http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/open-minds-not-ethnic-boxes/article1744297/ - a Canadian perspective.
We Are All Multiculturalists Now, observed Nathan Glazer, a former critic of pluralism, in his 1998 book. He’s right.
Respect for difference and the celebration of pluralism have come to be seen as the hallmarks of a modern liberal democracy. And yet, over the past decade, we’ve also become skeptical about the very enterprise. Immigration, especially Muslim immigration, has come to be seen, in the wake of 9/11, as form of “colonization” that, in the words of American writer Christopher Caldwell, “is not enhancing” Western culture but “supplanting it.”
Part of the reason that it has become difficult to make sense of this debate is that,
in thinking about multiculturalism, we have come to confuse two distinct concepts – the idea of diversity as lived experience, on the one hand, and of multiculturalism as a political process, on the other. The experience of living in a society transformed by mass immigration, a society that is less insular, more vibrant and more cosmopolitan, is obviously very positive. It’s a case for open borders and open minds.
As a political process, however, multiculturalism has come to mean something different. It describes a set of policies, the aim of which is
to manage diversity by putting people into ethnic boxes, defining individual needs and rights by virtue of the boxes into which people are put, and using those boxes to shape public policy. It’s a case not for open borders and minds but for the policing of borders, whether physical, cultural or imaginative.
This conflation of lived experience and political policy has proved highly invidious.
On the one hand, it has allowed many on the right to blame mass immigration for the failures of social policy and to turn minorities into the problem. From the success of the far-right Sweden Democrats in the recent Swedish election to the campaign against the Ground Zero mosque,
politics is being driven by fear and resentment of the Other. On the other hand, it has led many traditional liberals and radicals to abandon their attachment to free speech and secularism in the name of defending diversity.