B A in Governance and Development Studies

• Course Name: Introduction to multiculturalism

• Course Code: GaDS 514
• Credit Hours: 3
• Instructor: Siraj Chamari Godana
• Affiliation: Bule Hora University
 Chapter One: Understanding
Diversity and Multiculturalism
Meaning and Definition of Culture
• Culture is ways of life that people create as they
participate in a group or society.
• Culture is a social heredity of people,
• its fundamental ideas, practices and experiences,
which are transmitted from one generation to the
other, usually from parents to children.
• In this approach one becomes a member of a
culture not by birth, but by a process of learning.
• It is a shared set of ideas and practices that exist
in a people's mind as a form of "mental software”
• Culture consists of the shared beliefs, values, and
assumptions of a group of people who learn from
one another and teach to others that their
behaviors, attitudes, and perspectives are the
correct ways to think, act, and feel.
• Culture is a combination of thoughts, feelings,
attitudes, beliefs, values, and behavior patterns
that are shared by racial, ethnic, religious, or social
groups of people.
• Culture refers not only to those that we are born
into (racial or ethnic groups), but also those that
we choose to belong to, such as religious or social
groups.
 [Link] of Culture
• A. Values
• Value systems are fundamental to understanding
how culture expresses itself.
• Values are norms and traditions which influence
attitudes and behaviors in society and serve as
principles that guide people in their behaviors and
actions.
• Values define general moral qualities of behavior
expected from members of society, such as
honesty, patriotism, or commitment to freedom.
• B. Assumptions
• Our values are supported by our assumptions of
our world and the assumptions about our world
views guide our behaviors and shape our attitudes.
• They are beliefs or ideas that we believe and hold
to be true.
• They define for us, and give life or meaning to,
objects, people, places, and things in our lives.
• Our assumptions about our world determine how
we react emotionally and what actions we need to
take (assumptions come about through repetition).
• C. Symbols
• A symbol is anything that represents something else.
It can be either a material object (a flag, a cross) or a
nonmaterial element (a sound, a gesture).
• What we internalize comes through observation,
experience, interaction, and what we are taught.
• As members of a culture, we are constantly and
thoroughly surrounded by symbols:
• when we stop at the red light, we obey a symbolic
command.
• Symbols carry shared meanings among people and
they can be used to produce loyalty or hostility.
• D. Language
• Without language, there would be no culture.
• It is through language that we are able to create, share,
preserve and transmit cultural meanings such as complex
(and uniquely human) patterns of emotion, thought,
knowledge and beliefs.
• Language as a major symbolic system in use in all human
societies includes not only spoken and written words, but
also non-verbal communication forms such as the use of
eyes, hands, and body.
• Human language has to be learned and is variable
(thousands of different human languages exist in the
world), flexible (there is significant linguistic variation over
time) and generative (humans can create linguistic forms,
such as sign or computer languages, literature and poetry).
• [Link] and Society
• Implicit in the meaning of society is that its members
share some mutual concern or interest, common
objective and common characteristics.
• The term Society refers to a grouping of individuals,
which is characterized by common interest and may have
distinctive culture and institutions.
• "Society" may refer to a particular people, such as the
Sidama; to a nation state, such as Ethiopians; and to a
broader cultural group, such as African Society.
• Society can also be explained as an organized group of
people associated together for religious, benevolent,
cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes
such as the society of physics and the like.
 [Link] of Culture
• a) Culture is learned behavior.
• b) Culture is shared.
• c) Culture is symbolic.
• d) Culture is all-encompassing and integrated.
• e) Culture is dynamic.
 Diversity
• Activate your thinking
• Complete the following sentence
• When I hear the word “Diversity” the first
thought that come to my mind are………….
 Cont…….
• Wellner (2000) conceptualized diversity as representing a
multitude of individual differences and similarities that exist
among people.
• Diversity can encompass many different human
characteristics such as :
 race,
 age,
 doctrine,
 national origin,
 religion,
 ethnicity,
 sexual orientation.
• Most modern states today are, at least to some
degree, culturally diverse.
• Trade, tourism, international dialogue among
scholars, scientists and artists, and the movement
of skilled labour – as well as migration – have
ensured that few countries do not contain within
them significant numbers of people from alien
cultures.
• Many societies today are multicultural because
they are open to a diversity of peoples who come
and go and, sometimes, stay.
• When people from diverse traditions have to co-
exist within a single society, a number of issues
have to be settled so that the ground rules
governing their common life are clear and
generally accepted.
• There has to be some clear understanding not
only of what kind of conduct is acceptable or
required in public, but also of what kinds of
matters are matters of legitimate public concern.
• This means that it has to be clear, for example,
 what is the language of public
discourse,
what kinds of holidays are recognized,
what customs are to be tolerated,
what standards of public conduct and
appearance may be expected, and
what rights and obligations individuals
and communities enjoy or owe.
• The fact of cultural diversity has often given rise
to conflicts because these issues are not always
easily settled.
• People often have strong views about what is
right and wrong, and they are consequently
unwilling readily to modify their behavior
• Thus, for example, Muslim parents in France and
in Singapore have challenged the legality as well
as the moral justifiability of state school
regulations forbidding the wearing of head-
scarves favored by Muslim girls.
 • Seven ways of responses to diversity
• Societies may respond to the fact of cultural
diversity in a variety of ways.
• There are five responses that might usefully be
distinguished.
• (a) Isolationism
• The most obvious response a society might make
would be to try to prevent any kind of cultural
diversity from emerging by excluding outsiders
from entering or making their homes within it
particularly if the outsiders are different.
• There are many reasons why a society or
its rulers might choose the path of
isolationism in a policy of excluding all
outsiders but the select few. But a
particularly important reason for
isolationism policy is the fear of cultural
transformation.
• The problem with isolationism as a policy is
that it is difficult to sustain, for the costs of
the policy are greater than most people are
willing to accept.
• There are many ways in which a society might
come under the influence of foreign cultures.
• Trade and tourism alone will bring the domestic
society to awareness of other ways of life.
• And any kind of openness to foreign artistic and
literary traditions will exert its own influence on
the local population, encouraging imitation and
cultural borrowing.
• The importing of foods will change dietary habits.
• Participation in international activities, from World
Cup football to international science conventions
will also bring home ideas and attitudes from
other parts of the globe.
• To preserve cultural homogeneity it would not be
enough to restrict new comer.
• It would also be necessary to limit contact with
the outside world by restricting the freedom of
the domestic population to travel, to trade, and
generally to communicate with outsiders.
• Thus far, no nation has been able or willing to do
this, and so no nation has been able to escape the
forces of cultural transformation.
 • Assimilations
• One alternative to assimilations is a policy of
admitting outsiders but with a view to assimilating
them into the existing society, thereby limiting the
extent of domestic cultural transformation.
• This is a policy that seeks to acculturate
newcomers, though it might also be adopted with
respect to, say, a minority indigenous population.
• The problem with the policy of assimilation,
however, is that, like isolationism, its chances of
success are limited even if one is prepared to pay
a very high price to pursue it.
• In cultural anthropology, the metaphor of the
melting pot is used to describe a society in which
the mixing of heterogeneous peoples leads to a
common culture; that is to say, the various
elements of different cultures ‘melt’ into one
culture.
• First, assimilation is a two-way street: even as
newcomers are being assimilated, they will be
applying their own influence to modify the
practices and attitudes of the host-society.
• Second, not all cultural minorities want to
assimilate to the degree sought by the makers of
social policy.
• Third, assimilation may be difficult policy to
pursue in a society that has strong traditions of
respect for individual freedom, since such a
policy may require restrictions not only on
newcomers but also on native-born citizens.
 • Weak multiculturalism.
• While assimilation may be difficult to enforce, it
is also difficult to avoid.
• And for reasons of usefulness, newcomers or
minorities in any society will be motivated to
follow the dominant norms simply because it
makes life easier, less costly, or more enjoyable.
• It is easier to learn the language that most
people speak than to wait for them to learn our
own.
• It is easier to make friends with people with
whom we share something in common.
• The multiculturalist response to the fact of cultural
diversity is neither to try to prevent diversity from
emerging in society by isolating it from others, nor
to try to prevent diversity from taking root by
assimilating minorities into the whole.
• The multicultural outlook, however, is both willing
to accept a diversity of newcomers to a society,
and unworried if they remain unassimilated.
• The doors should be open to anyone who wishes
to enter society; and the extent to which anyone
assimilates should be determined by the desire
and capacity of each individual to do so.
 • (d) Strong multiculturalism
• One characteristic of the weak multiculturalist view, is
that leaves open the possibility that some people will
assimilate into a society less because they wish to do
so than because they have little other option.
• It leaves such people, either unable to enjoy their
separate cultural identity because the costs of
sustaining it are too high, or unable fully to participate
in the society.
• The strong multiculturalist view is that society should
take positive measures not only to enable such people
to participate as full members of society but also
better to enable them to maintain their separate
identity and traditions.
• Diversity should not only be tolerated but also
fostered or promoted, and supported – both
financially (if necessary) and by special rights for
minority cultures.
• The difference between the strong and weak
versions of multiculturalism is a matter of degree.
Both variants have their roots in liberal political
theory, with strong multiculturalism characteristic
of modern liberalism, and weak multiculturalism
characteristic of classical liberalism.
 • (e) Apartheid
• There is a fifth response to the fact of diversity
that ought to be mentioned for the sake of
completeness: apartheid.
• This response does not seek to exclude cultural
minorities but forbids them to assimilate to any
degree.
• South Africa under white minority rule supplies an
example of such a regime, though in this particular
case the groups denied the right to participate
fully in the society themselves formed a majority
of the total population.
• The problem with this response to diversity is that
is hard to sustain .
• It is difficult to maintain such a regime without
creating a polity in which different citizens have
different and unequal rights and duties.
• It may be impossible to sustain such a form of
political order without resort to domination.
 f) Amalgamation
• This describes the merging of two or more
different groups to produce a new group.
• It can be simply expressed as A+B+C=Z, where A,
B, and C are individual groups and Z is the
outcome of their mixing.
• Amalgamation is contrasted with assimilation in
which one culture tends to dominate and absorb
all others into a single culture i.e., A+B+C=A, in
which A is the most powerful group.
 g) Genocide
• The term genocide was coined by Raphael
Lemkin in 1943 and is a combination of the
Greek word ‘genos’ (meaning race or tribe)
and the Latin word ‘cide’ (meaning to kill).
• So, genocide means any of the following
acts committed with intent to destroy, in
whole or in part,
ethnical,
 racial or
religious group as such.
 cont@
• (a) Killing members of the group;
• (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to
members of the group;
• (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions
of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part;
• (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births
within the group; and
• (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to
another group.
 • Cultural Diversity
• Culture is diverse as it is often linked to ethnicity .
• Ethnicity refers to diverse groups of people that not
only have a common descent, but also share similarities
of physical type, customs, traditions, and language.
• Social construction of ethnicity is based on social
markers, for example, those of culture, nationality,
language or religion.
• Cultural Diversity shows the presence of different
cultures within a single community.
• It is an unavoidable fact of modern life.
• Cultural diversity means individuals or groups having
different cultural traditions, customs, lifestyle and
languages.
 • Threats to Cultural Diversity
• Cultural diversity is facing threats by the mono-
cultural development and Euro centrism .
• Cultural homogenization has led to threats to
cultural diversity.
• Euro centrism
• Euro centrism has created the construct of the
‘other’ as ‘orientalism’ which is inferior to Euro
centrism.
• It is a cultural prejudice that claims that western
culture is superior to others and its imitation by all
peoples is the only way to progress, justifying
colonization.
 • Cultural Conflicts
• Conflicts between religions, races, castes and
linguistic groups have increased in the recent times.
The denial of cultural recognition results in isolation
and powerlessness, providing a breeding ground for
extremism and the politics of hate
• Prejudicing ideologies and religious fundamentalism
play a major role in creating cultural conflicts.
• Prejudicing Ideologies
• While culture is a source of identity, it can also lead
to stereotypes about cultures of ‘others’, resulting in
tensions, social exclusion, conflicts and even
violence within and among societies .
 • Ethnocentrism:
• Ethnocentrism is judging another culture by the
standards of one’s own culture, assuming one’s
own culture to be superior.
• It blocks recognition of other cultures as good and
necessary for others as their own for themselves.
• Ethnocentrism leads to ethnic
stereotypes,
intolerance,
discrimination and
violence against those with cultural background
different than one’s own.
 • Racism:
• Racist attitudes include the view
that people of some ethnic
origins are less important and
valuable than those of other
ethnic origins .
 • Religious Fundamentalism:
• Fundamentalism refers to a commitment to
ideas and values that are seen as basic or
foundational which has an enduring and
unchanging character.
• Religious fundamentalism has arisen out of
religious ignorance and prejudices and as a
reaction to politicization, secularization and
homogenization in the context of
colonization.
 • Protection of Cultural Diversity
• The main objectives of Protection and
Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural are:
• a) To protect and promote the diversity of
cultural expressions;
• b) To create the conditions for cultures to
flourish and to freely interact in a mutually
beneficial manner;
• c) To develop cultural interaction in the spirit
of building bridges among peoples;
• d) To promote respect for the diversity of
cultural expressions and raise awareness of
its value at the local, national and
international levels;
• e) To give recognition to the distinctive
nature of cultural activities, goods and
services as vehicles of identity, values and
meaning;
 • Guiding Principles
• 1. Principle of respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms:
• Cultural diversity can be protected and
promoted only if human rights and
fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of
expression, information and
communication, as well as the ability of
individuals to choose cultural expressions,
are guaranteed.
• 3. Principle of equitable access:
• Equitable access to a rich and diversified range of
cultural expressions from all over the world and
access of cultures to the means of expressions and
dissemination constitute important elements for
enhancing cultural diversity and encouraging mutual
understanding.
• 4. Principle of openness and balance:
• When States adopt measures to support the diversity
of cultural expressions, they should seek to promote,
in an appropriate manner, openness to other cultures
of the world and to ensure that these measures are
geared to the objectives pursued under the present
Convention.
 B) Management of Diversity

• Managing diversity is an on-going process that

unleashes the various talents and capabilities
which a diverse population bring to an
organization, community or society, so as to
create a wholesome, inclusive environment, that
is “safe for differences,” enables people to “reject
rejection,” celebrates diversity, and maximizes the
full potential of all, in a cultural context where
everyone benefits
Way of managing diversity
Territorial Autonomy/Federalism
Integration
Non territorial Autonomy/
Consociationalism
Pluralism
Multiculturalism
 1.2. What is Multiculturalism?

• The term multiculturalism has gained

wide currency in both academic and
popular debate since 1960’s.
• In all the heated discussion around the
term no clear definition of the concept
has yet emerged.
 Cont….
• The terms ‘multicultural’ and
‘multiculturalism’ are not identical but
synonymous in many respects.
• It can be broken down into parts:
'multi' which means many and
'cultural' which refers to a group's
ways of thinking and living, its "design
for living".
 cont@
• It is a body of thought in political
philosophy about the proper way to
respond to cultural and religious diversity.
• In contrast with the concept of assimilation
and social integration, it seeks to preserve
distinctly different ethnic, racial or cultural
communities without melting them in to a
common culture.
 cont@
• multiculturalism is the acknowledgement
and promotion of cultural pluralism as a
feature of many societies.
• It is thus political, social, and cultural
movement which aims to respect a
multiplicity of diverging perspectives
outside the dominant traditions.
 Cont…
• Multiculturalism is a term which recognizes
and celebrates cultural diversity.
• It accepts and respects the right of all to
express and share their individual cultural
heritage.
• It also refers to the strategies, policies and
programs that are designed to:
 cont@
make administrative, social and economic
infrastructure more responsive to the
rights, obligations and needs of culturally
diverse population;
promote social harmony among the
different cultural groups in society;
optimize the benefits of cultural diversity
for all
 cont@
• For Caleb Rosado (1997) too, Multiculturalism is
a system of beliefs and behaviors that recognizes
and respects the presence of all diverse groups in
an organization or society.
• It used as
‘demographic
descriptive’ usage
 policy’ usage.
 cont@
• Multiculturalism as a demographic social
reality simply refers to the demographic
condition of contemporary societies which
contains two or more ethnic groups whose
differing cultural traits are distinctive
enough to enable the establishment and
maintenance of differing cultural identities
and communities.
 cont@
• In the second sense, multiculturalism is
understood as a normative claim or
political ideology, argues that this
ethno-cultural diversity should be
accommodated, not suppressed, and
celebrated, not feared.
• In a political context it has come to mean
the advocacy of extending equitable state
to distinct ethnic and religious groups
without promoting any specific ethnic,
religious, and/or cultural community values
as central.
• In the third sense, it is the policy or practice
of giving equal attention or representation
to the cultural needs and contributions of
all the groups in a society:
 cont@
• Generally, Multiculturalism as a term is used in
three distinct senses;
as descriptive of the state of cultural
diversity in a society,
as an ideology aimed at legitimatizing the
incorporation of ethnic diversity in the
general structure of society, or
as public policy designed to create national
unity in diversified community.
 cont@
• Multiculturalism recognizes and values
the ethno-cultural diversity of our
society.
• Therefore Multiculturalism is about
 diversity,not division –
it is about direction, not isolation.
 cont@
• It is about cultural and ethnic difference, set
within a framework of shared fundamental
values which enable them to coexist on a
complementary rather than a competitive
basis.
• It involves respect for the law and
democratic institutions and processes.
 Pillars of Multiculturalism
• Some of the major pillars of multiculturalism are:
• Acceptance/Recognitions
• Acceptance is to deal with positive welcome;
favour and endorsement.
Acceptance of difference
Acceptance of others...not mere tolerance
of others
Belief in something; agreement
 Respect
• Denotes both a positive feeling of esteem for a
person or other entity (such as a nation or
religion), and also specific actions and conduct
representative of that esteem.
• Respect for other
cultures,
languages,
religion ....Etc
 Tolerances
• In social, cultural and religious contexts,
toleration and tolerance used to describe
attitudes which are “tolerant” (or moderately
respectful) of practices or group memberships
that may be disapproved of by those in the
majority.
• In practice, “tolerance” indicates support for
practices that prohibit ethnic and religious
discrimination.
 Valuing diversity
• Valuing diversity is what institutions and
members of communities do to
acknowledge the benefits of their
differences and similarities.
• A community that values diversity ensures
that institutions provide equal treatment
and access to resources and decisions for all
community regardless of race, ethnicity,
sexual orientation, and physical disability.
• Valuing diversity recognizes differences between
people and acknowledges that these differences are
a valued asset.
• There are the seven paths for valuing diversity.
• 1. Develop self-awareness:
• First, become aware of your own perceptions and
biases so that you will be able to keep them in check
when interacting with people who are different.
• 2. Increase awareness of others:
• Observe, listen, think, do research if necessary, in
order to become more aware of the values, beliefs,
expectations, customs, and practices of the people
you supervise.
• 3. Acknowledged differences:
• 4. Maintain two-way communication:
• This reduces the chance of misunderstandings and leads to
increased understanding of other cultures.
• 5. Increase understanding:
• By trying to learn more about others, you gain additional insight,
which leads to improved problem-solving.
• 6. Develop mutual respect and appreciation:
• Give equal consideration and view others with equal importance.
• This leads to mutual respect and appreciation of other
individuals.
• 7. Value diversity:
• You will begin to fully value diversity when you realize all the
benefits.
• Therefore, valuing diversity is considered as the vital pillars of
multiculturalism.
• Multiculturalism:
_It is commitment to diversity
_It is commitment to social justice and activism
_It is concerned with optimizing communication
_It is concerned with empowering individuals,
groups, and nations.
_It is concerned with offering hope, optimism,
and opportunity
_It is multicultural, multidisciplinary, and multi-
sectional.
_It is revolutionary and progressive

 Equality and Egalitarian society

• Equality refers to the equality of being

fair or impartial, fairness
• Egalitarian doctrine tends to express
the idea that all human being are equal
in fundamental worth or moral status.
 Ethnicity and Ethno centrism
Ethnocentrism is the belief that one’s own
patterns of behavior are the best: the
most nature, beautiful, right, or
important.
 Therefore, other people, to the extent
that they live differently, live by standards
that are inhuman, irrational, unnatural, or
wrong.
 cont@
• The ethnocentric individual will judge other
groups relative to his or her own particular ethnic
group or culture, especially with concern to
language, behavior, customs, and religion.
• Ethnocentrism occurs when one culture or nation
places itself at the top of an imagined hierarchy
of cultures and nations and subsequently assigns
other cultures and nations equivalent or lower
value on that scale.
 cont@
• Ethnocentric thinking causes us
to make wrong assumptions
about other people because . . .
• Ethnocentrism leads us to make
premature judgments.
 Xenocentrism

• The opposite of ethnocentrism is

xenocentrism which means preferring
ideas and things from other cultures over
ideas and things from your own culture.
• At the heart of xenocentrism is an
assumption that other cultures are
superior to your own.
• Nation-state and Universal citizenship
Nation
State
Nation State
Nationalism
Universal citizenship
 What is a State?
• A State is an independent, sovereign government
exercising control over a certain spatially defined
and bounded area, whose borders are usually
clearly defined and internationally recognized by
other states.
• States are tied to territory
– Sovereign or state as absolute ruler over territory
– Have clear borders
– Defends and controls its territory within those borders
– Is recognized by other countries (diplomatic
recognition, passports, treaties, etc.)
• States have bureaucracies staffed
by state’s own personnel
– Has a national bureaucracy staffed by
government personnel (legal system,
educational system, hierarchical governmental
units, etc.)
• States monopolize certain functions within
its territory (sovereign)
• States try to form nations within their
borders (through symbols, education,
‘national interest,’ etc.).
• what is a Nation?
• A nation is a group of people who see themselves
as a cohesive and coherent unit based on shared
cultural or historical criteria.
• Nations are socially constructed units, not given by
nature. Their existence, definition, and members
can change dramatically based on circumstances.
• Nations in some ways can be thought of as
“imagined communities” that are bound together
by notions of unity that can pivot around religion,
ethnic identity, language, cultural practice and so
forth.
• The concept and practice of a nation work to
establish who belongs and who does not (insider
vs. outsider).
• Such conceptions often ignore political
boundaries such that a single nation may “spill
over” into multiple states.
• Furthermore, states ≠ nations: not every nation
has a state (e.g., Kurds; Roma; Palestine).
• Some states may contain all or parts of multiple
nations.
 Nation-State

• A Nation-State is the idea of a

homogenous nation governed by its own
sovereign state—where each state
contains one nation.
• This idea is almost never achieved.
 National identity
• It refers to a peoples conscious belief that they
collectively constitute a nation.
• It is a shared understanding that they belong
together on the basis of certain features that
transcend their differences and set them apart
from other national groups.
• In other words, national identity reflects a sense
of nationhood.
• Having the strong sense of once own identity as
a nation.
 What are the sources of national identity??

Ethnicity- a form of group identification that

usually rooted in a common biological ancestry.
Shared community - people feel that they
constitute a nation on the basis of certain shared
principles or community goals.
 Shared pattern of social communication
Nationalism
It is consciously formulated set of political ideas
emphasizing the distinctiveness and unity of
one’s nation, specifying common interests and
prescribing goals for action.
The distinction between national identity and
nationalism
• Where as national identity proclaims, “ we are
the people and we belong together in this
territory,” the idea of nationalism adds, “ we
must therefore act together to achieve our
common political aims”.
• Where as national identity evokes sentiment and
emotions, nationalism combines these effective
inclinations such as feeling of pride or
resentment.
• National identity answers the question “ Who am
I? nationalism addresses the question “ What
should we do? and it responds with project.
 Global citizen
• Global citizen means that you:
Think beyond your culture
 Take steps to improve our global mind
 Learn about other cultures—but be aware of
your own – and how they overlap
 Immerse oneself in other cultures
 Teach others about one’s culture
 Bring back/share your experiences and recognize
that the world is much more interconnected.

Chapter Two: Theoretical Foundations of Multiculturalism
• Liberal perspective of
Multiculturalism
The liberal perspective based on the
liberal values of autonomy and equality.
• The underlying assumption of liberal
perspective on multiculturalism is that
the principal task of government is to
secure and distribute fairly and
economic resources individual need to
lead freely chosen lives.
• According to liberal view multiculturalism is
instrumentally valuable to individuals for two reasons.
• First, it enables individual autonomy.
• One of the most important conditions of autonomy is
having an adequate range of options from which to
choose.
• Culture provides context of choice, which provide and
make meaningful the social scripts and narratives
from which people fashion their lives.
• Second, culture is instrumentally valuable for
individual self respect.
• The liberal perspective argues that there is a deep
and general connection between a people’s self
respect and the respect accorded to the cultural
group of which is a part.
• It is not simply membership in any culture but
one’s own culture that must be secured
because of the great difficulty of giving up it.
• The liberalists focus on these premises about
the instrumental value of cultural membership
to the egalitarian claim that because members
of minority groups are disadvantage in terms
of access to their own cultures in contrast to
members of the majority culture and they are
entitled for special protection.
• It is worth nothing that liberal egalitarian
argument for cultural accommodations reflects
a central idea of a broader body of what critics
of the view identified as luck egalitarianism.
• Luck egalitarian argues that individual should be held responsible
for in equalities from their own choice, but not for inequalities
deriving from un-chosen circumstances. The latter in equalities
are the collective responsibility of citizens to redress, because of
the fact that in equalities stemming from membership in a
minority culture is un-chosen. Minority group rights are justified a
within liberal egalitarian theory which emphasizes the important
of rectifying un-chosen in equalities.
• Liberalist theories of multiculturalism contend that anti
discrimination laws fall short treating of members of minority
groups as equals; this is because states cannot be neural with
respect to culture.
• Liberal multiculturalism argues that assisting cultural minority
through exemptions and accommodation is what egalitarian
justice requires. While offered as a general normative argument
for minority cultural groups, liberal multiculturalists distinguish
among different types of groups. Liberal perspective of
multiculturalism focused on individual rights and their self
government of minorities because their minority status is un-
chosen and they were incorporated in to the larger groups.
• To sum up the liberal perspectives of
multiculturalism:
• Liberal are ethical individuals and they argues
that individuals should be free to choose and
pursuit their own conceptions of the good life.
• It considers people in all societies and all cultures
have essentially the same inner identity.
• They give up primacy to individual rights and
liberties over community life and collective goods.
• Liberalists are individualists when they become
to social ontology what they call individualism or
atomism.
 .
Communitarian
• Communitrianism is the belief that the self or
person is constituted through the community in
the sense that individuals are shaped by the
communities to which they belong and thus own
them a debt of respect and consideration.
• Communitrianism arose as a philosophical revolt
against liberal universalism, the belief that,
individuals, people in all societies and all cultures
have essentially the same ‘inner identity”.
• Communitrianism has tried to dissolve from
traditional liberalism.
• It refers to the values of the community and
common welfare as value is opposed to the
individual value and to the individual
capitalism.
• Communitrianism philosophers portray this
idea of the abstract individual or self
imaginative as a recipe for rootless
atomism.
• One justification for multiculturalism arises out
of the communitarian critique of the liberalism is
that communitarians reject the idea that the
individual is prior to the community and that the
value of social goods can be reduced to their
contribution to individual well being.
• Communitarians examine the ways shared
conceptions of the good (values) are formed,
transmitted, justified, and enforced among the
community.
• Communitarians also pay much attention to the
relationship between the self and the
community, social institutions, common goods,
welfare of communities.
• The communitrianism perspective of
multiculturalism is one which centralizes the
social sphere and more specifically the
community and they uphold the general
importance of community that differs in the
extent to which they emphasize individual
liberties and rights.
 Limitations of Liberalism and Communitrianism
Perspective of Multiculturalism
• Liberalism perspective of multiculturalism gives absolute
freedom for the individuals.
• In contrast this ideology other argues that government
is needed to maintain social order or other things
associated with its citizens.
• They criticizes that excessive personal freedoms
encourage dangerous and irresponsible behavior
specifically for sexual norms, the drug and so on, but the
libertarians assumption is that the state has no business
being involved in what they see victimless crimes but
also others criticize this issues as a threats of the society.
• Other criticizes of the liberalism is as’’ a
form of arrogant nihilism’’ that is both
tolerant of nontraditional lifestyle like that
for recreational purpose drug use and
intolerant lifestyle towards other views.
• They criticizes as you did not turn children
in to responsible as adult by giving them
absolute freedom but you can promote
good character by limiting freedom and by
channeling energies in to the most
productive one.
• Libertarians wrongly seek to maximize
freedom without considerations the result
of freedoms.
• Liberalism perspective criticizes as a belief
that practical outcomes of capitalism with
full liberty, as abstract ideas do not exist in
a vacuum and thus the concept of liberty
needs to be validated by a process of
reason with an underlying philosophy of
rational selfishness.
• Communitrianism perspective of multiculturalism
emphasizes on common goods socialization, the
health of the community by the supporter of
government interventions.
• For example the criticizes of common on
ownership of private property, is that the right to
ownership of property is recognized by the
government and defended by the government
agencies such as police forces, who can use force
to defended ownership of property and courts.
• As we know, people are born in to classes with
differing levels of property ownership based on
reasons unrelated to their own effort or innovations,
but there is nothing about the right to ownership.
• It means no one has any freedom to use it.
• As a result this perspective considered as the
backward perspective of multiculturalism that focused
on communal life of the society.
• Generally communitrianism perspective of
multiculturalism criticizes as doctrine that
downgrading of the motives of individuals of on
working skill, innovation skill and also reduces the
productivity of individuals as well as it is hindrance on
the development of the state.
 Chapter four: Conceptualize multicultural
Governance
• Defining governance
• A useful working definition broadly defines
governance as collective decision-making, that is,
“. . . the rules of collective decision-making in
settings where there is a plurality of actors or
organizations and where no formal control
system can dictate the terms of the relationship
between these actors and organizations”
• For our purposes, then, governance can be
defined as a framework for rules that establishes a
principled relationship between ruler and ruled
including a corresponding exchange of rights and
obligations. With governance, relations between
people and central authorities are defined by way
of rules, principles, and norms that prevent
conflict and promote cohesion
• Procedures and protocols are invoked that are
both descriptive and prescriptive for creating
consensus and control in order to meet a specific
objective
• including the following attributes that point to how
• authority is divided;
• power is distributed;
• policies are formulated;
• valued resources are allocated;
• priorities and agendas are set;
• decisions are made;
• accountability is rendered;
• transparency in decision-making is assured
• implementation is secured and rules of the political game are respected.
 Monoculture governance
•
Put simply, whereas multicultural governance is
based on the principle of accommodating
difference by acknowledging its legitimacy in
defining who gets what, a monoculture
governance is committed to suppressing it—
either by decision or by default—thereby
reflecting, reinforcing, and advancing the
exclusiveness of a dominant culture, language,
and identity.
 focused on unifying an otherwise
disparate population by generating a
shared sense of national identity through
cultural and linguistic homogenization.
In other words, the non-national state
possessed and was possessed by a
dominant national group who manipulated
its hegemonic powers to control and
contain.
Those who didn’t belong to the dominant
national group were subject to expulsion,
discrimination, and assimilation—or worse
 Multicultural governance
• A commitment to multicultural governance means the state
should not explicitly identify with any particular ethnicity or
religion but remain neutral and impartial when engaging its
constituent individuals and communities.
• A multicultural model of governance endorses the notion that
the state belongs to all its citizens, not just a single national
group; the rights of all migrants and minorities to full and equal
participation without forfeiting a right to ethnic identity; and
recognition that all citizens have the same institutional access
accorded to the national group.
• Under a multicultural governance, then, difference and
diversity are framed and promoted in ways that make it less
threatening but more palatable to society and pivotal to society
building.
• The multicultural governance is focus on :
• To construct policies and programs, including
strategies, normative standards, and institutional
arrangements for constructively engaging
difference in ways that not only promote
democracy, justice, and social peace, but also are
respectful, reflective, and responsive to migrants
and minorities.
• Agenda that emphasizes a working collaboration
rather than direct control.
• Proactively managing difference by balancing
competing claims and opposing value orientations.
• To advance national interests, a multicultural governance
entails a two-pronged approach by
• (a) fostering positive relations between diverse
communities (through tolerance and engagement) and
• (b) promoting active interventions by central authorities
through removal of prejudice and discrimination,
construction of shared values and commonalities across
communities of difference, and the creation of
commitment and consensus among diverse constituents.
• References to respecting differences are combined with
acknowledging the importance of connections,
commitments, community, consensus, and common
areas of engagement across differences . To be sure, the
real and ideal do not always match.
• To sum up: multicultural governance strives to comply
with the principles of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
• Special attention is devoted to protecting all rights
and freedoms regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion,
including a minority’s rights to their own language,
culture, religion, and identity except where specific
practices violate national law or contravene
international standards.
• Multicultural governance also recognizes that a
cooperative coexistence is possible, but only when
power is shared rather than monopolized, devolved
rather than centralized, and meaningful rather than
perfunctory.
• Adopting multiculturalism as a policy strategy represents an integral
component in advancing an inclusive governance, albeit not in the
sense that many might think.
• The politics of difference under a multicultural governance should not
be framed as a problem to be solved. To the contrary: in a world that is
increasingly diverse, rapidly changing, and more connected than ever, a
commitment to conformity poses problems. In acknowledging the value
and benefits of diversity and differences as solutions or assets, the
multiculturalism in a multicultural governance points to a new way of
thinking that balances commonality with difference, cohesion with
ethnicity, and shared values with cultural relativism .
• Nor should responses to the diversity paradox and the difference
challenge be interpreted as final or solvable.
• Rather, the politics of an inclusive and multicultural governance should
be framed as a journey to be traveled, a tension to be accommodated,
an arrangement to be lived with, a sense of community to be nurtured,
an opportunity to be seized, and an imperfect situation that can yield
unanticipated outcomes.
• Toward an Inclusive Multicultural Governance:
Common Belonging, Shared Community,
Overarching Vision
• At the Commission for Racial
Equality, we now frequently say that
there are two major challenges for
mankind in the 21stcentury.
• One is how to live with our
planet.
• The other is how to live with
each other.
• Governments throughout the world have embarked on
formal strategies of multicultural governance, including
controlling immigration, managing ethnic relations,
accommodating differences, and integrating ethno
cultural minorities into the mainstream.
• Those governance frameworks such as assimilation or
segregation that may have worked in the past no longer
do; rather they come across as antiquated and inadequate
when addressing contemporary difference demands.
• By contrast, multiculturalism as governance represents an
innovative and inclusive blueprint for living together
equitably and with differences.
• A new symbolic order addresses the integration of
migrants and minorities through respect for cultural
differences and removal of discriminatory barriers.
• To be sure, a normative framework for trans-
forming multicultural ideals into governance
programs and practice may not be openly
articulated. Nevertheless, even an implicit
commitment to multiculturalism secures the
underlying agenda that legitimizes a multi- cultural
governance. That these aspirational goals are not
always realized to everyone’s satisfaction is not
necessarily a flaw in multiculturalism, although
there are multicultural models more prone to
provoke and parti- tion than to unite and commit.
The combination of implementation woes and lax
enforcement are often the stumbling blocks.
• What now? A commitment to the principles of separation
or assimilation are deeply problematic (Parekh 2005).
Even reference to integration as governance is no
panacea if dictatorially imposed, loosely bandied about
as a proxy for assimilation, and focused on a one-way
pattern of adaptation. Instead of governance models that
deny or exclude, a more workable alter- native in the art
of living together with difference is required, including a
commitment to the principles of shared community,
overarching vision, and common belonging. The key
challenge in securing an inclusive governance is not about
integrating migrants and minorities, but about ensuring
they become equal citizens who are emotionally bonded
to society and to other members of society through ties
of mutual commitment, engagement, and attachment.
• To ensure the ideal of community and connections
across differences, a two-pronged approach is
proposed.
• To one side of this inclusionary dynamic are the
responsibilities of immigrants. They must commit to
the society they have chosen and express their
commitment by accepting those responsibilities,
involvement, and obligations that citizenship entails .
• To the other side are societal obligations. Society must
commit to inclusiveness through removal of all
discriminatory barriers, assurances of settlement
assistance from housing to language, and provision of
services, including health and education, at local
levels .
• A reciprocating inclusiveness is critical; after all,
immigrants cannot belong to a society that
doesn’t welcome them, respect the terms of the
relationship, and discharge its obligations.
Conversely, society can- not accept migrants and
minorities as members unless they are prepared
to belong, with everything that entails in
assuming responsibilities and commitments.
Alternatively phrased, we are all in this together
as part of a grander ongoing national project, and
everybody needs to make adjustments and
concessions that go beyond self-interest but
foster the vision of a common good.
• In short, a multicultural governance of many cultures is possible if the
appropriate architecture is in place. For a successful multicultural
governance, a shared framework seems indispensable, one in which every-
one abides by agreed-upon rules, embraces a common blueprint for living
together with differences, agrees to the principle of agreeing to dis- agree,
and partakes of the principles and practices of a shared citizenship . A
perspective is required that emphasizes the importance of both national
identity and national laws in addition to a sensitivity to cultural differences
since individuals experiences continue to be grounded in group identities.
No less pivotal is the centrality of connections between diversities and
difference—about social solidarity not separateness.
• Still, formidable hurdles hinder the prospects for doing what is work- able,
necessary, and equitable under a multicultural governance. Potential
tensions prevail in accommodating the need to share common values with
the notion of society as a nation that welcomes diversity and difference—
even if multicultural governances are not shy about what they expect of
minorities and migrants (and vice versa) . Particularly urgent is the issue of
formulating a set of principled norms for responding to minority realities
without sacrificing national unity and liberal-democratic values in the
process.
• Some governance models appear better suited for addressing this challenge.
Neither assimilation nor isolation can survive in these politicized times. Pulling
up the drawbridge and retreating behind a fortress Europe is no less defeatist or
reactionary. A much-touted return to traditional values for integrating
minorities into a coherent whole sounds good in theory; nevertheless, it may
prove impractical in this postmodernist era. Whether by default or necessity,
the path ahead seems unavoidable. The multiculturalism in an inclusive
governance offers the most viable option for addressing the interrelated
dynamics of defiant diversities, surging immigration flows, politicized agendas,
and competing (transnational) citizenships.
• Under the circumstances, it is not a question of multiculturalism as blueprint for
inclusive governance. More to the point, the issue is what kind of
multiculturalism can cope with the contested realities of the twenty-first
century. With or without multiculturalism as a governance blueprint, the
inescapable challenge cannot be averted: how to share political, social, and
cultural space for belonging together under an inclusive and democratic
governance without conflict or incoherence ? In an increasingly interconnected
yet uncertain world of difference and change, societies cannot afford not to
embrace multiculturalism in their constant quest for political unity, social
coherence, economic prosperity, and cultural enrichment. But for
multiculturalism to work, two preconditions appear necessary.
• First is the need to challenge the misconceptions that distort people’s
understanding of the multiculturalism in a multicultural governance. Few
fields of governance are more littered with myths, half-truths, spin, and an
unwillingness to speak truth to power. Of note is a reluctance to appreciate
a fundamental contradiction: rhetoric versus reality. As this book clearly and
repeatedly demonstrates, multiculturalism is ultimately a political act to
achieve political goals in a politically acceptable manner. Even the seemingly
innocuous slogan “unity within diversity” conceals an unwritten code: unity
= control, containment, and co-optation (hegemony); diversity = paint-by-
number tiles in a sticky mosaic. As a result, what multiculturalism says it
does (respecting differences, removing dis- advantage) is not necessarily
what it really does (cooling out troublesome constituents who pose a threat
to national and vested interests). Also in need of a debunking is the belief
that multiculturalism can’t work. As countries like Canada have shown, a
commitment to multiculturalism is neither a hindrance to immigrant
citizenship nor a barrier to social equality and political incorporation .
Properly managed with clearly articulated instructions on limits,
expectations, and responsibilities, even a state-based multiculturalism can
prove pivotal in managing difference in ways workable, necessary, and fair.
• Second, the appropriate infrastructure must be in place for
multicultural- ism to advance an inclusive governance. In
constructing an inclusive multicultural governance, three
foundational principles must prevail, namely:
• (1) the necessity to put multiculturalism at the center of a principled
immigration program, and vice versa;
• (2) acknowledgement of the centrality of multiculturalism as a
framework not only for protecting minority and majority rights, but
also for building society safe from difference, safe for difference;
and
• (3) a willingness to negotiate the terms of cooperative coexistence
by way of shared citizenship, common belonging, and overarching
national vision.
• After all, it stands to reason that if people and communities are not
integrated at some level, they are unlikely to see any benefits from
multiculturalism, thus intensifying resentment over paying a price
for changes they neither understand nor approve .
• In that some of the more successful multicultural governances continue
to abide by these principles speaks volumes about the importance of
compromise and negotiation in constructing rules, priorities, and
standards at the heart of living together without drifting apart.
• Despite claims of multiculturalism as little more than a passing fad (Barry
2001), reality suggests otherwise. Even the much-ballyhooed retreat
from multiculturalism is subject to diverse interpretation. Approve or dis-
approve, like it or not, evidence suggests multiculturalism is here to stay,
albeit recast in a form and function that reflects contemporary realities.
Yes, multiculturalism’s halcyon days are over. Who can deny the
downscaling of multicultural governance as an explicit commitment
(although much of the animus toward multiculturalism is often meant for
immigration pro- grams and certain categories of immigrants). Yet to
announce the death of multiculturalism may be premature. A
commitment to multiculturalism is so deeply embedded in the
legislation, jurisprudence, institutions, and self-image of Western
countries that references to backlash and demise are misleading. Such
negativity or denial can blind us to its embeddedness in principle and in
taken-for-granted practices .
• Let’s face it: in a world of globalized migrant movements, evolving
demographic patterns, and the politicization of difference (as minorities
become more vociferous in competing for valued resources), multiculturalism
is hardly an option to discard when no longer fashionable. Nor should
multiculturalism be envisaged as a finalized policy or a settled governance but
rather a perpetual and unfinished work in progress .
• And the debates and disagreements unleashed by a commitment to
multiculturalism should not be seen as a problem to solve, but a tension to be
creatively played out. In that the forces of difference and the politics of
diversity are as unavoidable as the tides of the sea, what must transpire
instead are moves to reevaluate the concept of multiculturalism along the lines
of an inclusive governance. The book deserves to finish on an optimistic note.
• To the extent that multiculturalism is experiencing a crisis of confidence and an
identity cri- sis, the danger is not the result of too much multiculturalism as a
blueprint for living together differently. To the contrary, the problem lies in not
enough of an inclusive multiculturalism with a corresponding two-way
commitment to connect and interact. Or to put a not-too-fine spin on it, it’s
not so much the death of multiculturalism that should be mourned, but rather
the dearth of an inclusive multiculturalism for the contested realities of
twenty-first-century governance.