Multiculturalism
Responding to Issues of Diversity
Presentation: Claude Olivier
March 25, 2014
Multiculturalism
Primarily from:
• Kymlicka, W. (2008). Multiculturalism,
social justice and the welfare state. In G.
Craig, T. Burchardt, & D. Gordon (Eds.),
Social justice and public policy: Seeking
fairness in diverse societies (pp. 53-75).
Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.
Multiculturalism
What is it?
• Recognition and promotion of diversity
within society and its institutions (versus
requiring minority groups to conform or
assimilate into a dominant culture)
• Can you think of examples where we
recognize and/or promote cultural diversity
within our social institutions?
• Multiculturalism (Kymlicka, 2008) rejects
“earlier models of the unitary,
homogenous nation state” (p. 54);and
processes of assimilation and exclusion to
attain national homogeneity
• Can you think of examples of government
policies that have been used to impose the
dominant group’s culture?
Policies that have been used to impose
dominant group’s position (Kymlicka, 2008,
p. 55)
• “official language laws”
• “compulsory education promoting a standardized curriculum”
• “centralization of political power” (versus local autonomy of minority
groups)
• diffusion of dominant culture and language “through national cultural
institutions” (media, museums)
• “adoption of state symbols celebrating the dominant” group
• “unified legal and judicial system”
• “settlement policies that encourage members of dominant group to
settle in areas where minority groups” reside
• immigration policies with language requirements (of dominant
group)
• declaring natural resources “that used to belong to minority groups”
as national resources
• Such policy direction can result in…
“multiple and deeply-rooted forms of
exclusion and subordination for minorities”
(Kymlicka, 2008, p. 56).
• “As a result, various sub-state
groups…have advocated instead for a
more multicultural state” (Kymlicka, 2008,
p. 56).
Kymlicka identifies (2008, pp. 56-57) three
principles common to multicultural states:
• 1) reject idea of state as “possession of a single
national group” (p. 56)
• 2) reject nation-building policies when aim is to
assimilate or exclude members of non-dominant
group but rather support social inclusion without
needing to deny ethnocultural identity
• 3) acknowledge historic injustice to minority
groups by policies of assimilation and exclusion,
and offer rectification
Kymlicka (2008) illustrates approaches to
multiculturalism in relation to 3 key groups.
• 1) Indigenous peoples: distinct societies, land
claims, cultural rights, self-government.
• 2) Sub-state nationalisms: “nations within a
larger state” (p. 58), self-government at subfederal level, official language/cultural rights.
• 3) Immigrant groups: “race-neutral admissions
criteria” (p. 59), multicultural approach to
integration versus assimilation.
Multiculturalism
What is its history in Canada?
• In 1971, the federal government took position
that Canada would adopt a multicultural policy
(e.g., recognize and respect diversity of
languages, customs, religions)
• 1982; Section 27 of the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms requires the Charter to be
interpreted in a multicultural context
• The Canadian Multiculturalism Act enacted in
1988
The Canadian Multiculturalism Act states
that it is the policy of the Government of
Canada to: (10 clauses; a-j)
• (a) recognize and promote the understanding
that multiculturalism reflects the cultural and
racial diversity of Canadian society and
acknowledges the freedom of all members of
Canadian society to preserve, enhance and
share their cultural heritage
[so recognizes and promotes Canada’s
multicultural heritage]
• (e) ensure that all individuals receive equal
treatment and equal protection under the law,
while respecting and valuing their diversity
Multiculturalism Act cont.
• (f) encourage and assist the social, cultural,
economic and political institutions of Canada to be
both respectful and inclusive of Canada’s
multicultural character
[promotes recognition in our institutions]
• (i) preserve and enhance the use of languages other
than English and French, while strengthening the
status and use of the official languages of Canada
[recognizes English and French as official
languages but also use of other languages; so
preserves aspect of dominant culture]
(Government of Canada, Justice Laws website)
Can multiculturalism truly exist in our
society?
It may be a matter of degrees; at one end of the
multicultural continuum is:
• Social structures such as public institutions
reflect the dominant culture then
accommodation is made for minority groups
At other end of multicultural continuum is:
• An ideology that recognizes and affirms all
cultural diversities and does not preserve or
advantage any single one
Challenges: a dynamic tension
• I think the main issue is implementing
multicultural policy where aspects of the
dominant culture are preserved or
privileged, while affirming the cultural
identities of minority groups through
accommodation.
• And the state needs to be very careful
about reasons for not providing
accommodation.
Quebec Charter of Values provides a
current example of this tension:
• The proposed charter: Bill 60, Charter affirming
the values of State secularism and religious
neutrality and of equality between women and
men, and providing a framework for
accommodation requests (Quebec Official
Publisher, 2013).
• The proposed charter protects some important
facets of Canadian culture and values, such as
the equality between women and men, and
religious neutrality or the separation of religions
and state.
Quebec Charter of Values cont.
• Where it is viewed by some as
unnecessarily restrictive (and going
against principles of multiculturalism) is
the section that prohibits public sector
employees from wearing “objects such as
headgear, clothing, jewelry or other
adornments which, by their conspicuous
nature, overtly indicate a religious
affiliation” (Bill 60, 2013, p. 6)
• In contrast, in 1990 the federal
government lifted ban on RCMP members
wearing a turban (in response to challenge
by person of Sikh religion).
Kymlicka (2008) identifies two concerns related to
multiculturalism and the welfare state:
Concerns are based on premise that “multiculturalism policies are
undermining the national identities and solidarities that have
historically sustained the welfare state” (pp. 61-62)
1) The heterogeneity/redistribution trade-off hypothesis
• Posits that diversity may make it harder for people to come together
and form a national solidarity and support redistribution of wealth
associated with welfare state.
• Although there is some evidence to suggest this is true; Kymlicka
concludes there is need for more research before drawing a
definitive conclusion. He also points out that there is no evidence to
suggest that countries with large foreign-born populations spend
less on social programs than countries with small immigrant
populations (p. 68) or that support for welfare state policies is
eroded (p. 69).
2) The recognition/redistribution trade-off
hypothesis
• Posits that multicultural policies themselves
undermine national solidarity by emphasizing
ethnic difference rather than national
commonalities.
• Reasons speculated:
– 1. Weaker solidarity among citizens
– 2. Diverts attention from other policy approaches
– 3. Draws attention away from ‘real’ problems such as
racism and class division
Recognition/redistribution hypothesis cont.
• To test out this hypothesis, Kymlicka and
colleagues were able to rate countries related to
having adopted strong multicultural policies such
as their approach to immigrant integration (listed
below).
• Kymlicka (2008) concludes “we have found no
support for the claim that there is an inherent
trade-off between policies of ethnocultural
recognition and economic redistribution” (p. 71),
or that multiculturalism undermines support for
redistribution.
Policies common of a ‘multicultural’
approach to immigrant integration:
• “constitutional, legislative or parliamentary affirmation of
multiculturalism;
• the explanation/celebration of multiculturalism in the
school curriculum;
• the inclusion of ethnic representation/sensitivity in the
mandate of public media;
• exemption from dress codes, Sunday-closing legislation
and so on;
• allowing dual citizenship;
• the funding of ethnic group organizations or activities;
• the funding of bilingual education or mother-tongue
instruction; and
• affirmative action for disadvantaged immigrant groups.”
(Kymlicka, 2008, pp. 69-70)
The benefits of Multiculturalism
• Perhaps the benefits are best identified in
comparison to older models of organizing
societies, such as the notion of a homogenous
state with public policies that resulted in
assimilation and exclusion of minority groups.
• So can make a social justice argument for
multiculturalism.
• Are there better alternatives to responding to the
reality of a diverse society? Your thoughts?
References
• Government of Canada, Justice Laws Website,
Canadian Multiculturalism Act.
• Kymlicka, W. (2008). Multiculturalism, social justice and
the welfare state. In G. Craig, T. Burchardt, & D. Gordon
(Eds.), Social justice and public policy: Seeking fairness
in diverse societies (pp. 53-75). Bristol, UK: The Policy
Press.
• Quebec Official Publisher. (2013). Bill 60, Charter
affirming the values of State secularism and religious
neutrality and of equality between women and men, and
providing a framework for accommodation requests
(Quebec Official Publisher, 2013).