Term paper
Solidarity in a Multicultural Society: a possibility?
Abstract
The 21st century world is diversified and globalized and it is still blending and mixing to provide us
today's multicultural world. Cultural pluralism has become the norm, yet it has become intensely hard to
make everyone feel included and while maintaining a nonethnocentric view of our neighbors.
Huntington says that the world is becoming smaller due to increased interactions among people of
different civilizations. This intensifies the consciousness of civilizations, reinforcing differences and
historical animosities. The mixing and blending have resulted in more subcultures, conflicts and
overshadowed many minority cultures. With globalization and frequent migration, living among people
with varying norms and beliefs, solidarity is thus crucial for a multicultural society to survive! Emile
Durkheim, the founding figure of sociology, made significant contributions to our understanding of such
social cohesion and solidarity within society. Drawing on Durkheim's theories and embracing the
viewpoints of other sociologists, this essay will examine the concepts of conflict between civilization,
cultural pluralism and the feasibility of a united multicultural society.
Introduction
What is multiculturalism?
In a society where different ethnicities, languages, faiths, and customs coexist and contribute to the
general social fabric, this is referred to as multiculturalism. This concept promotes the equal recognition
and acceptance of people from diverse cultural backgrounds, acknowledging and valuing cultural
diversity. When talking about multiculturalism, cultural pluralism comes naturally into the equation.
Multiculturalism focuses on the coexistence of different cultures within a society, while cultural
pluralism takes a step further by emphasizing the interaction and integration of these cultures to form a
unified yet diverse social fabric.
Huntington in “clash of civilization” suggests that the world is divided into distinct civilizations, each with
its unique cultural, religious, and historical identity and argues that interactions among these
civilizations will dominate global interactions. Here we can view multiculturalism as multiple civilizations
coexisting on a global scale, each preserving its distinct identity and values.
Historical Struggle for Inclusion
Throughout history we see a struggle for acceptance, inclusion and diversity. Fishman (2004) in
"mainstream ethnicity" shared, A variety of minority groups have questioned the idea of a single, shared
culture (monoculture), claiming that it no longer accurately represents them, if it ever did. He said that
minority groups have concurrently pushed for increased public acknowledgment and representation of
their ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and religious identities in the public sphere. Thus, he analyzed that this
idea or movement has evolved into multiculturalism. As a result of its cumulative impact over the past
half century, he said even the longtime opponent of multiculturalism, Nathan Glazer (1998), has recently
acknowledged that “we are all multiculturalists now.” But truly, if we are all multiculturalists now, then
where is the harmony? In countries where they are banning hijab? In institutions, where your color
determines your position?
Challenges of Multicultural Society
Increasing diversity breeds more opinions and practices, which in turn brings more challenges.
Huntington's emphasis on the fundamental differences among civilizations raises concerns about the
feasibility of multiculturalism in a world characterized by deep-seated cultural disparities. The clashes
between these civilizations, rooted in their differing values, beliefs, history, language, culture, tradition,
and religion, may pose challenges to harmonious coexistence and integration of diverse cultures. Riduffo
mentions increase strict efforts of compulsory brotherhood in public can give rise to pluralism of
abnegation. He said people, at least in public, won't say their religion is better or their cultural practice is
superior to the other.
Pluralism of abnegation
"Pluralism of abnegation" refers to a concept within the framework of multiculturalism that emphasizes
the renunciation or suppression of one's cultural identity or practices in favor of assimilating into the
dominant culture or society like suggested in the Safir-Wolf theory developed by sociologists Ronald
Safir and Joe Wolf. Here they suggest societies may experience cultural assimilation, where minority
cultures adopt aspects of the dominant culture.
Minority groups choose to adopt the cultural norms, values, and practices of the dominant group,
consciously or unconsciously, while suppressing or minimizing aspects of their own cultural heritage.
Like when immigrant communities progressively absorb the cultural norms, beliefs, and ways of
behaving that are part of the host or dominant society. Immigrants' original cultural identity gradually
erodes because of their absorption into the greater social structure. This phenomenon can be caused by
societal pressure, the desire for social acceptance or economic opportunities. Though pluralism of
abnegation can have some positive aspects like smoother integration into dominant society, increased
social mobility and access to opportunities, it mostly has more upsetting negative aspects like, loss of
cultural diversity and heritage, identity crisis and perpetuate unequal power dynamics and reinforce
dominant cultural norms at the expense of minority cultures.
Clash of Civilization
Samuel P. Huntington says Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the
principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. Clash
occurs both at a micro-level where adjacent groups along civilization fault lines (multicultural societies)
struggle violently over territory, and at a macro-level where states from different civilizations compete
for military and economic power, control international institutions, and promote their political and
religious values. His theory of clashes occurring along the fault lines between civilizations suggests
potential tensions where different cultural groups interact. In these areas of interaction, the differences
in values, traditions, and worldviews may lead to conflicts, challenging the ideals of peaceful coexistence
that multiculturalism advocates.
Resurgence of Cultural Identities
He observes a resurgence of cultural identities, especially among non-Western civilizations, challenging
Western dominance and ideologies where he mentioned about Islamic resurgence. He emphasized the
role of religion, particularly Islam, as a source of identity and commitment that transcended national
boundaries. Islamic identity was becoming increasingly influential, getting its strength from shared
religious beliefs across various countries.
Cultural and civilization Identity differences are deep-rooted and fundamental and are less mutable than
political and economic ones. Conflicts based on cultural and religious identities are more rigid and less
easily compromised, which could challenge efforts to promote multiculturalism and tolerance.
Historically, we can see how recent dispute has something to do with multiculturalism, if not directly
arising from it.
Melting pot-salad bowl analogy
As Fishman mentioned, not all integration is preferred. The melting pot concept, commonly associated
with American society, suggests that various cultures meld and assimilate into a single amalgamated
identity, often emphasizing the adoption of dominant cultural traits.
The cocktail monoculture disregards all efforts for cultural pluralism and unity in diversity and solely
focus on unity by diverting all norms and beliefs to the dominant culture of that society, thus causing
confusing and uproars like for cultural appropriation or underrepresented ethnic groups.
The salad bowl concept, on the other hand, suggests that several cultures can survive inside a society
while preserving their own identities. Which we referred to as multiculturalism or cultural pluralism.
According to this approach, every cultural group makes a distinct contribution to the overall
composition, much like the many components of a salad. Like, in Safir-Wolf theory, it describes the
initiatives taken by immigrant communities to maintain their original customs, language, and way of life
in the new host community in preserving their cultural legacy. We will explore theories that promote
such cultural integration.
Is achieving solidarity feasible?
Evolution of Cultural pluralism
The sociologist Horace Kallen introduced the idea of cultural pluralism in the early 20th century,
emphasizing the value of diverse cultural contributions in a society which aligns with Durkheim's notion
of organic solidarity. In "We Are All Multiculturalists Now, What?" The author, David Hollinger, refers to
the work of Robert D. Ruffolo, who outlines the shift in the concept of cultural pluralism.
Initially, in the 19th century "pluralism as toleration" was rooted in the idea of acknowledging,
coexisting and tolerating different cultures within a society without necessarily promoting active
engagement or inclusion. But when circumstances in society changed, at time of World War II, the
concept developed into "pluralism as inclusion," which emphasizes the active participation and
integration of other cultural groups into the social, political, and economic domains of society. Further
development led to "pluralism as participation", which promoted not only the inclusion of diverse
cultures but also encouraged active engagement and empowerment of diverse groups in shaping
societal structures, policies, and decision-making, emphasizing equal participation and representation in
the socio-political landscape.
This demonstrates how cultural pluralism is more flexible than rigid and adapts to the demands of
uniqueness and diversity but also unstable. Explaining the current waves of unity and unrest.
The cosmopolitan canopy
Elijah Anderson's "The Cosmopolitan Canopy" presents a complex view of how urban spaces can serve
as arenas where people from different backgrounds come together, albeit temporarily, fostering
moments of tolerance and civility amidst larger societal challenges related to race and diversity. For
instance, public parks, shopping malls, cultural festivals, cafes, public transportation hubs, college
campuses, public malls and plazas act as a cosmopolitan canopy. Everybody there has their own set of
goals that align with each other’s interests. AUW could be a good example: diverse nationality women
get together under the same roof seeking education not bringing in the political dispute and animosity
between their respective countries. An accepting and tolerant environment is created for our cultural
differences. What might not have been an acceptable behavior in one’s culture, can be celebrated
elsewhere.
While the cosmopolitan canopy showcases moments of peaceful multicultural interactions, it may not
serve as a complete solution for resolving deeper conflicts among diverse cultures. It offers temporary,
surface-level interactions within specific spaces but might not address broader societal issues, structural
inequalities, or power dynamics that fuel multicultural conflicts. But, as a common ground where people
come to fulfil similar goals, it could act as a place for positive interactions and over time, a center for
peace and understanding- easing the disparities and promoting unity in diversity with a common goal
for peace. Comprehensive approaches involving systemic changes, addressing biases, and promoting
inclusivity are necessary for resolving deep-seated conflicts among diverse communities. This could give
rise to a more united community is micro level.
Durkheim's Notions of Solidarity
Emile Durkheim, in "The Division of Labor in Society" (1893), introduced the concepts of mechanical and
organic solidarity. Mechanical solidarity occurs in traditional, homogenous societies where individuals
share similar values, beliefs, and lifestyles, where individuals are bound by their similarities. Organic
solidarity, on the other hand, characterizes modern, heterogeneous societies where individuals have
diverse roles and functions. Here, cohesion stems from interdependence; individuals rely on each other
to maintain social order. them together.
Sociological Frameworks: Durkheim and Ibn Khaldun
Ibn Khaldun's theory, as discussed in "The Sociology of Civilizations: Ibn Khaldun and a MultiCivilizational World Order", centers around the cycle of civilization, where the societies go through
cycles of growth, peak, decline, and fall, influenced by the strength or weakness of their Asabiyyah
(cohesion and solidarity). He believed that leadership, cohesive bonds, cultural values, and shared social
norms were crucial for a civilization's sustainability. He also believed, a civilization satisfying its survival
needs only, could live with a sense of harmony and addressing wants over needs could device division.
Such wants and lack of survival needs came from settling and having territory and possessions, thus the
abundance allowed people to nurture selfish thoughts, weakening their solidarity. Although his theory
emphasizes how important unity is to the sustainability of civilizations, it leaves out specifically the
possibility of many cultures living in harmony under a single social structure.
Solidarity: a solution
Whereas Durkheim believed that organic solidarity is the glue that holds such multicultural society
together. It is a solution to the challenges posed by diversity and the division of labor in multicultural
societies. Organic solidarity promotes:
•
Interdependence and Acknowledgment of Differences: People with diverse cultural origins
frequently rely on one another for a range of products, services, and knowledge. Social cohesion results
from this interdependence and acknowledgement, which encourages collaboration and a sense of
dependability.
•
Specialization and Collaboration: Diverse cultural groups provide special abilities, insights, and
information, encouraging collaboration. Like when people from many communities came together to
support healthcare workers, feed the hungry, and assist those who were adversely affected financially
after the COVID-19 pandemic.
•
Mutual Respect and Understanding: Recognizing the value of each group's contributions to
society, it fosters tolerance and an appreciation for diversity, which in turn leads to respect and
understanding between people.
How to achieve these attributes:
•
Education and Integration's Role: Effective education could foster cultural competence and
empathy by educating people about the various in their community, fostering cross-cultural
relationships, and assisting in the healing of divisions to foster a sense of belonging.
•
Embracing Cultural Pluralism: This entails appreciating diversity and appreciating the distinctive
characteristics that every culture has to offer. Huntington mentions that a 'return to roots' phenomenon
is happening, reversing the trend of Western elites in non-Western societies.
•
Social Capital and Trust: Robert D. Putnam’s “social capital” suggests the importance of trust
and social networks in a functioning society. When individuals trust one another, they are more likely to
collaborate, which is a central aspect of organic solidarity.
Organic solidarity can be the foundation for resolving conflicts and building unity. When individuals
understand that they need each other to thrive and maintain social order, it fosters a sense of
responsibility and mutual respect. But why can we not see it happening in our world? I believe, dispute
among diverse groups is increasing due to selfish tendencies but I also believe, it is string that is used to
control the world states. War and disagreement does not let one culture to rise above the other but in
the end only a few set of people are benefited from a less unified and harmonized world.
Conclusion
In a world characterized by diversity, multiculturalism stands as both a promise and a challenge. We are
all multiculturalists now with a common goal- solidarity and prosperity. But individually, our selfish
desires do not allow us to grow together but urges us to grow above others. Thus, at times peace and
acceptance is all but an act of pretense to survive, to feel like we belong. Humans are complex creatures,
we don’t want just solidarity or just prosperity, but when given a choice to choose both, we are but too
selfish or simply our circumstances don’t allow so.
Taking a broader view, solidarity is a difficult but crucial concept in a multicultural community. The
sociological theories of Durkheim, Kallen, Huntington, and Putnam provide a solid foundation for
addressing the opportunities and difficulties brought about by diversity and the promotion of cultural
pluralism and social cohesion. They also provide insights into the possible advantages and underlying
conflicts of these concepts.
Though ideas such as the cosmopolitan canopy and organic solidarity provide glimmers of peace and
harmony, the road to true unity in variety is nevertheless difficult to travel. In order to promote
harmony in a multicultural community, it is important to prioritize integration and education, cultivate
trust and social capital, and embrace cultural variety. The understanding of the unique roles that each
culture and individual plays in the greater social canvas is the cornerstone of a peaceful and inclusive
society. But even after that, the question remains, is solidarity in a multiculturalism possible, when
multiculturalism itself gives birth to dispute?
Reference
1.
Putnam, R. (2001). Social capital: Measurement and consequences. Canadian journal of policy
research, 2(1), 41-51.
2.
Fishman, J. A. (2004). Mainstream ethnicity. In R. D. Torres & R. D. Ruffolo (Eds.), Cultural
pluralism, identity politics, and the law (pp. 177-202). University of Michigan Press.
3.
Glazer, N. (1998). We are all multiculturalists now. In H. J. Gans (Ed.), Multiculturalism and
diversity: A social psychological perspective (pp. 47-55). John Wiley & Sons.
4.
Hollinger, D. A. (2002). We are all multiculturalists now, what? In D. A. Hollinger (Ed.), Postethnic
America: Beyond multiculturalism (pp. 1-15). Basic Books.
5.
Riduffo, R. (2010). The pluralism of abnegation. In D. A. Hollinger (Ed.), The cultural promises of
multiculturalism: A critical assessment (pp. 113-129). Princeton University Press.
6.
Safir, R., & Wolf, J. (1999). The Safir-Wolf theory: Cultural preservation and assimilation in
immigrant populations. Journal of Cultural Sociology, 3(2), 207-224.
7.
154.
Kallen, H. (1924). Cultural pluralism and the hyphenated American. The Nation, 118(3069), 151-
8.
Durkheim, E. (1893). The division of labor in society. New York, NY: Free Press.
9.
Huntington. S. P. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations?. Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22-49, Council on
Foreign Relations. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20045621
10.
Şentürk. R. and Nizamuddin. A. M. (2008) The Sociology of Civilisations: Ibn Khaldun and a MultiCivilisational World Order. Asian Journal of Social Science, 36, 516–546. DOI:
10.1163/156853108X327065
11.
Anderson. E. (2004), The Cosmopolitan Canopy, Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science, Being Here and Being There: Fieldwork Encounters and Ethnographic Discoveries,
595, 14-31. Sage Publications. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4127607