achieving integration in multicultural societies

7/31/2019 Achieving Integration in Multicultural Societies

1/5

Key Issues

It is within this context that I intend to explore the following three issues/questions:

1 Is cultural diversity a threat to Integration?2 Is it possible to maintain good race relations with increasing diversity?3 How might social inclusion based on good race relations be successfully achieved inmulticultural societies?

As key factors in shaping divisions in societies, diversityand difference exercised the minds of socialthinkers for centuries particularly in relation to understanding and explaining racial conflict. Presently,with the ever increasing movements of people, the latter it would appear presents less of aphilosophical challenge than it does a moral dilemma with governments across the world franticallyseeking policy solutions to harmonise community conflicts that are underpinned by concerns aroundcultural and ethnic diversity. It is therefore crucial for contemporary scholars to seek ways in whichindividuals and societies can live amicable with diversity, particularly in the light of an irreversible patternof increased global migration which brings with it wider diversity within nation states.

The complexion of Britain, for example, is changing and, as a result, communities have become morediverse in terms of race, nationality and ethnic background. Further, the asylum seekers dispersalprogramme has led to a growth of new communities in neighbourhoods across Britain and, in somecases, tensions between new arrivals and local communities. There is now a greater diversity within


2/5

-2-

diversity, which can create its own tensions but also importantly, opportunities. What it means to beBritish is different now and will be different in the future from what it has been in the past.

Currently, within Britain, there is discourse around the threat that migration poses for stability particularlyin relation to asylum seekers and refugees, where polls consistently show Britons over-estimate thenumber of asylum seekers coming to the country and pessimism remains about the state of racerelations generally.

A conflation of popular disaffection, the absence of moral/political leadership in the face of deafeningand bullying media comment on asylum is creating a vacuum that is being easily filled by an increasinglyplausible far right agenda for certain white communities. Such developments are not necessarily uniqueto Britain as there is evidence to suggest that these patterns are mirrored elsewhere in Europe.

It is therefore critical to shift the debate on migration to one which is grounded in opportunity, where thefocus is on the benefits of migration and the emphasis on respecting diversity with the latter beingreconstructed as a positive rather than a negative element of integration.

Content

A fundamental problem with the notion of cultural, ethnic or racial diversity is that it is often,negatively constructed, narrowly defined and selectively interpreted. For instance, it is more readilyused to refer to mainly minority communities, often ignoring cultural differences between and

amongst majority, essentially white communities. Similarly, the idea of diversity within minoritycommunities who are themselves diverse is not fully explored. And, finally, the concept is curiouslymore often than not associated with immigrants. Cultural diversity is therefore perceived assomething that is not necessarily part of a given society but rather, as something that emerges fromthe outside thus posing a threat to an otherwise stable, solid, cohesive nation state.

Similarly, the process of immigration (which brings with it diversity) whilst global, more often thannot is perceived as a national threat, particularly in relation to national identity; public services;employment and educational opportunities. Such fears result in social closure constructed alongcultural, racial and religious lines and is effectively sustained by misinformation, stereotypes andprejudices creating greater tensions within communities, poor race relations and greater divisions

between people and that are culturally or racially different.

For example, reaction to the arrival of immigrants to Britain mainly from the ex-colonies between1945-1982, was marked with overt fear, suspicion and concern with the then government andmedia playing a key role during this period, in creating unsavoury images of the so-called colouredarrivals who were portrayed as a grave danger to British identity and culture. Such negativereactions created notable divisions between immigrants and settled communities, soured socialrelationships and sowed the seeds for contemporary forms of racism and social segregation. InBritain, immigrants continue to be viewed as alien and outsiders purely on the basis of their cultural,ethnic or religious differences. Such conceptions, invariably impact on contemporary definitions ofidentities, with those of immigrant origin being defined and labelled as ethnic minorities-henceoccupying a position that lies on the margins of mainstream British society with the majority still notfully accepted or socially integrated into mainstream British society despite being born here orhaving political citizenship for some 40 years.


3/5

-3-

It might be argued therefore that the real threat to integration is not necessarily cultural diversity perse but fear and reluctance on the part of receiving nations to accept and respect diversity anddifference. The evidence on the ground suggests that most receiving nations, in responding to thesettlement of immigrants, tend to grapple with the complexity of irresolvable cultural differenceswhich they attempt to neutralise by assimilation rather than on fostering inclusion based on commonvalues underpinned by for example, equality, fairness and justice.

Based on British experience, It may be argued that if nation states are to be truly multicultural thenindividuals and communities would need to become comfortable with their own identifies. Thismight mean confronting fears about the loss of traditionally defined national or personal identitiesand a willingness to embrace a new vision for the creation of whole and integrated communities.More importantly, it will also mean managing the tensions between traditional and modern social

attitudes to difference and candidly seeking to address the somewhat difficult issues arising fromconflicting belief systems whether these be faith, class or culturally based.

Achieving the above requires strong political commitment and leadership as often immigration andasylum issues are ruthlessly used by political parties to foster their own political ends. This processcould involve, frank discussions and debate within a negotiable human rights framework with a viewto both facilitating and seeking to promote good race relations and social inclusion.

Britain is unique in that it specifically legislates on good race relations. The 1976 Race relationsAct (amended in 2000) embodies a duty to promote equality of opportunity and good race relationsbetween persons of different racial groups. Worth noting is the fact that, this piece of legislationemerged within a climate of strong anti-immigrant sentiment in the post war period with a view tocreating stable, integrated communities.

Yet, despite being in place for almost a quarter of a century, it is evident that British society remainsdeeply divided in parts with communities being socially, and sometimes even spatially, segregatedalong racial, cultural and religious lines. Indeed, the disturbances in our Northern towns of Burnley,Bradford and Oldham in 2001; the events following11th September; high profile media coverage ofasylum seeker and refugee issues, and the rise of the far right across Europe have reawakened

deeply rooted prejudices and stereotypes which have resulted in an increase in racism andxenophobia, directed mainly at new arrivals. The latter while not necessarily white are nevertheless,culturally and religiously different and are perceived as a threat to settled communities, some whoare themselves culturally diverse and marginalised from mainstream British society. Indeed, recentevidence reveals that the latter appear more threatened by the arrival of new migrants that theirindigenous counterparts.

So what does good relations mean within this context? Legislation has been useful to some extentbut good race relations clearly rests upon developing harmonious relationships built around anawareness and understanding of and respect for different cultures. Moreover, it is essential to insurethat institutional practices do not contribute directly or indirectly to the creation of inequalities,marginalisation and social exclusion. Notion of good race relations which strongly influenced earlyBritish academic thinking on immigrants and related race discrimination matters have transformedover time but remains relevant to our contemporary thinking, especially in regard to solutions for


4/5

-4-

building integrated communities. Presently, the idea of good race relations can be best described asbeing underpinned by core principles of equality, unity, respect and co-operation between groups ofpeople that are culturally, religiously and racially different.

In this context, cultural diversity is not necessarily a challenge to good race relations andmulticultural nation states can foster social inclusion and good race relations if they create theappropriate environment for change. The latter can be achieved by ensuring equal rights and equalopportunities for all individuals; accepting the rights of all individuals to identify with and maintaintheir cultural heritage but at the same time sharing an underlying identity based on a sense ofbelonging to a wider inclusive community rooted in common citizenship.

Achieving this would require a step change to increase levels of public confidence so that people

and communities are able to trust and believe that there is a meaningful role for them to play in thecivic, economic and political life of the state. Thus it might be argued that the real threat to socialexclusion and harmonious race relations is disadvantage, inequality and discrimination notnecessarily diversityper se.

We should not give in to the notion that divided communities are the authors of their own social

exclusion through some perverse refusal to get along. I have argued above that although resistanceto immigrants are often constructed around ethnic and cultural diversity, very often aspects of socialexclusion lie deeply embedded within the structure of societies, connected to long-standingdiscontentment and disengagement from public affairs and in certain circumstances, the arrival ofnew migrants is somewhat of a final straw.

The complexities of racial exclusion must therefore be considered within a broader framework ofsocial class and other forms of social inequalities. Strategies to address social exclusion musttherefore be holistic and jointly owned by key stakeholders but driven by a political desire for socialinclusion with a strong commitment to foster proper civic engagement around common core values.Attempts to address settlement of immigrants have generally focused primarily on the induction ofnew arrivals with an expectation that they will assimilate and become part of the host state. Instead,it is being suggested here that integration is a two way process- in addition to preparing newarrivals for settlement, societies themselves ought to evolve and be flexible to adapt to diversity- apoint which requires to be addressed by those designing policy nationally as well as those deliveringservices on the ground.

Locally, all sectors have a responsibility to remedy inequality and promote positive interaction/goodrace relations but the role of central, devolved and local government is pivotal. In particular, theirresponsibility to provide the leadership and the means to address these issues is crucial. Forexample, in Britain, since the 60s the government has progressively increased sanctions against

discrimination as reflected in our successive Race Relations Legislation (1965; 1976; 2000) andcontinues to place emphasis on the requirements to promote equality and good race relations.


5/5

-5-

Yet it is important to note that legislation whilst being an extremely powerful tool for change islimited in terms of bringing about cultural and attitude change. Ultimately, the success of strategiesto deliver social inclusion will depend on regular mainstream activities, including for example, a clearunderstanding the nature of diverse communities; establishing evidence base for policy on race-related matters; joining up policy objectives; but more critically, promoting a culture and a climate inwhich equality and citizenship are synonymous values; and discrimination is socially unacceptablethus instilling confidence in communities to address points of difference and commonality withmaturity.

achieving integration in multicultural societies

Documents