Introduction
From a sociological perspective, the term ‘multiculturalism’ refers to the way in which a particular society responds or deals with issues bordering on cultural diversity. Going by the notion that there is a dire need for people of different cultural backgrounds across the globe to live to gather harmoniously, multiculturalism holds that societies experience a great deal of development and growth by preserving, respecting and encouraging cultural diversity (Longley, 2020); Mitchell, 2017). Furthermore, as a concept, multiculturalism encompasses a number of ideas and political differences, explaining the manner in which societies choose to create and execute formal policies and programmes that are associated with the orderly and equal treatment of different cultures.
From the foregoing, it can be deduced that multiculturalism is a necessary asset and tool that can be leveraged on by world leaders to deal with cultural diversity and its challenges. However, the question that begs for answer in this context is whether multiculturalism should be acknowledged as just a policy or lived experience of people in a given society? Thus, it is in a bid to reflectively justify my answer to this question that this essay becomes relevant. In the course of providing my answer, relevant theories, would be incorporated in the essay.
An overview of multiculturalism: A Discourse of Perspectives
Ronald (2011) argues that cultural diversity only exists in most societies. Probably, this explains why the quest for cultural diversity is visible in the first place as most societies see the need to embrace it, while others do not. On the other hand, there are groups that seize the opportunity of advancing the cause of diversity, to share their dominant hegemonic culture while there are others, especially intellectuals, who criticize the established system and structure (Parekh, 2000).
In another event, Eriksen (2001) states that the idea of multiculturalism was built partly on the Enlightenment notion of individual rights, and partly on the Romanticism idea of people and the right of groups to survive. Based on this, there exists a slight tension regarding the concept of multiculturalism, especially between individual and collective rights. The questions this tension raise are as follows: “Is multiculturalism concerned with the freedom to have one culture or the freedom to be without a specific culture? Is it possible for individuals within groups to choose the particular system they would like to join and practice? And is it possible for individuals within groups to belong and practice with one system? Based on the foregoing, it is important to note that the confusion between individual and collective rights is consequent upon the concept of multiculturalism.
Furthermore, Modood (1997) noted that there is a confusion of the conceptual understanding of multiculturalism given that fact that it is understood differently by different countries in accordance with their socio-political and cultural background. What this means is that while most countries especially those that comprise people from different cultural background can be classified as (multicultural societies), very few others are not multicultural and as such, do not agree to embrace other cultures (Parekh, 2000).
As a concept that has become an essential focus in national and international debates, given its tremendous impact on societies generally Akar & Ulu (2006), multiculturalism is still endowed with a lot of limitations, as some countries across the world are yet to completely accept themselves as immigrant societies Eckardt (2007) and are ready to open up their ideas, knowledge, cultural practices and even borders to others.
Meer & Modood (2016), in their explanation, mentioned that in Europe and across English-speaking States, multiculturalism is rather perceived as the political accommodation by a dominant group of all minority cultures defined by reference attributes such as nationality and aboriginality. Having been perceived as a political movement, it means that multicultural tendencies in these countries would be consequent upon governmental policies and programmes that would be designed in such a way that they would become determinants of whether a country will be open to cultural diversity or not, depending on its domestic policies and national interests (Roald, 2011). For instance, countries that are highly) orthodox (like Serbia) and are unilateral would find it difficult to wholly accept the cultural practices of other countries that liberal and tolerant to all forms of religious, social and political practices with little or no sanctions and well-defined limits to actions. It is based on this backdrop that Meer & Modood (2016, p.48) concluded that “until interculturalism as a political subject is able to provide a credible and all-encompassing perspective, it may not intellectually advance multiculturalism”.
From a sociological perspective, the challenge for multiculturalism in the society is evident in the rate of the unequal access to educational resources as well as conditions attached to cultural diversity by countries, especially those of the global North. Minorities in the above-mentioned countries as well as groups within them are always of the receiving end of the negative implications in regard to the forms and modes of treatment they receive e.g. knowledge disparity and unequal learning differences (Moodod, 2007).
As a general term to scholars: scientists, philosophers, theorists and policy makers, multiculturalism refers to: the existence of many cultures in a space (Beqiri & Sylas, 2021); the identification of group differences within the public sphere of laws, democratic principles and the terms of a shared nationality (Moodod, 2007); a particular political approach to address culturally diverse societies in which the cultural practices of minority groups get the same recognition as those of the cultural practices of the dominate group and a process of building the learning and teaching that offers cultural pluralism (Basbay & Kagnici, 2011).
Is distinguishing multiculturalism as a policy and lived experience important?
Before I delve into my answer to this question, it would be proper to first of all, explain what multiculturalism as a policy and lived experiences mean. Also, in the course of this explanation, the melting pot theory/ Salad bowl hypothesis will be adopted and used to drive home the points raised in the essay.
Multiculturalism as a Policy
According to Jameson (2008), multiculturalism describes the social and political environment that is essential for public policy in managing issues bordering on cultural diversity in culturally diverse societies, focusing on tolerance for cultural differences and mutual respect within a state’s border or territory. Further the author noted that as a policy, multiculturalism deals with the special features of different cultures, especially as they relate to one another within national boundaries.
\In another event, as a policy, multiculturalism is a government’s obligation to implement and ensure that both the state and citizens abide by it in order to advance the state’s national interest. For instance, in countries like Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, multiculturalism has become an official policy that allows for the respect and preservation of the cultures of different ethnic groups. Also multiculturalism as a policy affects public polices and people’s behaviour about their heritage and that of others, and how this can coexist together harmoniously instead of competing (Jameson, 2008).
Additionally, the “multicultural policy index” which is used to evaluate governments’ commitment to the acknowledgement of cultural diversity across twenty-one (21) western countries is another evidence of multiculturalism as a policy that focuses particularly on multicultural policies made to identify, accommodate and support the cultural differences of minority groups (Migration Research Hub, 2021).
Multiculturalism as Lived Experiences
Multiculturalism as lived experiences refers to event or activities shaped by factors like migration, settlement and acculturation devoid of oppression, discrimination and segregation on account of people’s race, colour religion, political ideology and the like. It can also be seen as a situation where an individual or a group of people, especially minorities are valued, respected and embarrassed (World Wellness Groups). Based on the above-mentioned, I dare ask the following question “how far has multiculturalism been achieved whether in the context of valuing the cultures of different ethnic groups or religions in a country or that of intermixing of cultures as is practiced in the United States? how wide has the concept of multiculturalism gone especially in Europe and Asia? And how many countries across the globe has adopted multiculturalism as an official policy?
The reason for this questions is to keep us in track with the fact that multiculturalism is yet to become absorbed by governments of world given its inherent challenges. So, if governments of the world are yet to incorporate this policy into their programmes, why then are we in a rush to differentiate multiculturalism as a policy from multiculturalism as lived experiences when the world is yet to understand the concept, digest it and absorb it?
The Melting Pot Theory/ Salad Bowl Hypothesis
This theory opines that just like metals are melted together by great heat, the melting together of several cultures to the extent that they are valued, appreciated and possibly exchanged regardless of peoples’ race, religion and ideology (2013). The theory is also used to describe societies that are by the accommodation of immigrant cultures, end up producing hybrid cultural and social organisations. A perfect example of a country where this theory is well expressed is the United States, a country with a diverse and distinct breed of people that came from various group of migrants.
In the case of Australia, it can be argued that despite the fluctuating nature of the country’s policies on cultural diversity, especially as regards the migration of people from Europe and Asia, the country’s practice of multiculturalism in the sense of ethnic differences proves that even though the practice is yet to be wholly certified, it has at least gained ground in the country (Quea & Campbell, 2020). This is evident as the Australian national census in 2006 shows that the top five most commonly reported country of birth among six million Australians who were born oversees include: New Zealand 14.7%), China (8.4%) and the Philippines (3.8%). The report also revealed that 49% of Australians are either born overseas otherwise as ‘first generation’, or have at least one parent born overseas otherwise known as ‘second generation’. The remaining 51% are born in Australia to Australian-born parent (third generation) (Hunt, 2017). From the foregoing, one can easily identify the ethnic mix in the country. And even though it may not have reached the state of melting pot, it has at least adopted some features of the salad bowl metaphor.
When it comes to the issue of distinction between multiculturalism as a policy and lived experiences, I am of the opinion that there is no need for such distinctions at the moment. Every policy that is being made has a rationale behind it and this compromises the lived experiences of people in the environment as well as series of events that led to the formulation of that policy. Thus, in this situation, it would rather be a waste of time and government resources to attempt a distinction of multiculturalism, which may result in another round of policy formulation that may end up confusing the citizens.
Although the concept of multiculturalism lacks a clear and an all-encompassing definition as it bears dual meanings – one as a political process and two as lived experiences, it is my opinion that instead of differentiating these meanings, the Australian government should rather integrate both of them in such a way that the cultural differences of people are publicly acknowledged, recognised and institutionalized such that people seize to be defined by their ethnic affiliation politically, and are also treated in line with the degree of their contributions in the country as well as their lived experiences (Malik & Sebel, 2011).
If possible, the political meanings that have been attached to multiculturalism should be expunged given the fact that it has caused a great deal of blame on immigrants and also undermined the positive qualities of cultural diversity as a lived experience. Is it therefore in such a situation that multiculturalism should be differentiated both a policy and life experiences?
My overall opinion is that instead of attempting a distinction of multiculturalism as a policy and lived experience, which will not salvage the challenges of the concepts, effort should be made by the Australian government to collapse both meaning into one, expange the political undertones of the concept, and rather incorporate it as the country’s national interest, which will allow her citizens to come out of their cultural, religious or ethnic boxes and embrace other beliefs, value systems, lifestyle. This way, the country will achieve a far-reaching sustainable development.
Conclusion
The essay examined the concept of multiculturalism. It x-rayed different scholarly explanations of the concept as well as the rationale behind it. Furthermore, the essay took a cursory look at what multiculturalism both as a policy and lived experiences meant, after which it enumerated the reasons why there should not be distinction between the concept as a policy and lived experiences.
References
Beqiri, T. & Sylaj, V. (2021). The Perception of Multiculturalism and the Impact on the social sphere of pupils. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 13(2), 261-282.
Hunt, E. (2017, June 27). Barely Half of Population born in Australia to Australian-born parents. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/june/27/australia-reaches-tipping-point-with-quarter-of-population-born-overseas#maincontent.
Jameson, J. H. (2008). Interpretation of Archaeology for the public. Encyclopedia of Archaeology. https://doi.org/10.1016/8978.012373962-9-00423-4.
Maddern, S.W. (2013). Melting Pot Theory. The Encyclopedia of Global Human Migration. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.102/9781444351071.wbeghm359.
Malik, K. & Sebej, F. (2011). Multiculturalism at its limits? Managing diversity in the New Europe. https://www.eurozine.com/multiculturalism-at-its-limits/
Mitchell, K. (2017). Multiculturalism. The International Encyclopedia of Geography. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314243134_Multiculturalism.
Modood, T. (1997). “Introduction” in Tanq Modood & Pnina Werbner (eds.). The Politics of Multiculturalism in the New Europe: Racism, Identity, and Community, Palgrave Macmillan.
Multiculturalism Policy Index. (2011). https://migrationresearch.com/item/multicultural-policy-index/474317.
Parekh, B. (2000). Rethinking Culturalism. Cultural diversity and political theory, Macmillan Press.
Quam, T. & Campbell, S. (2020). Pacific Realm: Cultural Geography I. The Western World: Daily Readings on Geography. https://cod.pressbooks.pub/westernworlddailyreadingsgeography/chapter/pacific-realm-cultural-geography-i/
Ronald, A.S. (2011). Multiculturalism and Pluralism in Secular Society: Individual or Collective Rights? Ars Disputandi: The Online Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 11, 147-163.
World Wellness Group. (2020). Multicultural Lived Experience Framework. https://worldwellnessgroup.org.au/our-voices/lived-experience/#:-:text=Multiculturalism/%
