My question:
To what extent can modern states enable plural identities to flourish?
Under the condition of one main identity (Gellner)
Under the condition of pluralism (Popper)
Under some conditions (Kymlicka, Taylor)
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Modern States and Their Challenge: Multicultural Societies
My question is under what conditions can modern states manage their multicultural societies?
Under the condition of striving for homogeneity
Under the condition of (Kymlicka, Taylor)
Under the condition of no management?
Nation-States and Their Challenge: Open Society
The strain of the democratic change brought about by the forces of globalization is felt in the modern nation-states. Nation-states are no longer nation states as they contain a mosaic of different identities, cultures, and affiliations. It seems that in the 21st century, therefore, one of the tasks of the modern state is how to maintain social peace among its various cultures, identities, and subcultures.
One of the impact of globalization was the recent enhancement in democratic rights that led, in turn, to the questioning of the conservative and traditional order upon which the modern nation is built. Earlier, one aspect of nation-state building was the identity is inculcated in its citizens. That is, the one-identity it imposed on its citizens. This identity, however, lost its meaning once the forces of globalization connected people of different identities, cultures, and languages under one roof. The modern state, therefore, was faced with the task of satisfying the needs of its multicultural societies, manage them so as to maintain social peace.
I would like to start from the beginning:
The goal of the modern state is ensure territorial integrity, social peace, and sound economy.
The nation-states, which emerged in the 20th century, sought to achieve all the above by imposing one identity, one culture, and one loyalty to its citizens. That is, homogeneity and a unified society were considered the path to a successful nation-state. The 20th century also witnessed the break-up of nation-states into even smaller parts, which are also striving for homogeneity. It seems as though the more break-up into small parts of a once large nation-states, the more parts are left waiting to break away. It seems that there is an endless number of identities waiting to spring up once the umbrella of an all-encompassing identity is lifted. The question is whether the break-up of nation-states into even smaller entities is the solution for nations, identities, and cultures to achieve social peace? The question is whether a modern state will always have to manage another different culture and identity within its own entity. Most probably, yes. I will take up this sidenote of whether break-up of modern nation-states and seeking of independence is the answer to s0cial peace. I am not saying that nations should not strive for independence, I am just saying that establishing another modern state based on the concept of natio, homogeneous society, and one identity may not necessarily be the answer to violation of human rights, massacres, or even social unrest as there are always smaller particles waiting to emerge. I wonder if it is it time to look for a more global answer to this challenge of how to deal with these many different groups. Yes, I will come back to this question later.
So, let me go to the beginning, to my question. Under what conditions can modern states manage their multicultural societies?
After having discussed modern states and the challenges they face, I would like to talk about multicultural societies. When I talk about multicultural societies, I mean everything from ethnic to cultural identities. I am not only referring to differences based on religion and ethnicity, I am also referring to cultures of secularism vs religiosity, patriarchial societies vs open societies, agrarian vs urban cultures. Modern nations may face the challenge of having to manage multicultural societies, which do not share the same values, in order to maintain social peace.
Now I am questioning my question
Under the condition of striving for homogeneity
Under the condition of (Kymlicka, Taylor)
Under the condition of no management?
Nation-States and Their Challenge: Open Society
The strain of the democratic change brought about by the forces of globalization is felt in the modern nation-states. Nation-states are no longer nation states as they contain a mosaic of different identities, cultures, and affiliations. It seems that in the 21st century, therefore, one of the tasks of the modern state is how to maintain social peace among its various cultures, identities, and subcultures.
One of the impact of globalization was the recent enhancement in democratic rights that led, in turn, to the questioning of the conservative and traditional order upon which the modern nation is built. Earlier, one aspect of nation-state building was the identity is inculcated in its citizens. That is, the one-identity it imposed on its citizens. This identity, however, lost its meaning once the forces of globalization connected people of different identities, cultures, and languages under one roof. The modern state, therefore, was faced with the task of satisfying the needs of its multicultural societies, manage them so as to maintain social peace.
I would like to start from the beginning:
The goal of the modern state is ensure territorial integrity, social peace, and sound economy.
The nation-states, which emerged in the 20th century, sought to achieve all the above by imposing one identity, one culture, and one loyalty to its citizens. That is, homogeneity and a unified society were considered the path to a successful nation-state. The 20th century also witnessed the break-up of nation-states into even smaller parts, which are also striving for homogeneity. It seems as though the more break-up into small parts of a once large nation-states, the more parts are left waiting to break away. It seems that there is an endless number of identities waiting to spring up once the umbrella of an all-encompassing identity is lifted. The question is whether the break-up of nation-states into even smaller entities is the solution for nations, identities, and cultures to achieve social peace? The question is whether a modern state will always have to manage another different culture and identity within its own entity. Most probably, yes. I will take up this sidenote of whether break-up of modern nation-states and seeking of independence is the answer to s0cial peace. I am not saying that nations should not strive for independence, I am just saying that establishing another modern state based on the concept of natio, homogeneous society, and one identity may not necessarily be the answer to violation of human rights, massacres, or even social unrest as there are always smaller particles waiting to emerge. I wonder if it is it time to look for a more global answer to this challenge of how to deal with these many different groups. Yes, I will come back to this question later.
So, let me go to the beginning, to my question. Under what conditions can modern states manage their multicultural societies?
After having discussed modern states and the challenges they face, I would like to talk about multicultural societies. When I talk about multicultural societies, I mean everything from ethnic to cultural identities. I am not only referring to differences based on religion and ethnicity, I am also referring to cultures of secularism vs religiosity, patriarchial societies vs open societies, agrarian vs urban cultures. Modern nations may face the challenge of having to manage multicultural societies, which do not share the same values, in order to maintain social peace.
Now I am questioning my question
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Global Government & Multicultural Societies by Miriam Rodrig Farhi
when taken in its extreme idealized form, globalization may eventually draft the global population into the global community whose features are vague and emerging as had been evidenced by the simoultaneous unorganized protests worldwide to the Iraq war, before the war and to the worldwide support to reduce global warming during the Bali Summit in DEcember 2007. in such a case, members of the global community though mostly living within local communities will have global considerations. these global considerations may be diversified but they will be global and every individual will have to solve her problem - the tension between the attention paid to global problems and the attention paid to local problems. if the global community is governed by a democratic global government with moving centers - big cities, capitals, institutions etc.- than there will be as many high cultures as one may think of and as many local cultures as one may think of. to the extent that not only global institutions but also regional, communitarial and local institutions are democratic, then multiculturalism will cease to be a problem. the role of the global government is to democratically facilitate global trade of goods, cultures values etc...I think that betrand russell, albert einstein, joseph stiglitz, amartya sen, dani rodrik, david held and a few other thinkers will agree with this piece of fantasy,after all even if something is not realistic for the moment (the conflicts wordwide, global terrorism etc) it may be instrumental in enlightening a new architectural design...MRF
Managing a Multicultural society
Decided that I will use multicultural society instead of multiculturalism. I relate better to a multicultural society, which is a fact in almost all nations and countries I know of.
The question is under what conditions can a nation-state manage a multicultural society without causing social unrest. Why is this important? Because a nation-state needs to maintain order within its territory to prevent a possible breakup. Because, in order to prosper and achieve economic progress a nation-state needs to maintain some kind of balance within its borders. What about Israel? No peace, no tranquillity, social unrest, and yet economic progress. Actually, a sort of break-up did occur in Israel when the two-state solution was accepted by all sides. If Israel had successfully managed its multicultural society, perhaps a two-state solution would not have come up.
If Serbia had successfully managed its multicultural society, Kosovo would not have demanded independence. What about Turkey? Is it successfully managing its multicultural society.
Let us look at Turkey. Let us just say that at present Turkey's multicultural society is composed of seculars and moderate Muslims and both are facing the Islamic headdress issue. So the question will be, under what conditions can Turkey manage the headdress issue without causing social unrest.
The issue here is that the AKP is not really imposing its values on the society as it is only an emissary of all the young women, who are seeking to make a statement by wearing the headscarf. Who is putting the pressure on whom? Could we say that the headscarved young women are searching for their democratic rights? Are they under pressure from the menfolk? The fact that they are attending universities show that the pressure may not be for the men in the family but from a sense of belonging of these women themselves. They have just created a subculture -- headscarved university students.
The question is under what conditions can a nation-state manage a multicultural society without causing social unrest. Why is this important? Because a nation-state needs to maintain order within its territory to prevent a possible breakup. Because, in order to prosper and achieve economic progress a nation-state needs to maintain some kind of balance within its borders. What about Israel? No peace, no tranquillity, social unrest, and yet economic progress. Actually, a sort of break-up did occur in Israel when the two-state solution was accepted by all sides. If Israel had successfully managed its multicultural society, perhaps a two-state solution would not have come up.
If Serbia had successfully managed its multicultural society, Kosovo would not have demanded independence. What about Turkey? Is it successfully managing its multicultural society.
Let us look at Turkey. Let us just say that at present Turkey's multicultural society is composed of seculars and moderate Muslims and both are facing the Islamic headdress issue. So the question will be, under what conditions can Turkey manage the headdress issue without causing social unrest.
- By imposing its values on the whole of the society
- By introducing the changes with small steps
- Turkey will no be able to manage its multicultural society and this will cause unrest and maybe even a breakup.
The issue here is that the AKP is not really imposing its values on the society as it is only an emissary of all the young women, who are seeking to make a statement by wearing the headscarf. Who is putting the pressure on whom? Could we say that the headscarved young women are searching for their democratic rights? Are they under pressure from the menfolk? The fact that they are attending universities show that the pressure may not be for the men in the family but from a sense of belonging of these women themselves. They have just created a subculture -- headscarved university students.
Multiculturalism & Popper
Multiculturalism and the 'Open Society': a Popperian approach
Marcello Pera, president of the Italian Senate, will speak on Multiculturalism and the 'Open Society': a Popperian approach on Tuesday 10 February at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).
Alongside its great impact on philosophy, Popper's celebrated two volume work The Open Society and its Enemies has influenced a number of politicians and political movements. Marcello Pera brings the insight of both the philosopher and the practising politician to bear on the issue of how multiculturalism should be viewed from the perspective of an 'Open Society'.
Marcello Pera, president of the Italian Senate, will speak on Multiculturalism and the 'Open Society': a Popperian approach on Tuesday 10 February at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).
Alongside its great impact on philosophy, Popper's celebrated two volume work The Open Society and its Enemies has influenced a number of politicians and political movements. Marcello Pera brings the insight of both the philosopher and the practising politician to bear on the issue of how multiculturalism should be viewed from the perspective of an 'Open Society'.
Question
Under what conditions can nation-states balance a multicultural society with a common sense of belonging amongst all its citizens?
Rethinking Multiculturalism - Cultural Diversity and Political Theory by Bhiku Parekh was published on 20 July 2000. For more information about the book, or to order it, see www.palgrave.com
Rethinking Multiculturalism - Cultural Diversity and Political Theory by Bhiku Parekh was published on 20 July 2000. For more information about the book, or to order it, see www.palgrave.com
Multiculturalism Readings
Gellner: Nations and Nationalism
I M Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference;
J Tully, Strange Multiplicity;
D Miller, On Nationality.
I M Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference;
J Tully, Strange Multiplicity;
D Miller, On Nationality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
