By: nikky Howard
Submitted: 2010-07-06 23:47:32 | Word Count: 1249
A backlash against multiculturalism has been building in Europe over the previous couple of years.
The high profile murder of the Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh at the hands of the Islamist, Mohammad Bouyeri, was a wakeup call for many. The bombings in London and Madrid drove home the message that the multicultural status quo way from being a successful model for harmonious co-existence, is in fact creating a gulf of separation between communities and providing sanctuary for those whose primary objective is to attack the host societies from within.
[ advertisement ]
The backlash in Europe has led to greater support for parties on the far right. For example in Holland the Freedom Party has emerged as a significant contender in Dutch politics. Within the UK the govt. is tightening up citizenship needs, and just recently issued pointers that can enable faculty authorities to ban varieties of non secular dress such as the niqab. In France there is a growing chorus calling for harder immigration laws and a crack down on immigrant crime. Presidential hopeful, Nicolas Sarkozy, has been reading the tea leaves and is now taking part in to a constituency that far right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen may consider a most well-liked audience.
These reactions are entirely predictable. However the matter with this backlash and the principles and regs being introduced is that it doesn't address the foundation of the problem. These are cosmetic measures at best. At worse they'll even deepen cross-cultural hostility.
A basic hypocrisy lies at the foundation of the problematic European experiment with multiculturalism, and it's the view that multiculturalism may be a kind of creche for immigrants. The host societies have not viewed themselves as equal partners within the multicultural mosaic.The recent blood-and-soil read of culture still reigns supreme in Europe, as does the covert racism and elitism that's inherent in that sort of cultural ascendancy.
In distinction to the US where assimilation is the overriding priority, the host societies in Europe have historically most well-liked to play the role of benevolent parent. So naturally they are horrified that the youngsters they invited into their home and placed in the creche have turned out to be unruly. Some subversive brats are even keen on putting stink bombs and booby traps around the house. This late hour attempt to toughen up the principles will merely have the result of hardening attitudes on both sides. Perhaps even making a bad scenario worse.
France may be a good example of a European double commonplace that masquerades as equality. The public line that advocates of French multiculturalism like to market is that the French are egalitarians with an inclusive, laissez-faire approach. Nothing might be additional from the truth. The recent rioting by Muslim youths in France was really an explosion of rage returning from individuals who have been marginalized by racism and systemic discrimination. The notorious sink estates that are home to immigrants bear witness to a sort of unofficial segregation. A "French 1st" mentality on the part of the host culture just about ensures that if you are a young second or third generation Frenchman, but happen to be named Ali or Hassan, your possibilities of getting a tight job are slim to zero.
A host society's liberal pluralism that celebrates the distinctiveness of immigrant communities while at the identical time exercising cultural prejudice on a private level, could be a societal powder keg within the making. New immigrants should be encouraged to assume a cultural identity based on individual worth, not an identity that is just an extension of their ethnic community. This individualism should place them on an equal footing with host citizens and allow for assimilation in real terms.
Within the US, the Yankee creed serves this purpose. In contrast to Europe where immigrants will often say they're "Muslim" 1st or "Moroccan" first, newly minted US voters from all quarters of the globe are happy to announce they are "Yankee" first, and solely American. When they do reference their ethnic and non secular background, it's a non-public disclosure, rather than a public assertion or protest.
Things in Europe is terribly serious. European paternalism and what the French thinker Bernard-Henri Levy characterised as societies of "blood and soil", are sleep walking toward a disaster. Their birth rate is falling precipitously as they patronize immigrants who place a high worth on fertility. In Italy some 50% of females within the sixteen to 25 bracket claim they do not wish to have any children. By 2050 the population of Italy may shrink by as abundant as a third. In Germany the birth rate has additionally shown a marked decline, particularly in East Germany. According to one demographic study, by 2010 in Europe as a whole there can be additional citizens 60 and older than voters in their twenty's.
What is overlooked by the proponents of European multiculturalism is that together with cultural distinctiveness, immigrant communities additionally bring political agendas. Over and on top of terrorist outrages, there was a deliberate campaign on the half of some Muslim immigrants to challenge the laws of the host societies. Challenges have also been mounted against their customs, traditions and national emblems - such as the flag of St George within the UK. One may argue that the flag needs to travel anyway and that Europe needs a additional inclusive emblems of national identity, but there is some question whether militant Islamists read themselves as candidates for integration in any new deal that needs accommodation.
In contrast to some writers whose criticisms of multiculturalism tend to be sweeping, I'd draw a sharp distinction between the European and Canadian models of multiculturalism. In Canada there is no homogeneous host society rooted in the politics of "blood and soil". Many of the first settlers were themselves outcasts from a category system in Europe in that they felt ostracized, together with the ancestors of the Quebecois with their tightly knit culture. The Initial Nations in Canada represents the sole culture which will claim this kind of ancestral blood relationship with the land.
On the whole Canadian society has been much additional amenable to the aspirations of the individual immigrant. Challenges definitely exist, but I think it is misleading to put Canada in the same class as Europe in a discussion of this sort.
European multiculturalism with its political correctness codes is meant to market harmonious co-existence. Essentially, it's served to radicalize immigrant communities and has created gulfs of separation. The proponents of this failed model currently need an infinite capability for self-deception and denial so as to take care of even passing credibility. They have helped to create this downside, and their advocacy on behalf of a failed social experiment doesn't provide any approach out of the impasse.
By the identical token, rules, regs and right wing blow-back won't give a long term solution either. What is needed in Europe could be a serious effort to urge removed from the community primarily based "sociological" model of multiculturalism. An inclusive European identity is urgently required, one that features immigrants as equal partners - not just within the context of their community - however as people in their own right.
Author Resource:-
Nik has been writing articles online for nearly 2 years now. Not only does this author specialize in Multicultural, you can also check out his latest website about:
