MULTICULTURALISM:

Does the inequality of outcomes prove racial or ethnic discrimination? Are there groups that have better outcomes because of their values, ideas, institutions, social practices? Does this mean that cultural differences produce economic inequalities? How does multiculturalism change the way we write history, given that history is usually about the struggles of groups for land, power, wealth, social recognition, and cultural expression?

'It's good to be different' might be the motto of our times. The celebration of difference, the respect for pluralism, is now a more than a policy, it’s a belief. People usually try to change a culture or a religion to fit on the current standards, instead of accepting the individuality and diversity of their own costumes. Is this the right attitude? I guess not. With a plural culture people get a “taste” of each culture, thus they’re able to have a greater understanding of their own costumes and history.

Multiculturalism is the only means of ensuring a tolerant and democratic polity in a world in which there are conflicts between cultures with different values. The attempt to establish universal norms leads to racism and tyranny. Human beings have a basic, almost biological, need for cultural attachments. This need can only be satisfied if we do protect different cultures. People must understand cultural values are not the so different cultures should be treated equal respect.

In spite of this, it’s very difficult to support respect for difference without appealing to some universalised principles of equality or social justice. Equality arises from fact that humans are political creatures and possess a capacity for culture. But the fact that all humans possess a capacity for culture does not mean that all cultures are equal. It means that we should respect other’s differences as they respect ours. Diversity is important, because it allows us to expand our horizons, to compare and contrast different values, beliefs and lifestyles. In other words, because it allows us to engage in political dialogue and debate that can help create more universal values and beliefs, and a collective language of citizenship. But on those debates we can never forget the words 'tolerance' and 'respect'.A truly plural society would be one in which citizens have full freedom to pursue their different values or practices, while in the public sphere all citizens would be treated as political equals whatever the differences in their private lives. Multiculturalism is usually as a result of immigration. This can lead to anxiety about the stability of national identity, yet can also lead to cultural exchanges that benefit the cultural groups. Such exchanges range from major accomplishments in literature, art and philosophy to relatively token appreciation of variations in music, dress and new foods. A plural society can brought racism or homophobia. That’s why it’s vital to establish some policies to decrease these feelings:

• dual citizenship
• government support for newspapers, television, and radio in minority languages
• support for minority festivals, holidays, and celebrations
• acceptance of traditional and religious dress in schools, the military, and society in general
• support for arts from cultures around the world
• programs to encourage minority representation in politics, education, and the work force

In what concerns these policies not every country has the same. For example, France has made efforts to adapt French culture to new immigrant groups, while Canada still has many policies that work to encourage assimilation.

Unfortunately there are some who can’t accept these new concept. One of the most articulate and careful recent critics of multiculturalism is from the political theorist Brian Barry, who argues from the liberal left in his 2002 book "Culture and Equality: An Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturalism" that some forms of multiculturalism can divide people when they need to unite in order to fight for social justice.” Another more recent and conservative criticism, based largely upon the Nordic and Canadian experience, is these view multiculturalism as a Utopian ideology with a simplistic and overly optimistic view of human nature, the same weakness he attributes to communism, anarchism, and many strains of liberalism. According to them, multiculturalism is particular to a western urban environment and cannot survive as an ideology outside it.

Personally I think that living in a plural society is a plus. Living in a cosmopolitan area will allow us to be more attentive, more helpful. So, in what concerns multiculturalism I think that




Chicago Cultural Studies Group. "Critical Multiculturalism." Critical Inquiry 18:3 (1992): 530-55.
Erickson, Peter. “What Multiculturalism Means.”Transition 55 (1992): 105-14.

Leonor Pinharanda