Beyond multiculturalism?

In two recent articles in the Globe and Mail, here and here, it is argued that the term multiculturalism might have outlived its usefulness. In the first, Malik argues that the concept has led to a thinking where people are put in "ethnic boxes" and treated exclusively according to their heritage, reduced simply to being representatives of their ethnic groups. This is critique that is fairly common now, and it's certainly been voiced in Europe as well (as has been stated on this page before), for instance in this piece on the Swedish debate site Newsmill.

The second piece argues that Canada should adopt more rigorous language testing and credentials recognition using the Australian model, which allegedly is smoother (though I have to admit that I have seen no studies on the Australian case). It also states that citizenship entails responsibilities as well as rights.

There are important points made here, but also room for raising some caveats. First, while group-think is all too common in the public (and sometimes even academic) debate, it is worthwhile remembering that Multiculturalism was introduced to counter the strong policies of assimilation that preceeded it. Therefore, any replacement of multiculturalism must include a recognition that a) ethnicity is an important marker of identity for many people and that there should be room in public space to recognize that for each individual, b) that immigration in itself often is a fundamental formative moment in the life of the migrant and that this important experience should not be neglected in the public discourse and, c) that also the dominant "mainstream" population has an ethnicity and that practices informed by this ethnicity (involuntarily) can become discriminatory against minorities.

The risk is that the critique against multiculturalism becomes a backlash, leaving the space open for assimilatory policies. It is interesting, for instance, to note that the Globe and Mail editorial feels that specifically new citizens must informed of citizen obligations, which to some extent implies that this segment of the citizenry cannot be entirely trusted with doing their duties, which leaves a lot of questions open, such as what duties? Immigrants to Canada generally do not vote to a lesser degree than the native born population, and if immigrants lack jobs or are under employed, it might have to do with the Canadian immigration policy, rather than the immigration population, which the editorial itself points out.

If it is time to move beyond multiculturalism, and it might be, then care has to be taken so that the embraced alternative does not result in further alienation of the ethnic "others"...