the backlash discourse in various countries, see Steven Vertovec and Susan Wessendorf, eds. , The Multiculturalism ricochet European Discourses, Policies and Practices (London Routledge, 2010). Multiculturalism Success, Failure, and the Future 3 MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE away from it and shifted to a discourse that emphasizes civic integration, social cohesion, common values, and shared citizenship.2 The social-democratic discourse of civic integration differs from the radical-right discourse in emphasizing the need to develop a more comprehensive national identity and to fight racism and discrimination, but it til now distances itself from the rhetoric and policies of multiculturalism. The term postmulticulturalism has of ten been invoked to signal this new approach, which seeks to overcome the limits of a naive or direct multiculturalism while avoiding the oppressive reassertion of homogenizing nationalist ideologies.3 II. What Is Multiculturalism? A. Misleading Model In much of the post-multiculturalist literature, multiculturalism is characterized as a feel-good celebration of ethnocultural diversity, encouraging citizens to acknowledge and embrace the panoply of customs, traditions, music, and culinary art that exist in a social society. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown calls this the 3S model of multiculturalism in Britain saris, samosas, and steeldrums. 4Multiculturalism takes these familiar cultural markers of ethnic groups clothing, cuisine, and music and treats them as authentic practices to be preserved by their members and safely consumed by others. Under the banner of multiculturalism they are taught in school, performed in festivals, displayed in media and museums, and so on. This celebratory model of multiculturalism has been the focus of many critiques, including the following It ignores issues of economic and political inequality.Even if all Britons come to enjoy Jamaican steeldrum music or Indian samosas, this would do nothing to address the real problems facing Caribbean and South Asian communities in Britain problems of unemployment, poor educational outcomes, residential segregation, poor English verbiage skills, and political marginalization. These economic and political issues cannot be solved simply by celebrating cultural differences. Even with respect to the (legitimate) goal of promoting greater understanding of culturaldifferences, the focus on celebrating authentic cultural practices that are unique to each group is potentially dangerous. First, not all customs that may be traditionally practiced within a particular group are worthy of cosmos celebrated, or even of being legally tolerated, such as forced marriage. To avoid stirring up controversy, the res a tendency to choose as the focus of multicultural celebrations safely inoffensive practices such as cuisine or music that can be enjoyably consumed by members of the bigger society. But this runs the opposite risk 2For an overview of the attitudes of European social democratic parties to these issues, see Rene Cuperus, Karl Duffek, and Johannes Kandel, eds. , The Challenge of Diversity European Social state Facing Migration, Integration and Multiculturalism (Innsbruck Studien Verlag, 2003). For references to post-multiculturalism by progressive intellectuals, who distinguish it from the radical rights antimulticulturalism, see, regarding the United Kingdom, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, deeplyr on Multiculturalism (London Foreign Policy Centre, 2000), and Beyond Multiculturalism, Canadian Diversity/Diversite Canadienne 3, no.2 (2004) 514 regarding Australia, crowd Jupp, From White Australia to Woomera The Story of Australian Immigration, 2nd edition (Cambridge Cambridge Universit y Press, 2007) and regarding the United States, Desmond King, The Liberty of Strangers Making the American Nation (Oxford Oxford University Press, 2004), and David A. Hollinger, Post-ethnic America Beyond Multiculturalism, revised edition (New York Basic Books, 2006).Alibhai-Brown, After Multiculturalism. 3 4 4 Multiculturalism Success, Failure, and the Future MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE of the trivialization or Disneyfication of cultural differences,5 ignoring the real challenges that differences in cultural and religious values can raise. Third, the 3S model of multiculturalism can encourage a conception of groups as hermetically sealed and static, each reproducing its own distinct practices.Multiculturalism may be intended to encourage people to share their customs, but the assumption that each group has its own distinctive customs ignores processes of cultural adaptation, mixing, and melange, as well as emerging cultural commonalities, thereby potentially reinforcing perceptions of minorities as eternally other. This in turn can lead to the strengthening of hurt and stereotyping, and more generally to the polarization of ethnic relations. Fourth, this model can end up reinforcing power inequalities and cultural restrictions withinminority groups. In deciding which traditions are authentic, and how to interpret and display them, the state generally consults the traditional elites within the group typically older males while ignoring the way these traditional practices (and traditional elites) are often challenged by internal reformers, who have different views about how, say, a good Muslim should act. It can thus imprison people in cultural scripts that they are not allowed to question or dispute.According to post-multiculturalists, the suppuration recognition of these flaws underlies the retreat from multiculturalism and signals the search for new models of citizenship that emphasize 1) political participation and economic opportunities over the sym bolical politics of cultural recognition, 2) human rights and individual freedom over respect for cultural traditions, 3) the building of inclusive national identities over the recognition of ancestral cultural identities, and 4) cultural change and cultural mixing over the reification of static cultural differences.This narrative about the rise and fall of 3S multiculturalism will no surmise be familiar to many readers. In my view, however, it is inaccurate. Not only is it a caricature of the reality of multiculturalism as it has developed over the past 40 years in the Western democracies, but it is a bewitchery from the real issues that we need to face.The 3S model captures something important about natural human tendencies to simplify ethnic differences, and about the logic of global capitalism to sell cosmopolitan cultural products, but it does not capture the nature of post-mid-sixties government MCPs, which have had more complex diachronical sources and political goals. B. Multiculturalism in Context It is important to put multiculturalism in its historical context. In one sense, it is as old as humanity different cultures have always found ways of coexisting, and respect for diversity was a familiar feature of many historic empires, such as the Ottoman Empire.But the sort of multiculturalism that is said to have had a rise and fall is a more specific historic phenomenon, emerging first in the Western democracies in the late sixties. This timing is important, for it helps us situate multiculturalism in relation to larger social transformations of the postwar era. More specifically, multiculturalism is part of a larger human-rights revolution involving ethnic and racial diversity.Prior to World contend II, ethnocultural and religious diversity in the West was characterized by a range of illiberal and undemocratic relationships of hierarchy,6 justified by racist ideologies that explicitly propounded the superiority of some peoples and cultures and t heir right to rule over others. These ideologies were widely accepted throughout the Western world and underpinned both domestic laws (e. g. , racially biased immigration and citizenship policies) and foreign policies (e. g. , in relation to abroad colonies). 5 6 Neil Bissoondath, Selling Illusions The Cult of Multiculturalism in Canada(Toronto Penguin, 1994). Including relations of conqueror and conquered, colonizer and colonized, master and slave, colonist and indigenous, racialized and unmarked, normalized and deviant, orthodox and heretic, civilized and primitive, and ally and enemy. Multiculturalism Success, Failure, and the Future 5 MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE After World War II, however, the world recoiled against Hitlers fanatical and murderous use of such ideologies, and the United Nations decisively repudiated them in opt of a new ideology of the equality of races and peoples.And this new assumption of human equality generated a serial publication of political movements designed to contest the lingering presence or enduring effects of older hierarchies. We can distinguish three waves of such movements 1) the struggle for decolonization, concentrated in the period 194865 2) the struggle against racial segregation and discrimination, initiated and exemplified by the AfricanAmerican civil-rights movement from 1955 to 1965 and 3) the struggle for multiculturalism and minority rights, which emerged in the late 1960s.Multiculturalism is part of a larger human-rights revolution involving ethnic and racial diversity. Each of these movements draws upon the human-rights revolution, and its foundational ideology of the equality of races and peoples, to challenge the legacies of earlier ethnic and racial hierarchies. Indeed, the human-rights revolution plays a double role here, not just as the inspiration for a struggle, but also as a constraint on the permissible goals and means of that struggle.Insofar as historically excluded or stigmatized groups struggle against earlier hierarchies in the name of equality, they too have to renounce their own traditions of exclusion or oppression in the treatment of, say, women, gays, people of mixed race, religious dissenters, and so on. Human rights, and liberal-democratic constitutionalism more generally, provide the overarching framework within which these struggles are debated and addressed.Each of these movements, therefore, can be seen as contributing to a process of democratic citizenization that is, turning the earlier catalog of hierarchical relations into relationships of liberaldemocratic citizenship. This entails transforming both the vertical relationships between minorities and the state and the horizontal relationships among the members of different groups. In the past, it was often assumed that the only way to engage in this process of citizenization was to impose a single undifferentiated model of citizenship on all individuals.But the ideas and policies of multiculturalism that em erged from the 1960s push through from the assumption that this complex history inevitably and appropriately generates group-differentiated ethnopolitical claims. The key to citizenization is not to suppress these derived function claims but to filter them through and frame them within the language of human rights, civil liberties, and democratic accountability. And this is what multiculturalist movements have aimed to do.The precise character of the resulting multicultural reforms varies from group to group, as befits the distinctive history that each has faced. They all start from the antidiscrimination principle that underpinned the second wave but go beyond it to challenge other forms of exclusion or stigmatization. In most Western countries, explicit state-sponsored discrimination against ethnic, racial, or religious minorities had largely ceased by the 1960s and 1970s, under the influence of the second wave of humanrights struggles.Yet ethnic and racial hierarchies persist i n many societies, whether measured in terms of economic inequalities, political underrepresentation, social stigmatization, or cultural invisibility. Various forms of multiculturalism have been developed to help overcome these lingering inequalities. The focus in this report is on multiculturalism as it pertains to (permanently settled) immigrant groups,7 7 There was briefly in some European countries a form of multiculturalism that was not aimed at the cellular inclusion of permanent immigrants, but rather at ensuring that temporary migrants would return to their country of origin.For example, mothertongue education in Germany was not initially introduced as a minority right but in order to enable thickening worker children to reintegrate in their countries of origin (Karen Schonwalder, Germany Integration Policy and Pluralism in a Self-Conscious soil of Immigration, in The Multiculturalism Backlash European Discourses, Policies and Practices, eds. Steven Vertovec and Susanne We ssendorf London Routledge, 2010, 160).Needless to say, this sort of returnist multiculturalism premised on the idea that migrants are foreigners who should return to their real home has nothing to do with multiculturalism policies (MCPs) premised on the idea that immigrants belong in their host countries, and which aim to make immigrants 6 Multiculturalism Success, Failure, and the Future MIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE but it is worth noting that struggles for multicultural citizenship have also emerged in relation to historic minorities and indigenous peoples. 8 C. The Evolution of Multiculturalism PoliciesThe case of immigrant multiculturalism is just one aspect of a larger ethnic revival across the Western democracies,9 in which different types of minorities have struggled for new forms of multicultural citizenship that combine both antidiscrimination measures and positive forms of recognition and accommodation. Multicultural citizenship for immigrant groups clearly does not involv e the same types of claims as for indigenous peoples or national minorities immigrant groups do not typically seek land rights, territorial autonomy, or official language status.What then is the substance of multicultural citizenship in relation to immigrant groups? The Multiculturalism Policy Index is one attempt to measure the evolution of MCPs in a standardized format that enables comparative research. 10 The index takes the following eight policies as the most common or emblematic forms of immigrant MCPs11 Constitutional, legislative, or parliamentary affirmation of multiculturalism, at the central and/ or regional and municipal levels The adoption of multiculturalism in school curricula The inclusion of ethnic representation/sensitivity in the mandate of public media or media licensing Exemptions from dress codes, either by statute or by court cases Allowing of dual citizenship The funding of ethnic group organizations to support cultural activities The funding of bilingu al education or mother-tongue instruction Affirmative action for disadvantaged immigrant groups12 feel more at home where they are.The focus of this paper is on the latter type of multiculturalism, which is centrally concerned with constructing new relations of citizenship. 8 In relation to indigenous peoples, for example such as the Maori in New Zealand, Aboriginal peoples in Canada and Australia, American Indians, the Sami in Scandinavia, and the Inuit of Greenland new models of multicultural citizenship have emerged since the late 1960s that hold policies such as land rights, self-government rights, recognition of customary laws, and guarantees of political consultation.And in relation to substate national groups such as the Basques and Catalans in Spain, Flemish and Walloons in Belgium, Scots and Welsh in Britain, Quebecois in Canada, Germans in South Tyrol, Swedish in Finland we see new models of multicultural citizenship that include policies such as federal or quasi-fed eral territorial autonomy official language status, either in the region or nationally and guarantees of representation in the central government or on constitutional courts. 9 Anthony Smith, The social Revival in the Modern World (Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 1981).10 Keith Banting and I developed this index, first publish in Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka, eds. , Multiculturalism and the Welfare State Recognition and Redistribution in Contemporary Democracies (Oxford Oxford University Press, 2006). Many of the ideas discussed in this paper are the result of our collaboration. 11 As with all cross-national indices, there is a trade-off between standardization and sensitivity to local nuances. There is no universally accepted definition of multiculturalism policies and no unspoken and fast line that would sharply distinguish MCPs from closely related policy fields, such as antidis