Multiculturalism and the plural society
Multiculturalism attempts to deal with some of the problems radical pluralism raise in a more grounded and normative approach. Multiculturalism can be rooted in pluralist thought because it is based on the idea that no single set or norms or values should dominate a society and that the role of the state should be about reconciling different interests rather than ensuring the dominance of a particular group.
It can be traced back to the notions of the plural society which develop as a way of analyzing colonial societies where different groups were forced together. Consequently, within a colonial system there could be a number of ethnic groups living side by side with little interaction and each maintaining their traditional patterns of social life, norms and values (see Nichols 1974). However, unlike notions of multiculturalism which is seen as normatively good, plural societies were held together merely by the existence of a shared economic system and force.Multiculturalism has become one of the central debates in political theory. Whilst in many ways it differs from the sorts of pressure group pluralism we have discussed earlier in the chapter, and unlike the notion of a plural society, it does not see a multicultural society as being based on force but as being normatively good. It reflects some of the themes that reoccur in plural society. First, multiculturalism is based on the notion of group identities. What is important for multiculturalists is group rights. Second, multiculturalists are opposed to the notion that a single group (and in particular the majority group) can dominate other groups. The basis of multiculturalism is the equal treatment of groups and so the role of the state is to balance conflicting group interests. There is a presumption amongst some multiculturalists such as Walzer that the state ‘stands above all the various ethnic and nationalist groups in the country’ (Kymlicka 2001: 16).
Walzer in particular, like the mainstream American pluralists, takes a benign view of the US state seeing it as ‘neutral among the various thick cultures sustained by different groups of immigrants’ (Walzer 2001: 151). However, the multiculturalist debate has been moved on to examine how the state should develop a positive role in developing and protecting the rights of minority groups. This view is based again on a benign view that the state is the force able, and possibly willing, to protect the rights of minorities. Of course, whilst in some liberal states, policy will make rhetorical concessions to minority rights, the impact on groups in terms of employment, housing and education may be limited. Other liberal states, such as France, are still concerned with protecting the rights of majorities from a multiculturalist frame.Multiculturalists also draw on the pluralist tradition of seeing rights as group based rather than individually based. It may be a good thing to protect the rights of Muslims to sustain their culture and religion in Britain. However, there may be some Muslim women who want to have their rights protected as individuals rather than as Muslims. Why should our rights be linked to groups that are essentially arbitrary? This, of course, is the dilemma of multiculturalism: how do group rights impact on individual rights and is their a tension between the two sets of rights?
More on the topic Multiculturalism and the plural society:
- Risk society and ecological modernization
- Civil society and social capital
- Law and Society
- 8.1 MAKING POLITICAL SOCIETY IN AN INTERNATIONAL AGE
- CHAPTER 12 Global Governance and the Myth of Civil Society Participation
- Reproducing the Myth of Civil Society Participation in Global Policymaking
- Identifying the Myth of Civil Society Participation in Global Governance
- Morality is a subject that interests us above all others: we fancy the peace of society to be at stake in every decision concerning it;
- Governance is shorthand for the pursuit of collective interests and the steering and coordination of society.
- Cairns J.W., Plessis P.J. du. (eds.). Beyond Dogmatics: Law and Society in the Roman World. Edinburgh University Press,2007. - 236 p., 2007
- Berger Adolf. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law. Philadelphia: The American philosophical Society,1953. — 479 p., 1953
- Pluralism has been one of the most dominant frameworks for understanding politics in mainstream political science.
- INTRODUCTION