Ok, Sorry this took me a bit longer than expected to post, but here it is. This is my now infamous essay on the failure of multiculturalism. For my "close mindedness" I got a C+ in the class. For my ability to write and present the argument, not graded. I did, however, get docked 2 letter grades on this paper as well for going over the word count (it was 800, this paper is about 1000); which comes after cutting this paper again by half.
I couldn't find the original "director's cut", so this will have to do. Enjoi! And remember, flame responsibly!
I couldn't find the original "director's cut", so this will have to do. Enjoi! And remember, flame responsibly!
Media Reaction: Multiculturalism
Jade Navarre Valdivieso
06/07/2011
Media Reaction: Multiculturalism
The piece I have viewed and will be reacting to is a YouTube
video uploaded by Pajamasmedia entitled “Andrew Klavan: Multiculturalism
Explained” as an episode of a series called “Klavan on the Culture.” The issue discussed here is multiculturalism,
which applies to immigration as the mixing of many cultures and the rules and
etiquette regarding the integration and diversification of a group of mixed peoples
is called multiculturalism. As defined
by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
Multiculturalism is a body of
thought in political philosophy about the proper way to respond to cultural and
religious diversity. Mere toleration of group differences is said to fall short
of treating members of minority groups as equal citizens; recognition and
positive accommodation of group differences are required through
“group-differentiated rights,” a term coined by Will Kymlicka (1995) Some group-differentiated rights are
held by individual members of minority groups, as in the case of individuals
who are granted exemptions from generally applicable laws in virtue of their
religious beliefs or individuals who seek language accommodations in schools or
in voting. Other group-differentiated rights are held by the group qua(sic)
group rather by its members severally; such rights are properly called group
rights, as in the case of indigenous groups and minority nations, who claim the
right of self-determination. In the latter respect, multiculturalism is closely
allied with nationalism. (Song,
2010)
Thus we see that the idea of multiculturalism is a belief in
the retention of culture by self determination with direct ties to nationalism,
thereby affirming the loyalties of an individual to a state or
sovereignty. This directly conflicts
with the values set forth in the Oath of Citizenship to become a citizen of the
United States of America. While not
demanding a change of culture or a radical expulsion of one’s personal and
ethnic identity, it does require the full loyalty of an individual; a difficult
thing to do for many. Here is the Oath
of Citizenship to be recited by each new citizen in the country. This shows the gravity of what each person is
taking upon themselves when they decide to become an official US citizen:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely
renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince,
potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a
subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of
the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I
will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on
behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform
noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by
the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian
direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely
without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. (USCIS, 03/0)
Note that many argue that a culture is not defined based on
race or religion, but is usually the result of multiple factors that change as
one’s environment changes.
In recent
news, German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that Germany’s attempts to build
a multicultural society had failed. This
was further highlighted in a study by a German think tank, which found that
more than 30 percent of people believed Germany was ‘overrun by foreigners.’
(Clark, 10/1) Her remarks were greeted by fervor, and a standing ovation. Many believe that foreigners had come
primarily to take advantage of social benefits.
The study showed that the groups that had the hardest time integrating
into society were Arabs and Muslims.
Thilo Sarrazin, a senior official at Germany's central bank, who has
since resigned, said that "no immigrant group other than Muslims is so
strongly connected with claims on the welfare state and crime." (Clark,
10/1) This move against multiculturalism and societal integrations is not
happening just in Germany either. More
than 57% of voters in Switzerland backed a referendum proposal to ban the
building of minarets in the country. (BBC, 2009) In response to this, Elham
Manea, co-founder of the Forum for a Progressive Islam stated: “It’s a message
that you are not welcome here as true citizens of this society”. In Arizona, Senate Bill 1070 was passed “to
discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic
activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.” (State of Arizona,
2010)
This
piece attempts to portray the difficulty and hypocrisy of certain political
forces at work in the world to force a type of peace on their citizens that may
not actually be plausible. The media
piece seemed biased, but made a clear argument that was well researched and
clearly explained. This is a
controversial topic, as many hold to the hope of a truly peaceful and
multicultural society while the media piece points out the very possible
reality of the impossibility of peaceable multicultural mixing. “Multiculturalism is the philosophy that
every culture is morally valid, and no culture has the right to impose its
values on another.” (Pajamasmedia, 2/24)
The issue arises when differing cultures have philosophies and beliefs that are
directly contradictory to another.
“(Multiculturalism) has evolved into a central western value. Other cultures don’t have that value of
tolerance, so we have to tolerate their intolerance and let them kill us.”
(Pajamasmedia, 2/24) This piece does a very good job of explaining the issue at
hand, and is effective in portraying the plausible impossibility and eventual
hypocrisy that is multiculturalism. What
is truly needed, we find, is mutual tolerance, and true citizenship, hence the
oath of citizenship required to be a US citizen. Theodore Roosevelt, the 26th
President of the United States summed up what it means to be an American
Citizen when he said: “We can have no "50-50" allegiance in this
country. Either a man is an American
and nothing else, or he is not an American at all.” Difficult words to stomach, and even harder
to achieve without “hurting someone’s feelings,” but possibly necessary to
truly “keep the peace.”
I couldn't get the formatting to work properly on this blogishness. Sorry!
No comments:
Post a Comment