Multiculturalism and Free Speech

Anthony Lester tackles the complex and sensitive issues of multiculturalism and free speech. He explores the various meanings given to multiculturalism, integration and assimilation, as well as the relationship between the right to equality and dignity for ethnic and religious minorities and the right to freedom of expression. Placing our multicultural society in its historical context, he considers the treatment of Commonwealth immigrants in the 1960s and 1970s and discusses more recent confrontations involving racial or religious groups which have raised the right to free speech. He argues that our approach to integration and cultural diversity should promote equality and individuality but resist unreasonable demands to respect customs and practices which, for example, harm the rights of women and children, in the name of misguided multiculturalism. We must guard against political correctness that panders to the thin-skinned but remember that the right to offend does not mean a duty to do so.     

Introduction

This introductory paper seeks to provide an overview of the key themes that run through the papers in this special issue. Taking their cue from some ongoing current debates about the meanings of citizenship, multiculturalism and identity in the contemporary environment, Schuster and Solomos begin by exploring some of the most significant ideas in current political and academic controversies about these issues. In doing so they touch upon some of the main policy dilemmas faced both by nation-states and by migrant and minority communities. They then move on to engage with the question of what policies need to be developed to deal with citizenship and belonging in societies that are increasingly ethnically and culturally diverse. They conclude by analysing the direction of current research and policy priorities, and provide an overview of the key arguments to be found in each of the substantive papers that make up this issue.     

Self-exclusion as a strategy of inclusion: the case of Shas

Among the many paradoxes of Israeli politics, there are the strategies of political inclusion used by organizations and parties representing groups that reject the universalism which Israeli democracy is heir to. This paper develops a model of ‘political inclusion Israeli-style’, illustrated by one party, Shas, which since 1984 proclaims itself the voice of the socially and culturally excluded Sephardi population of north African and Middle Eastern Jews, who represent over 40% of the Jewish population. Shas is also a movement of religious and ethnic revival which, by adopting a social strategy of self-exclusion grounded in strict religious observance, and of independence vis-à-vis established Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox politics, has gained 11 out of 120 Knesset seats, inclusion in government, and control over a share of educational and welfare expenditure. The paper raises the issue whether such less-than-perfectly universalistic practices are not a variety of corporatism and possibly, for the parties concerned, a more effective strategy of incorporation than the classic social democratic path.     

Nordic vs. anti-Nordic: the Galton Society and the American Anthropological Association

Most homegrown commentators on race and multiculturalism in Britain find it very difficult to believe that multi-ethnic Britain has anything much it can learn from continental Europe. Arguing against this view, Favell diagnoses the reasons why British academics tend to fall back on 'exceptionalist' arguments. It is wrong to characterize the achievements and peculiarities of British multicultural race relations in terms that disconnect it from similar developments in other West European countries. Favell goes on to discuss the wide-ranging impact of black British cultural studies on research in Britain, exploring the limitations in particular of the paradigm laid down by the influential work of Stuart Hall. Offering an alternative comparative approach to understanding race relations and immigration in Britain, he sets out the distinctive insights to be found when Britain is looked at in terms of general international theories of citizenship and migration. Policymakers and policy academics in Britain, however, continue to work within a framework of ideas and concepts that is becoming increasingly less responsive to the challenge of new migrations-such as asylum-seekers and new economic migrants - which have come to dominate the European scene in the last decade.     

Towards cultural citizenship? Cultural rights and cultural policy in Taiwan

This article reviews existing literature on the construction of cultural citizenship, and argues that cultural citizenship expands the concept of ‘citizenship’, promotes citizens' consciousness and ensures the protection of minority rights. Since the 1990s, three cultural policies have arisen related to cultural citizenship in Taiwan: ‘Community Renaissance’, ‘Multicultural Policy’ and the ‘Announcement of Cultural Citizenship’. ‘Cultural citizenship’ has expanded the concept of citizenship in two ways. First, it has led to the consideration of the minority rights of Taiwanese indigenous peoples, the Hakkas, foreign brides and migrant workers in ‘citizenship’; and second, it has placed emphasis on ‘cultural rights’ in addition to civil rights, political rights and social rights. This article begins by exploring what approach to cultural citizenship is used in cultural policy, and what approach is suitable for practising cultural citizenship in Taiwan. I argue that minority groups practise their cultural rights with the public participation of Community Renaissance. Taiwan's case bears out Stevenson's view: a society of actively engaged citizens requires both the protection offered by rights and opportunities to participate. Finally, this article shows the challenges and contradictions of cultural citizenship in Taiwan: the loss of autonomy and the continuation of cultural inequality.     

How Safe Do Majority Group Members,Ethnic Minorities,and Muslims Feel in Multicultural European Societies?

London elected a Muslim mayor in 2016, less than a year after Germany took the lead in welcoming Syrian refugees. What accounts, then, for political leaders’ public assertions of the death of multiculturalism and the resurgence of far-right parties? We examine the possibility that some areas of multicultural policy foster a sense of discrimination on the part of majority populations and reduce their sense of safety, putting pressure on political leaders for assurances and providing the impetus for populist political party agendas, even to the point of Brexit. Data from the Banting/Kymlicka Multiculturalism Policy Index project and from the European Social Survey allow us to explore the impact of specific areas of multicultural policy on those who identify as majority group members, ethnic minorities, and Muslims in fourteen European states. We provide a quantitative multivariate analysis of the influence of key areas of state-level multicultural policy on individuals’ sense of being in a group that is discriminated against, as well as their feelings of safety, satisfaction with life, and satisfaction with the national government. Background factors, including respondents’ education, are controlled. For each of the three groups of respondents, the article offers conclusions as to which areas of multicultural policy seem to contribute to the most adverse reactions. Our findings help to explain the backlash against multiculturalism and the shift in focus in European states toward “mainstreaming” integration programs. They also provide a contextual background for understanding the increasing sway of rightist party demands and cautions for the development of programs to counter violent extremism.     

Citizenship in Palestine: a fractured geography

This article deals with the Israeli–Palestinian conflict through an approach based on citizenship. The article considers the whole historical Palestine (Israel and the so-called Occupied Territories) as a unique unit of analysis, and suggests that the dynamics of citizenship in this area should be analysed through the exam of two fundamental dimensions, relating to membership and territory. In general, the example of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict offers the chance to address the conventional meaning of concepts such as ‘state’, ‘democracy’ and ‘citizenship’, underlying the complex dynamics of inclusion/exclusion of individuals and groups within a collective decision-making process. As far as Palestine is concerned, the centre of gravity and the horizons of the conflict are described through the notion of ‘ruptured demos’, suggesting new directions for comparative research and drawing the attention to the progressive demise of the so-called ‘two-state’ solution.     

The politics of other citizens

In all kinds of political action, citizens are confronted with the performances of other citizens. An important guide to political behaviour is therefore likely to be the assumptions people make concerning how others can be expected to behave. This article explores common sense ideas about other citizens as potential political participants, drawing on a series of group interviews conducted with taxi-drivers in Britain, Germany and the Czech Republic. I argue the expectations voiced of other citizens tend to be pessimistic in nature, casting them as ill-informed, apathetic, passive and unduly self-interested, notwithstanding the appearance of a more optimistic view which holds they can be expected to follow the lead of those who ‘take a stand’. These empirical observations lead to a discussion of the theoretical issues they raise, notably where to locate the origins of such views, and how to appraise their implications for democracy.     

How much is citizenship worth? The case of Kyrgyzstani migrants in Kazakhstan and Russia

In the past few decades, political membership has become more complex, for example, through the proliferation of dual and multiple citizenships. Some scholars argue that, as a result, state membership may have become less relevant to individuals. In the same vein, our article argues that Kyrgyzstani migrants working in Russia and Kazakhstan have developed a pragmatic approach to citizenship. This case study, which builds upon in-depth interviews conducted in April and May 2008, is pertinent for several reasons. Labor migration from Kyrgyzstan has surged in recent years and is radically affecting the country's economy, society, and polity. Besides, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Russia have been separate political units for less than two decades; transnational practices and attitudes are thus not new. Our results show that for Kyrgyzstani migrants in Russia and Kazakhstan, citizenship is mainly defined in terms of concrete, short-term benefits. They have difficulties formulating what it means to be a citizen beyond the expression of a vague patriotic support. Those who have naturalized, mostly in Russia, do it for convenience purposes without attaching much affective meaning to it. Most see their stay as temporary (particularly in Kazakhstan), are not engaged in diasporic organizations or activities, and are estranged from the politics of both their home and host country.     

‘In Canada of all places’: national belonging and the lost Canadians

This paper explores the role of kinship and ethnicity in the designation of Canadian citizenship. Using the phenomenon of Lost Canadians – people whose citizenship status is ambiguous due to conflicting laws, unfamiliarity with requirements to maintain citizenship and quixotic enforcement of these requirements – the paper offers evidence for the kinship basis of a contemporary liberal democracy and reveals the degree to which a Canadian ethnic identity is operative in this settler society. But the objective of the analytical exercise is not to rest at the observation that Canadian nationalism is ethnic. Rather, by examining the ways in which the complex rules of Canadian citizenship define or exclude people from citizenship, we see how thoroughly rule-bound the status of national belonging really is. It thus might be observed that Canadian nationalism, indeed, all nationalisms, are civic since they rest on rules for belonging. Once we notice the rule-boundedness of belonging it becomes possible to disentangle these rules – kinship rules – from their connections to nature and biology and thus to appreciate their social character. From this vantage we might begin to think about alternative, and potentially more democratic, forms of belonging.     

Historical apologies as acts of symbolic inclusion – and exclusion? Reflections on institutional apologies as politics of cultural citizenship

Institutional apologies for historical injustices can be conceived as acts of symbolic inclusion directed to people whose collective experiences and memories of the past have not been recognized in the hegemonic narratives of the past. However, in this article it is argued that such apologies also have exclusionary potential as vehicles of symbolic politics of citizenship in that they may designate the apologizing community, so that it effectively excludes cultural ‘aliens’, like migrants, from the community of ‘remedial’ citizens. The article suggests a crucial point is the rhetoric shifts when one is appealing to both cultural and political solidarity, as when apologizing in the name of the state but simultaneously invoking ‘our’ nation and ‘our’ history. Thus, the increasing number of institutional historical apologies is not necessarily incompatible with the trend of reinforcing the symbolic boundaries around ‘our’ historical–cultural communities that has been visible recently, e.g. in the demands for cultural canons and citizenship tests in many Western societies.     

Reading the Ongoing Changes: European Identity

Europeans constituted their post‐Second World War political identities in terms shaped by the Cold War but matters took an unexpected turn when the events of 1989/91 required acknowledgement of the hitherto largely unremarked existence of the project of the European Union. The question of the identity of Europe/Europeans moved into mainstream debate: how can the variety of 'national pasts' be reconciled, how might ideas of Europe/Europeans fit within the range of identities affirmed by Europeans, and can the project present a clear image within the international community? The European Union is the only game in town for Europeans but it is also deficient; reform is made more difficult by the struggle to define the post bloc world: reform for what becomes the issue ‐ upgraded US ally, loose free trade area or federal polity? These are awkward questions but the continent is recovering from the catastrophe of its twentieth century and one can feel optimistic for the future.     

Neo(liberal) citizens of Europe: politics,scales, and visibilities of environmental citizenship in contemporary Turkey

The aim of this article is to critically interrogate articulations of environmental citizenship in contemporary Turkey. Specifically, I analyse articulations of environmental citizenship through citizen and activist narratives taken from interviews and focus group discussions. I argue that first, scalar focus on local spaces and individuated responsibility for action that emerge from the narratives are crucial to understand future environmental politics and possibilities in this context. Invoking recent discussions related to the politics and performativities of scale, in particular, allows consideration of the politics of visibility and other consequences of these scalar foci. Second, themes from narrative analysis show key convergences with Europeanization- and neoliberalization-related discourses and shifts. The resonance and overlap between these discourses and practices is significant, particularly as it shows citizen receptivity towards broader ideas related to increased citizen responsibility. As such, the research contributes to efforts to move away from theorization of processes such as neoliberalism as top-down, instead enabling examination of ways that these ideals are taken up, expressed, and refashioned by everyday citizens. The third argument that emerges from the analysis, following from the first two, is the need to theorize power more fully in discussions of environmental citizenship. Bridging with neoliberalism discussions is one possible way to move such a project forward.     

Labor migration,ethnic kinship,and the conundrum of citizenship in Turkey

This paper explores the ambiguous purchase that claiming Turkish ethnicity has in Bulgarian Turkish migrants' attempts to access formal and social citizenship. I suggest that despite the new Citizenship Law, which appears to eliminate ethnic privilege, the emphasis on Turkish ethnicity continues to play a significant role in the migrants' attempts at inclusion. I seek to resolve this seeming tension between, on the one hand, the continuing significance of ‘Turkishness’ in migrants' discursive claims, and, on the other hand, the failure of most of these claims to materialize in practice by addressing the question of social and economic capital. Although ethnic belonging continues to be an important facet of citizenship, social class makes a significant difference in determining who qualifies as a citizen and has access to social citizenship. I thus argue that we need to expand the current terms of the debate on the inclusiveness of citizenship in Turkey, which revolve around ‘denationalization’ and ‘postnationalism,’ to include questions of class-based exclusion.     

(Im)possible citizens: Canada's ‘citizenship bonanza’ and its boundaries

This article discusses a recent amendment to the Canadian Citizenship Act, which retroactively restores or gives Canadian citizenship to ‘hundreds of thousands of unsuspecting foreigners, most of them Americans’ (P. Dvorak, 2009. Canada issues a wake-up call: you may be a citizen. The Wall Street Journal, 17 April. Available from: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123993183347727843.html) while also restricting the inheritance of Canadian citizenship to the first-generation born abroad. Aiming to redress past discriminations based on gender, marital status and dual citizenship while simultaneously curtailing modern citizenship's dubious ius sanguinis provision, the new law might be interpreted as perpetuating Canada's reputation as a world leader in interethnic relations and human rights. A contextual analysis of the new law, by contrast, shows that the opposite is the case: the boundaries that are being drawn by Canada's new citizenship regime follow the now common trend of re-ethnicization and securitization. Specifically, they conflate kinship and Whiteness, thereby leading, on the one hand, to the construction of possible citizens whose authenticity and loyalty to the nation are unquestioned. On the other hand, within the logic of the new laws and their surrounding discourses, non-White, non-Christian ‘impossible citizens’ emerge, whose lack of loyalty and instrumental use of their Canadian passport are said to be eroding the value of citizenship from within.     

The Strange Career of British Democracy: John Milton to Gordon Brown

Political debate in modern Britain has been structured by four narratives or traditions, called here ‘Whig imperialist’, ‘Tory nationalist’, ‘democratic collectivist’ and ‘democratic republican’. The Whig imperialist tradition goes back to Edmund Burke; it is a tradition of responsive evolution, flexible statecraft, genial optimism and abhorrence of dogmatic absolutes. It prevailed for most of the nineteenth century, for most of the interwar period and for most of the 1950s and early‐1960s. Its Tory nationalist counterpart is tense, rebarbative and often shrill. At its core lies a primal fear of the dissolution of authority and a collapse of the social order. Its most notable exponents include Lord Salisbury, Enoch Powell and Margaret Thatcher. The democratic collectivist tradition stresses ineluctable progress towards a just and rational society, to be achieved by a strong, essentially technocratic central state, with the power and will to replace the wasteful, unjust chaos of the market place by planned co‐ordination. Formative influences on it were the great Fabian socialists, George Bernard Shaw and Sidney and Beatrice Webb; it achieved its apotheosis under the Attlee Government of 1945‐51. The democratic republican tradition is much more inchoate: its exponents have been the awkward squad of British democracy. The most glittering stars in the democratic republican firmament were probably John Milton, John Stuart Mill and R.H. Tawney. It stresses active self‐government and republican self respect, embodied in a vigorous civil society and strong local authorities. During the ninety‐odd years since Britain belatedly acquired a more‐or‐less democratic suffrage, the first three traditions have all been tested, almost to destruction. But though the fourth has had great influence on social movements of all kinds, governments at the centre have done little more than toy with it, usually for brief periods. The great question now is whether Britain is about to experience a democratic republican moment.