Multiculturalism & Will Kymlicka

Geographical Approaches Iris Blom (0511919) Laura Maussart (0512133) H. Ernste 19-12-2006

Table of contents
Introduction 1. What is multiculturalism? The history and causes of multiculturalism Conflicts of multiculturalism When is a country considered multicultural? Multiculturalism versus cosmopolitism Multiculturalism in the Netherlands 2. What is the opinion of Will Kymlicka about multiculturalism? Two models of multiculturalism Immigrants and national minorities Conclusion 8 9 10 4 6 6 7 7 3

3. Other opinions about multiculturalism, and how are they different from Kymlickas opinion? The opinion of Charles Taylor about multiculturalism The opinion of Brain Barry about multiculturalism The opinion of Bhikhu Parekh about multiculturalism Kymlicka, Barry, Taylor and Parekh 11 11 12 12

Conclusion Bibliography

13

14

Introduction
Everywhere you look you see different cultures within a country. Take Canada for example, they have 600 different native races. How does a country deal with all those different people? So many different standards often lead to conflicts. Another example is the country Belgium. In Belgium are two main districts: Walloni and Vlaanderen. These two districts have different languages, French and Dutch. The politics are also different in the two districts, especially with regards to the economic policy. The people who live in Belgium have a regional consciousness. When you ask them where they live, they do not answer with the name of their country, but with that of their district. This type of phenomena is called multiculturalism. In this paper we discuss the main subject multiculturalism and the persons who are involved with multiculturalism. Our main question is:

What

is

multiculturalism, what is the opinion of Will Kymlicka and what is the vision of other scientists about multiculturalism?
In the first chapter we will discuss this definition of multiculturalism further. We will also talk about the history of it, what are the conflicts caused by multiculturalism and finally we discuss when a country is considered multicultural. In the second chapter the man Will Kymlicka will be discussed. This man is a professor in (- the) philosophy at the Queens University Kingston near Ottawa, Canada. He has a strong opinion about multiculturalism. In the third chapter we will compare his opinion with those of other scientists. Charles Taylor, Brain Barry and Bhikhu Parekh will be discussed in this chapter.

1. What is multiculturalism?
Multiculturalism can be defined in many ways, one definition is (Willet, 1998: 1); ..a political, social, and cultural movement which aimed to respect a multiplicity of diverging perspectives outside of dominant traditions. or Multiculturalism is the way to describe how social structures create and maintain different cultures in a society (Wekker, 1998: 44). In this chapter we will talk about this conception, what is the history and what are the causes of multiculturalism? What are the conflicts caused by multiculturalism and finally, when can a country be called multicultural?
The history and causes of multiculturalism The Suisses were the first ones that, in 1957, used the term multiculturalism. Switzerland is a country with four spoken languages and different religions, they introduced the term multiculturalism to identity their country (www.wikipedia.nl/multiculturalisme). Since 1971, the term had changed from different languages/religions in a country to a multicultural country which also accepted migrants and outside cultures. The government of Canada introduced multiculturalism to connect opposite cultures with minority cultures in Canada, this were the opposite English speaking inhabitants verses the minority French speaking inhabitants (www.wikipedia.nl/multiculturalisme). After Canada, other countries like the U.K. and the Netherlands, introduced multiculturalism in the policy of their governments, where different cultures can be accepted within a country. Important is to understand that in a multicultural country the opposite culture doesnt disappear, but the culture is only transformed (Geuijen, 1998). In the period of colonization, from the 15th till the 17th century, Western countries like Portugal and France, placed settlements in Africa and Latin America. This is the first period where people really became aware of the

existence of different cultures. Colonization is one of the causes of globalization. Globalization is the togetherness of international cultures, societies and economics. Trough globalization, the relative distance to another country became smaller. This also lead to bigger inequalities in the world, the difference between the rich West (or North) and the poor South only became bigger trough globalization. The threshold for migration is now lower then ever, through this process the number of different cultures within a country has grown. Tourism had also grown trough globalization, especially long-distance travelling has grown. Through migration and tourism the knowledge of other countries and cultures has grown, this is an important cause of multiculturalism. Through this process of globalization, keeping local cultures and an own identity become more important, people resist to one dominant Western culture (Geuijen, 1998). Besides globalization, there are other causes of migration, for example refugee-migration. This can be split up in forced migration and labour migration. Forced migration is migration caused by the fact that people have no choice, they have to flee because of war or natural disasters. Labour migration is a form of migration by choice, for example people hope to find a job in another country to make more money for them or their family. In the Netherlands for example: from 1955 to 1975, lots of men from Turkey came to the Netherlands to work, in the first place only temporary (Wilterdink, 1998). The men stayed and brought their women to the Netherlands and they also got children. In other words, the migration went from temporary labour migration to family reunification to family formation (Wilterding, 1998). Labour migration and forced migration is a cause of multiculturalism. People from different cultures move to the same country so that more cultures live together. Multiculturalism is a very old phenomenon and will always be a complicated concept. The main causes of multiculturalism are colonisation, globalization and migration. 5

Conflicts of multiculturalism Multiculturalism can lead to conflicts in a country. Every culture has its own identity, standards and values, not all natives of a country can respect the values of another culture, therefore this leads to problems with immigrants (Geijen, 1998). Migrants often have their famliy in their former country. They send money to them and keep on having their influence in their former country. The result of this is that the gap between natives and immigrants does not disappear (Wilterdink, 1998). The main problem exists between Islamic and Christian people. In Western Europe the gap between Islamic people (for example from Turkey and Morocco) and native people is big because of different thoughts and ideas of, for example, sex and women. Migrants sometimes role into the criminal sector because of frustration of not getting a job or not being accepted in a country. This leads to further disrimination from natives to migration. So the problems in relation to integration are a vicious circle that cannot be solved without big changes from the government or the market. In the last five years, through terrorism, the difference between Islamic and Western people grew enormously. The difference between cultures in a country does not disappear, that is why it is important to respect and accept other cultures, that is the only way to solve the conflicts. When is a country considered multicultural? A country can be called multicultural when the policy of the government is aimed at stimulating the relation between different cultures in the country. A country is also multicultural when the inhabitants of a country respect other cultures and do not discriminate. In practice, there is no country where this is actually happening. But in many countries the government is stimulating multiculturalism. A government can stimulate this trough the following policy-objectives (www.wikipedia.nl/multiculturalisme).

Acceptation of habits from immigrants, like the wearing of veils for example; The allowance of having two passports; Building of mosques; The creation of jobs for ethnic minorities; These are examples of stimulating cultures to accept and understand eachother. Multiculturalism versus cosmopolitism The biggest difference between these two main subjects is that multiculturalism strives for the preservation of their own culture. Culture is also important in relation to migration. In comparison to multiculturalism, the cosmopolitism supporters think that you have to be free to choose your own culture. This should not be dependent on where you come from. There should be no borders in the development of the cultural human being. The rights of a individual are more important then a culture according to the supporters of cosmopolitism. Multiculturalism in the Netherlands In the Netherlands we have a multicultural society. In our country live different cultures together. There are problems with the integration of immigrants. But the media enlarges the problems of immigrants. When immigrants are in the media, it is most of the time in a negative perspective. This does not stimulate the integration of the minorities. When you hear something negative in the news that your minority group affects, the responding is automatically negative. So this is a kind of vicious circle.

2. What is the multiculturalism?

opinion

of

Will

Kymlicka

about

Will Kymlicka is a professor in the philosophy at the University of Ottawa in Canada. Kymlicka's work is philosophical, but is also applied to current issues and debates. His main subjects are diversity, identity, rights, culture, liberal tradition and of course multiculturalism. These are different subjects with a lot of discussion about it. According to Kymlicka the definition of multiculturalism is: .. a supplement to, not a substitute for, citizenship (Kymlicka, 2001; 153). In this chapter we will discuss Kymlickas opinion of multiculturalism. Furthermore, we have a paragraph about two models of multiculturalism made by Kymlicka, and a paragraph about national minorities and immigrants and the difference between them according to Kymlicka.
Two models of multiculturalism The three major immigrant countries in the West are Australia, United States and Canada. These countries have over a 150 years of experience with immigrants. These immigrants are socially, politically and economical completely integrated in the countries. This was in the 19th century an impressive achievement (Kymlicka, 2001; 152). Nowadays there are a lot of doubts about integration. The governments are afraid of terms such as ghettoizationd and Balkanization. (Kymlicka, 2001; 152). Because this process does not stimulate a multicultural society. They blame the immigrants that they are less willing to integrate. But the main cause is the policy of the governments themselves. The governments have changed their opinions about immigrants. In order to come to good integration it is important that natives respect the foreign culture inspite of the fact that the culture go against our liberal-democratic values. Around the 1960s three major immigrant countries worked according to the anglo-conformity model in relation to immigration. This model implies that immigrants in the course of time adopt the native culture and the standards. In

the sixties it was obvious they integrated in respect to almost all aspects of society. After a period of time there would be no difference anymore between immigrants and the local inhabitants. Their pronunciation, the way they dress, the food and the identity became the same. This model was very important for the government. Through this model they could create productive and loyal members of the society. The second model was coined at the beginning of the seventies. Under pressure of the immigrants the model of the sixties changed. To keep the culture of the immigrants alive the government became more tolerant towards the immigrants. This model is called the multicultural model. The first government who used this model was Canada in 1971. After Canada more countries followed. So the angloconformity model has changed into the multiculturalism model. Immigrants and national minorities In this chapter we will discuss the difference between immigrants en national minorities. It is important to talk about this difference, because in relation tot multiculturalism, these terms are often be used for the same. While Kymlicka thinks that these terms are different from each other. First we define immigrants and national minorities and after this we discuss the difference between them according to Kymlicka. Immigrants are: People who arrive under an immigration policy which gives them the right to become citizens after a relatively short period of time say 3-5 years subject only to minimal conditions (e.g. learning the official language, and knowing something about the countrys history and political institutions). (Kymlicka, 2001; 153) Kymlicka says the following about national minorities (www.uregina.ca): National minorities are groups that have in common some or all of history, community, territory, language, or culture. Each of these is sometimes referred to as a nation, people, or culture. Each of these may have become a minority involuntarily through conquest, colonization, or expansion, or 9

it could have voluntarily agreed to enter a federation with one or more other nations, peoples, or cultures. I define national minorities in terms of culture, and argue that if these minorities wish to retain their cultures, they should be recognized as distinct. The difference between immigrants and national minorities is the form of integration. Immigrants accept the fact that they have to integrate and adapt to the dominant social culture. In stead of immigrants, national minorities resist integration and fight to maintain their own social culture (Kymlicka, 2001). By reference to chapter 1.2 about conflicts of multiculturalism it can be concluded that national minorities get more involved in conflicts than immigrants. An example of this is Spain. In Spain there exists a national minority: The Basques. They see their region (the Basque county) as their territory. They want to be seen as an independent region. That is why they are in conflict with the government of Spain. Another example of integration according to immigrants are the Indonesian people in the Netherlands. They are highly integrated in the Dutch society and do not have conflicts. They speak the official language, know something about the Dutch history and political institutions. To sustain as a national minority group, Kymlicka says, you have to create public institutions to survive in the modern world. This only works trough the use of your own language. Otherwise the language and so the culture will disappear. Conclusion After all that has been said above, we can conclude that there are two terms related to multiculturalism: immigrants and national minorities. Immigrants accept the native culture and adapt to the society. National minorities resist integration and fight to maintain their own social culture. This theory from Kymlicka can be discussed. Our opinion is that the theory does not fit for all countries. In the Netherlands for example the immigrants (like people from the Dutch Antilles and Moroccans) have not all accepted the Dutch social culture. Meanwhile the national minorities in the Netherlands (like the Frisians) are not 10

resisting being integrated into the Dutch culture. Even the Frisian culture is very slowly becoming faint. So the theory is not in all cases the right one.

3. Other opinions about multiculturalism, and how they are different from Kymlickas opinion
In the previous chapter, we already gave our critique on the opinion of Kymlicka. There are also other scientists who discuss the opinion of Kymlicka about multiculturalism. In this chapter we will describe the opinions of Charles Taylor, Brian Barry and Bhikhu Parekh about multiculturalism and how these are different from Kymlickas.
The opinion of Charles Taylor about multiculturalism Taylor is a supporter of equality between the majority and the minority. Every group in the society must be able to practice their culture. So when another culture comes in contact with a new country, the country has to welcome them as an equal. In practice, this is not always reality, because there are always prejudices. But Taylor says also that the culture that comes into a country can not claim equality. When minorities claim to be handled equal it is a form of disrespect. Only when cultures live together they can give a grounded opinion about the other culture. It takes a while to understand and respect other cultures. A liberal society can only develop well to give the minorities the same fundamental rights as the majority. (www.fontys.nl and www.migrantenstudies.nl) The opinion of Brain Barry about multiculturalism The more critical opinion about the preservation of cultures is from Barry. His critique is that cultures still exists because the fear of losing them. The individual has nothing to say in this opinion. Cultures exist for the outside world but not for

11

the individuals. For example for tourists. Often, individuals have no connection to their culture. Barry says that different cultures do not have to see each other as equal. Psychologically seen it is too much to demand from people but it is also not necessary. Equality is not a necessary condition to treat the citizens right, according to Barry. Barry says there is something like tolerance. Tolerance means that you treat people equal but you do not see them as equal. (www.migrantenstudies.nl and www.fondspascaldecroos.com) The opinion of Bhikhu Parekh about multiculturalism Culture is, according to Parekh, not a given entity but a process that always changes. Culture has two sides: as a context and as a product of human choices. Individuals are a member of a culture, this is a fact. They can not walk away from their roots. But their identity can not determine their culture. So the meaning of the word culture has two different sides. For a part the human life is determined by the culture. (www.migrantenstudies.nl) Kymlicka, Barry, Taylor and Parekh So, the difference between the opinions of the mentioned scientists can roughly be seen as Barry versus Kymlicka, Taylor and Parekh. Kymlicka, Taylor and Parekh say that the culture is important for the individuals. This is a liberal consideration, because individuals can make their own choices. On the other hand, Barry says that liberalism and multiculturalism do not have any thing in common (www.rolandpierik.nl). Barry says also that the individual gives no meaning to its culture.

12

Conclusion
There are many ways to define multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is a many-sided concept. In our opinion it is the task of the government to stimulate multiculturalism. In many countries this is not happening. Because of this, conflicts arise within a country between different cultures, for example the conflicts between Islamic and Western people. The main causes of multiculturalism are colonisation, globalization and migration. Kymlicka is a professor at the Queens University in Canada . Multiculturalism is a main subject in his books. He defined two models with regards to multiculturalism: the anglo-conformity model and the multicultural-model. In short the anglo-conformity model is a model that means that immigrants in the course of time adopt the native culture and standards. The second model, the multicultural-model, is a model that says in order to keep the culture of the immigrants alive, the government must become tolerant towards the immigrants. So Kymlicka says that the first model changed into the second one. According to Kymlicka there are two terms referring to multiculturalism: immigrants and national minorities. Immigrants accept the native culture and adapt to the society. National minorities resist integration and fight to maintain their own social culture. A couple of other scientists agree with this statement about multiculturalism of Kymlicka. Taylor and Parekh agree with Kymlicka, they say that the culture is important for the individuals. This is a liberal consideration, because individuals can make their own choices. The scientist B. Barry disagrees with Kymlicka. He says that liberalism and multiculturalism do not have any thing in common. Barry also says that the individual gives no meaning to its culture. So multiculturalism will always change and there will never be a consensus about what is wrong or right according to the concept.

13

Bibliography
Literature: Geuijen, C.H.M., Wekker, G., Wilterdink, M. e.a. (1998), Multiculturalisme, Lemma B.V., Utrecht. Kymlicka, W. (2001), Politics in the Vernacular: Nationalism, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship, Oxford University Press Inc., New York. Willet, C. (1998), Theorizing Multiculturalism, A Guide to the Current Debate, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford. Websites: Fonds Pascal de Croos, www.fondspascaldecroos.com/scriptiebank/2002/de_schutter.html, 23-09-2006 Fontys, http://www.fontys.nl/generiek/bronnenbank/sendfile.aspx?id=19911, 2309-2006 Liberales, www.liberales.be/cgi-bin/showfraim.pl?boek&kymlicka, 23-09-2006 Migrantenstudies, www.migrantenstudies .nl/inhoud/2003-2/MS%2020032%20Prins.doc, 23-09-2006 Roland Pierik, www.rolandpierik.nl/Theory/Downloads?R&R.pdf, 23-09-2006 Uregina, http://uregina.ca/~gingrich/k1.htm, 23-09-2006 Wikipedia, http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalisme, 23-09-2006

14