MM202 Lecture 2
Concepts of Multiculturalism
Multiculturalism In
Western Europe And
North America
Institute Of Western European Studies, FSV UK
Spring
Lecturer: Antonin Mikeš
abtmikes@gmail.com
“When we identify one thing as unlike the
others, we are dividing the world; we use
our language to exclude, to distinguish –
to discriminate.”
Minow. M. Making all the difference 1990
Racism is Racism

Are there different forms of racism?
What are they?
Are there different forms of racism?
What are they?
Answers #1


Type: Individual

Belief in superiority of Whites Violence against "non-Whites“

Denial of the existence of racism in any form.

Belief that lack of success of "non-White" persons is due to genetic
inferiority or racial-group malaise.
Type: Cultural

Language superiority

Law, politics defined from a White perspective
 In education, science, philosophy and so forth, the contributions of White
people are the best.

Type: Institutional

Law enforcement policies are more stringent for people of color.

Unemployment and underemployment for people of color.

Inadequate housing
Are there different forms of racism?
What are they?
Answers #2

Racist behaviour may be direct (overt) or indirect (covert) in nature.

Direct racial discrimination:


Indirect racial discrimination:


is the unfair or unequal treatment of a person or a group on racial
grounds. An example would be an employer who won't hire someone on
the basis of their cultural or linguistic background. This type of
discrimination is typically deliberate.
is seemingly equitable on the surface, but in practice disadvantages
people from particular groups. For example, a rule that says that all
students must not wear anything on their heads could result in
discrimination against students whose religion requires the wearing of
headwear. Indirect racial discrimination can occur even when there is no
intention to discriminate.
Institutional racism (or systemic racism):

describes forms of racism which are structured into political and social
institutions. It occurs when organisations, institutions or governments
discriminate, either deliberately or indirectly, against certain groups of
Racism defined….

“Racism is an ideology that gives
expression to myths about other racial and
ethnic groups, that devalues and renders
inferior those groups, that reflects and is
perpetuated by deeply rooted historical,
social, cultural and power inequalities in
society.”
Today
Positive action vrs pos. Discrimination
Multiculturalism TheoryDescriptive vrs Normative
Brief look at schools of thought
Integration
Forms
Theories
Policies

What is the difference between:
 Positive Action
 Positive
Discrimination
Positive action




What is positive action?
The term 'positive action' refers to a number of methods
designed to counteract the effects of past discrimination and to
help abolish stereotyping.
Action can be taken to encourage people from particular groups
to take advantage of opportunities for work and training. This
can be done when underrepresentation of particular groups has
been identified in the previous year.
Under this broad meaning positive action may include initiatives
such as the introduction of non-discriminatory selection
procedures, training programmes or policies aimed at
preventing sexual harassment.
http://www.equality-online.org.uk/equality_advice/positive_action.html
Positive action cont.
Positive action
Employers may not discriminate in the actual selection for a
post on the grounds of sex or race but the legislation does
allow measures to be taken to encourage members of
under-represented groups to take advantage of
opportunities. However, positive action which is lawful
should not be confused with positive discrimination which
is unlawful. (ACAS)
http://www.equality-online.org.uk/employment_legislation/race_legislation_definitions.html
No one should be worse off due to positive action
Theories affect outcomes
Different theories of
Multiculturalism
• Descriptive – post 1945• rapid influx of people from all over the world into countries like the UK,
France Netherlands, Canada.- resulting in a grudging acceptance of new
idea’s and heterogeneity
• Normative –
• cultural diversity as good• resulting in what may be called a loss of national cohesion- Canada today.
• Diversity as enriching
Different theories:
Gov. Policy
• Government policy (Canada, Australia)
• Canada – (normative policies)
• the Constitution of Canada recognizes the importance of
preserving and enhancing the multicultural heritage of
Canadians;
• the Government of Canada recognizes the diversity of
Canadians as regards race, national or ethnic origin, colour
and religion as a fundamental characteristic of Canadian
society and is committed to a policy of multiculturalism
designed to preserve and enhance the multicultural heritage
of Canadians…..
Different theories:
Gov. Policy
• Government policy (Canada, Australia)
• Australia– (normative policies)
Multicultural Australia: United in Diversity (Gov slogan 2003)
• Responsibilities of all
• All Australians have a civic duty to support …our freedom and equality
and enable diversity in our society to flourish.
• Respect for each person
• Fairness for each person
• All Australians are entitled to equality of treatment and opportunity.
• Benefits for all
• All Australians benefit from productive diversity, ie. the significant
cultural, social and economic dividends arising from the diversity of our
population. Diversity works for all Australians.
Different theories:
Institutional Policy
• Institutional policies EU
• Race Equality Directives EU.(Art.1)
• The purpose of this Directive is to lay down a framework for combating
discrimination on the grounds of racial or ethnic origin, with a view to
putting into effect in the Member States.
• the principle of equal treatment.
• COUNCIL DIRECTIVE of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the
principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to
employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions
(76/207/EEC)
• Other EU directives
Different theories:
Institutional Policy
• Institutional policies UK
• UK – racial equality,
• Commission for Racial Equality
• The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) is a publicly funded, nondepartmental public body, set up under the Race Relations Act 1976 to
tackle racial discrimination and to promote equal opportunities and good
race relations.
• Race Relations Act (1976)
• Race Relations Act protects (against) racial discrimination in most, but
not all, situations
Different theories:
Institutional Policy
• Institutional policies Canada
• Canadian Multiculturalism Act
• “pluralism that was a fact of Canadian life.”
• 1960 Passage of the Canadian Bill of Rights
• 1969 Book IV of the Bilingualism and Biculturalism Commission Report
emphasizes the bilingual and multicultural nature of Canada
• 1969 Introduction of the Official Languages Act
• 1971 Introduction of Canada's Multiculturalism Policy
• 1982 Adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• 1988 Passage of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act
• 1997 Renewed Multiculturalism Program announced
Different theories:
Institutional Policy
• Institutional policies
Australia
• The Living in Harmony initiative, including Harmony Day.
• See: Living In Harmony
• The Access and Equity strategy.
• See: Fairer Government Services and Programmes
• The Diversity Works! programme
• See: Diversity Works!
• The Muslim Community Reference Group
• See: Muslim Community Reference Group
• The National Action Plan
• See: National Action Plan
Multiculturalism – cont.

Conservative (diversity as a deficit, communit.)

Left essentialist (Afrocentrism, also
communit.)

Liberal (natural equality, lack of opportunities,
decontextualisation, depolitisation)




procedural liberalism vs communitarian liber. – Kis,
Taylor, Kymlicka (see also politics of recognition)
Pluralist - salad bowl (exoticism, affirmation)
vs
melting pot
Multiculturalism – cont.

Critical MC (Frankfurt School, power, emancipation, soc. justice,
self reflection)
Antiracist (life chances )
 Reflexive (Ali Ratansi – Derrida + Giddens)
 Cosmopolitan
 Ethnicity as habitus (Bourdieu)
 Hybridity (H. Bhabha, Paul Gilroy, St. Hall) rooting vs shifting


(see S. May, P. McLaren, etc)
Multiculturalism – cont.

V. Parrillo: three models of minority
integration:
 Assimilation
(majority- conformity)
 Amalgamation (melting pot)
 Accommodation (pluralism) (multiculturalism)
Multiculturalism = diversity + cooperation

Parillo, 1997
Multiculturalism – cont.

Eva Sobotka: policies twds the Roma in CEE:
– common in the past (communists who
pretended that Roma were workers just like everyone
else)
 Exclusion
– France Co-existence – Czech Rep now- Germany to some
extent- Netherlands Multiculturalism – Canada and UK
 Melting pot- USA
 Assimilation

Sobotka 2003
Multicultural Policy:
target groups/requirements




Indigenous (Nunavat in Canada, Sami in Scandinavia)
National minorities (Canada, Europe)
Legal immigrants (USA, Australia)
Irregular & illegal immigrants –
 denizens
(foreign citizens who have acquired
permanent resident status)
 metics (caste ranking between slaves and citizens)


AfroAmericans
Roma, Ch. Jews, Amish, etc
 Kymlicka
building
–stages: communitarian, liberal, nation
Multiculturalism – Philosophies.


Integration, inclusion, inclusive education
Intercultural vs multicultural
 Intercultural
studies are studies that focus on the
interaction two or more cultures and answer the main
question of what happens when of two or more
cultures interact (at the interpersonal level, grouplevel or international level).

Politics of :
 redistribution,
of recognition (Frazer)
 equal dignity – “acknowledge cultures”
(autonomy/universalism) &
 difference “uniqueness of their identities”
(authenticity/identity)

(From “the politics of recognition" Charles Taylor)
Integration of Immigrants
Forms of Integration (4)Marginalization, Segmentation, Multi- integration, assimilation
Assimilationpros and cons
Integration policy
Obstacles- countries compared
Towards the future
Adapted from Heinz Fassmann IOM 2010
Forms of Assimilation
Marginalization
Migrants are neither tied in their origin
country nor in their new destination, they
are marginalized, they live between two
societies
Part of the labour force migration of the 60s
and 70s, Asylum seekers
Segmentation
ie. Parallel Societies
Migrants have not „arrived“ in the receiving
society, and are still a part of their origin
society
Muslim communities in large cities; elite
migrants with diplomatic status
Multiple Integration
Migrants are part of the receiving society and
at the same time part of the origin context
Bi-/Multilingualism;
Hybrid identities - values and ethnic norms both of countries of
origin as well as receiving society; switching identities in
dependency of social environment
Assimilation
One sided (Chicago school) or interactive
adaption process (Esser, Alba) which leads
to dissolution of the „ethnic dimension“;
No relation to the country of origin (or ethnic
community) and only interaction with the
host society;
The concept of assimilation refers to the
„Chicago school of sociology“ (1920s);
Idea of melting pot
Assimilation
The concept refers to the “Chicago school of
sociology” (1920s);
Assimilation as a concept can be
differentiated into phases:
1. Migration and contact
2. Competition and conflict of resources
3. Adaption (acculturation) to the mainstream society
4. Finally disappearance of the ethnic origin
Assimilation
4 dimensions of assimilation (Esser 2001):
Structural assimilation: Status, profession; housing
Cognitive assimilation: language, norms, behaviour;
Identificatory assimilation: Identity
Social Assimilation: Inter ethnic contacts- marriage
Pros and Cons of the 4 forms
Marginality
No pros only cons; it could never be a target of integration
policy to keep migrants out societal relations and structures;
Segmentation
Pros: strong coherence within the group of migrants or ethnic
minority
Cons: „parallel society“ contradicts to the idea of cohesion;
loyalty conflicts and ethnic motivated riots
Pros and Cons
Assimilation
Pros: strong cohesion, no loyalty conflicts, ethnic structures
cannot be maintained easily
Cons: extinction of cultural capital, language capacity and
useful ties to the home country
Cons: difficult definition: what is assimilation?
For discussion German „Leitkultur“
Pros and Cons
Multiple Integration
Pros: mediates between different societies; cultural capital as
economically beneficial
Cons: border between cultural autonomy (e.g. familiar rights)
and common norms remains unclear; loyalty conflicts (in
order of norms, traditions, spoken language, and behaviour:
tradition vs. modernism, country of origin vs. new home
country)
Cons: cognitively difficult for migrants (knowledge of two or
more languages/histories/norms)
Integration of Immigrants
Integration Policy-can be...
Preventive
Requirement to learn German (or Dutch) before immigration;
Distributing information in source country as preventive
measure
Accompanying
comprises language courses, mentoring programs or
information material to dis-burden the ongoing inclusion
process
Catching up
Qualification and language competence improvement
For example: re-qualification of a medical doctor
Integration Policy-can...
address certain fields
Language and education
Labour market
Housing and spatial dimension
Sport and leisure time
Intercultural dialogue
Obstacles
Conflictual discussion
Integration measurements should be voluntarily to
provide learning success
Integration measurements should be mandatory
otherwise they would be ignored (linked with
financial transfers or with the length of a legal stay)
Institutional obstacles
Integration policy should be concentrated in one hand
(ministry or department)
Integration policy is a cross sectional policy and
should therefore be implemented in each of the
responsible unit (ministry for education, health,
labour etc.)
Obstacles- cont.
Distribution of competences
Responsibility lies with federal state, the region and the local level;
The EU is still expanding the competence in this policy area as well
(2010 Treaty of Lisbon; 2005 the “Common Basic Principles on
Integration)
Integration is a dynamic, bi-directional process of mutual cooperation
Employment is a basic component of the process of integration
Basic knowledge of the language, history and institutions is a necessary
requirement;
Efforts in the educational system to empower migrants of the first and
second generation to participate actively in the social life
The charter of basic rights assuring the right of free religion, if there is no
conflict with other European rights;
Participation of migrants on the democratic processes, especially on the
local level, will foster integration;
Primary obstacles are the
different principal approaches
within EU and worldwide
1. Liberal paradigm of integration (USA, UK)
No forced assimilation; plurality is guaranteed
and segregation can be observed; the Amish
lives without electricity and cars and they are
respected;
Migration: everyone is welcomed but no public
support and no social transfers
Problems of segregation are security problems
Important is the national overhead (flag,
constitution, anthem)
Primary obstacles. Cont
2. Republican model (France)
Assimilation is necessary; plurality and diversity are
incompatible with the republican values;
Migrants are welcome who respects the republican
ideals
Division of state and church
Commitment to the Republic and to France; French
language and the French culture
Citizenship is strictly linked to the republican values
but it is possible to become a „true Frenchman“
(Sarkozy) because the past and the ancestry is
Primary obstacle are the
different principal approaches
within EU and worldwide
3. Paradigm of descent (Germany)
The people are defined by a common descent;
shared history and myth
The integration paradigm is that of segmentation;
to become a „true German“ or „Austrian“ is
difficult and needs in principal many decades;
but Germany changed it‘s paradigm in 2005
Control of migration and selection of migrants is
necessary to be sure that the “right persons”
will enter the territory. The welfare state makes
it necessary to control who is eligible to receive
Towards the Future
The need for integration policy
Every migration policy lacks integration policy
concepts.
– research about guest workers from the 1970s and 1980s
demonstrates the deficits and unintended side effects of the
rotation policy.
Integration policy should offer clear future for
immigrants and also implement concrete
integration measures.
Integration policy should not endeavour for pure
assimilation nor cultivate diversity for its own
sake.
Towards the Future
Integration policy should focus on structural
harmonization- implementation of preventive,
accompanying and catching up integration
measurements.
Housing markets have to be open while frictions
on the labour market have to be avoided.
Integration policy should borrow some elements
from the republican and the liberal paradigm
Clear guide for the migrants to become citizens if
they wish
Recognition that integration processes need time
and plurality of different lifestyles