Diversity has become a core area of discussion when it comes to culture, society and immigration. Our world is increasingly becoming a place where many people live in cultures other than their own. At present, it is rare to find a country with a homogenous society. People from different cultures, ethnicities, backgrounds and religions are living side by side in unprecedented ways.
The introduction of the internet and mass media has made people aware of differences in nations. Some countries such as Canada have opened up their borders to attract immigrants that the country needs to thrive. Political, economical, social and religiously driven unrest have forced many people to flee their home countries. Additionally, the advancements in transport have made global mobility a reality instead of a farfetched dream.
We are in a time where there is rife debate on the idea of diversity and Multiculturalism. Many European leaders have recently declared that multiculturalism has failed. Some, such as British Prime Minister David Cameron have gone as far as partially blamed multiculturalism for fostering Islamist extremism[1]. Diversity could threaten the national culture and values, they seem to argue. On the other hand, many others believe diversity has enriched the fabric of their society. Diversity helps broaden the perspective and tolerance of a people. It also helps them learn to deal better with different cultures and broaden view of the world.
In my assessment, diversity can be both a challenge and an enrichment to citizenship. I believe that diversity is a positive factor in encouraging citizens to thrive in terms of tolerance, creativity and to stop the society from being a homogenous one with dogmatic views. On the other hand, I do believe that there needs to be base agreements on core values and societal norms that connect all these diverse citizens together.
A society where everyone only follows their own cultural background is a society where the citizens are not united in any way. A society with non-unified people will not advance. People need to take pride in their country, believe in it and aim to advance it. Citizens of a country should respect diversity and welcome new immigrants while holding onto what is the fundamental meaning of being a citizen of that nation. For example, a commitment to respecting religious beliefs, adhering to human rights, fighting against discrimination and believing in democracy are example of things that could be basic national values. These values could be seen as the core foundations of citizens in a specific country for example. Another such factor would be language. People should have a good command and be able to communicate in the language of the country they live in. This is not to say that if the language from their cultural backgrounds is different they should abandon it. On the contrary, as citizens of a diverse nation, they should relish and be fluent in both.
A further look into the words of European leaders could help us understand the issue more. President Sarkozy made his views clear recently on a television interview. "Of course we must all respect differences, but we do not want... a society where communities coexist side by side. If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France," he is quoted as saying by an Agence France-Presse article[2]. "The French national community cannot accept a change in its lifestyle, equality between men and women... freedom for little girls to go to school...we have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.”
Sarkozy here is both making a good point, yet also taking it a little too far. His belief that immigrants should “melt into the national community” seems to be somewhat extreme. It seems to imply that people have to fit in and be homogenous instead of following the core French values while being distinctive. However, he is right in that immigrants should not go to France and try to enforce forms of cultural beliefs or values that clash with the national French identity. He makes a good point when he talks about the fact that there was not enough concern about the identity of France. There must be a social glue that binds together French citizens. There should be an attempt to define what it means to be a citizen of France. That definition should make a commitment to also respect the diversity of the French population. This is what I mean by the idea that there should be core societal values that are supplemented by diversity.
Comments by British Prime Minister David Cameron also echo the sentiment that multiculturalism fails if there is no national identity. “Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream,” he is quoted as saying in an MSNBC article [3]. “We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong,” he is quoted as saying. Stressing on my earlier point, a society where people do not feel like they belong could foster a feeling of apathy and separation between citizens. One of the keys to good citizenship is being active in society and caring about your country. I agree with the view that a sense of national pride should be encouraged in new immigrants. The challenge here is to stop making them feel like outsiders and to truly embrace them in a way that will instill in them the motivation to adopt the basic core national values while living with their cultural identity.
Irene Bloemraad an associate professor at the University of California at Berkeley, scholar and author, argues that in a country like Canada multiculturalism and diversity work. In a Globe and Mail article she states that her research shows that multiculturalism is a key factor in the successful citizenship integration. “It legitimates diversity, provides a sense of inclusion and, through the multitude of (oft-maligned) government grants given to community-based organizations – not only for multiculturalism but also for a host of integration programs – it provides the support structures to help newcomers join the country as full citizens,” she states[4]. It is key to note here that she mentions a sense of inclusion. This supports my point that when included in society, immigrants or culturally diverse citizens feel like they belong to the culture and thus will add to it.
“Like health care and hockey, multiculturalism has become a symbol of what defines Canada. In poll after poll, Canadians say multiculturalism is one of the top three defining features of the country. What’s more, they are proud of it,” Bloemraad states. “They should be. Over four decades, incredibly rapid demographic change has transformed Canada, especially its largest cities. In Europe, similar change has resulted in riots and cultural tensions that have tarnished the concept of multiculturalism there. But, in Canada, these changes, despite many challenges, happened peacefully, productively and positively. Multiculturalism was part of the solution, not the problem.” Her views show that the value of multiculturalism has become a part of what it means to be Canadian. This seems to be one of the basic values that defines a Canadian citizen. The fact that individuals with diverse backgrounds are welcomed and made to feel an integral part of the society could encourage them to participate in it more. This is how Europe, in my opinion, has failed. Canada’s multicultural policy has ensured from the start that immigrants and diverse individuals are not treated as second-class citizens but as part of the Canadian society.
There is no doubt that diversity with all its benefits can be challenging to the idea of citizenship. Recent problems in Europe have highlighted this. The words by European leaders show that there is a crisis with dealing with diversity, creating national pride and including immigrants and citizens with diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds. The only way forward is to focus on the idea of citizenship that makes citizens appreciate for and look to diversity while maintaining pride in their nationality. This can be done by fostering a sense of commitment to core values that bring the citizens together. Without this citizen-cohesion, diversity will never be able to flourish in a way that benefits society and the individual citizen.
Sources:
[1] (2011, February 06). British PM: Multiculturalism has failed. MSNBC.com.
Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41444364/
[2] (2011, February 10). Multiculturalism has failed, says French president. Agence France-Presse
Retrieved from http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jR1m5BpdMrDES3u4Cso1v3FwQRUg?docId=CNG.6b096ac0cdcfce7a0f599fbbb1c85c27.911
[3] (2011, February 06). British PM: Multiculturalism has failed. MSNBC.com.
Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41444364/
[4] (2011, February 10). Multiculturalism has been Canada’s solution, not its problem. The Globe and Mail.
Retrieved from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/multiculturalism-has-been-canadas-solution-not-its-problem/article1775471/