Solutions; at the level of society

A necessary condition for finding a solution is to recognise the nature of the problem. However, the nature of multicultural society is only known to a limited degree. Insufficient reliable research results contrast with a flood of opinions that are not always helpful in solving the issues at hand. Closing borders for instance, is not a realistic option. In general terms the following problems need to be tackled: an increase of understanding the phenomenon (research), dealing with cultural differences (involving minorities in society, preventing discrimination) and solving issues of socio-economic inequality.

At the same time at least three conditions have to be kept in mind: knowing what you want to achieve, one-size-fits-all solutions do not exist and the role of government is necessary but not sufficient. The first condition mentioned is to define the objective, what kind of society are you aiming for. Is it segregation (apartheid), a multicultural society (plural identities, limited commonality, equal opportunities), assimilation with the dominant culture (full integration after some generations), a melting-pot (creating a new national identity for everyone), a mosaic or …?

The processes may be quite different. On the one hand you may have assimilation by use of force after military victory and on the other Zeus, the God of ancient Greece, sleeping with the goddesses of the religions of conquered people, incorporating their religion in the Greek pantheon.

The second condition refers the role of government, whether government should be involved or not. If multicultural society does not pose any problem, government has no role to play (although it might have done so to realise that situation). However, if problems do arise, then they probable touch on the two key tasks of a state, security and the well-being of its citizens (both tasks with an internal and external dimension, within the state itself or in relation to other states). Examples include public unrest, maintaining order, riots, fighting, terrorism, equal opportunities, trust in government, political dispute, relations with countries of origin, treaties and their implementation, border control, money transfers, human rights and even fake news and propaganda; specifically housing, employment and education. On the other hand a government cannot oblige individuals to change their values and attitudes.

They have a mosaic, not a melting pot. They have found a way to celebrate cultural differences and wrap them in a bundle of all-enveloping tolerance. It is not a choice between cultural exceptionalism and moral universalism, but a benign mix of both.

The Economist, December 23rd, 2017