Celebrating Diversity

Coexisting in a Multicultural Society

Carlton Munson, B Harold Chetkow-Yanoov

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• eBook ISBN: 9781317790488
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Ethnic Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

Celebrating Diversity: Coexisting in a Multicultural Society, offers pragmatic ways to replace conflictive behaviors between diverse peoples with coexistence alternatives. Coexistence-partnership values and skills help us to outgrow ways of the past--competition, suspicion, manipulation, isolation, victimization. These skills enhance our own lives as well as those of future generations.In Celebrating Diversity, author Benyamin Chetkow-Yanoov asserts that the increasing religious-ethnic-linguistic pluralisms of the twentieth century requires that we cease lumping people different from ourselves into an "other" category. He identifies classical elements of a coexistence model and suggests various strategies and tactics for implementing coexistence in modern societies. Among the many insights you will find are:

• the definition of coexistence
• an analysis of past patterns of majority-minority group relations, such as segregation, tolerance, and integration
• models of majority-minority relations, participation, and coexistence appropriate for the twenty-first century
• illustrations of the coexistence model through examples of places where it is flourishing
• action steps for leaders and citizens to put the idea of coexistence into practice
• a range of research findings that help us determine what is effective in promoting coexistence

In the pages of Celebrating Diversity, you can learn social skills for preventing conflict escalation, for finding areas of common interest, and for working cooperatively. As more of us become informed about alternatives to violence, hopefully we can find ways to bring peace to areas of unrest, such as Algeria, Ireland, Israel, Nigeria, Rwanda, Serbia, or the former Soviet Union.

Chapter 1

Preparing for Life in a Pluralist World

INTRODUCTION

Elites and Out-Groups

For many centuries, human beings have lived according to a paradigm of elitism, privilege, or chosenness—especially when they enjoyed physical and ethnic homogeneity. This was often based on the religious, linguistic, social, and cultural characteristics of the group into which one was born. Ideally, membership in such a group gave one a sense of personal-clan-family identity, loyalty to ancestors, history, tradition, and behavioral norms. Awareness of joint suffering, pride in the group’s achievements, and commitments to mutual aid enhanced group cohesion.

Unfortunately, ethnicity can also be the basis for building walls between (or segregating) ethnic groups. Many prophets, kings, priests, and heads of prestigious family clans translated ethnic or racial identity into the certainty that one’s own group is unique and morally better than all the others. Such values often justified exploiting members of out-groups and avoiding contamination by “strangers” or low-caste subordinates. The outcome was usually racist elitism—which marginalized or victimized members of other “undeserving” groups. In fact, belonging to a rejected ethnic group may fill its members with shame or self-hatred (Lewin, 1948; Lewis and Keung, 1975; Rouhana and Bar-Tel, 1998).

Another type of elitism was based on the control of wealth and power. The wealthy rejected the poor (often defined as members of a socially inferior or unworthy ethnic group), using them for society’s menial jobs. In situations of power symmetry, rival kings or emperors tended to be courteous to each other—while viewing the poor as basically disreputable. Over long periods of time, outcasts such as the Jews or the Gypsies survived if they were quiet. Those who rebelled were conquered, enslaved, exiled, or eliminated.

Today, establishments (e.g., power structures, military-ruled countries) are accepted as appropriate norm setters, controllers of available resources, makers of policy, and authorizers of implementation and enforcement, as well as determiners of the rules of the power game itself (Hunter, 1953). In most countries, local norms sanction a reality in which those who do not belong have little status, few resources, meager services, and only a subsistence lifestyle.

Accordingly, persons or groups who are clearly different from the establishment are considered deviant. In some cases, these strangers are thought to pose a threat to the ruling elite. Consequently, this out-group “deserves” to be rejected or controlled. Its inferiority or inadequacy is prejudged, having little to do with standards of behavior, effectiveness in performing specific roles, or whether the group constitutes a large or small percentage of the local population (Chetkow-Yanoov, 1997; Kosmin, 1979; Kung, 1962; Lewis and Keung, 1975).

The very structure of such a world has influenced our thinking in one significant way—we conceive of the universe in dichotomous terms. For example: light and dark, good and evil, y in and yang, women and men, Jews and Gentiles, Catholics and here-tics, Greeks and barbarians. Dichotomization continues in distinctions between the third world and the West, blacks or whites, Croats or Serbs, Tutsis or Hutus, Republicans or Democrats, etc. Such a paradigm is convenient for continuing the privileges of members of local and national elites.

Living in an Increasingly Pluralist Reality

Significant technological changes (such as the printing press, electricity, the telephone, television, and computers) have increased the mobility of people all over this planet during the past 100 years. The invention of steam-driven trains, the automobile, and inexpensive air travel also contributed to significant changes. The spread of democratic government, efflorescence of the middle class, urbanization, Einstein’s theory of relativity, change in the roles played by women, the relaxation of many of the world’s geographic boundaries, and the increase of aged/ retired populations are examples of what has been happening at a very rapid pace all over the world.

In fact, the world seems to be getting smaller every day. Public institutions, metropolitan areas, even entire countries seem less and less homogeneous. Most countries have, in fact, become transformed from one-culture societies into ethnically, religiously, or linguistically pluralistic ones—as has happened, for example, between the French and English speakers in Canada. Terms such as multiculturalism, pluralism, or diversity have become popular, and remind us that we might do well to avoid previous generations’ absolutist outlooks and rigid categories. Figure 1.1 helps us define reality flexibly.

Our newly possible contacts with many cultures or peoples is seen more and more as enriching. The operation of the European Common Market, and of the United Nations itself, seems to exemplify the heterogeneity of today’s world. We no longer go to the “Far” East—as if Europe were the center of the world; instead, we travel to Thailand or Japan.

Figure 1.1. What Is Reality?

Many former ethnic or cultural (minority) groups are no longer willing to postpone the satisfying of their basic needs, be exploited economically, or to assimilate (Mitchell, 1990). Cults and fundamentalist believers continue to flourish, but the world’s religions are learning to cooperate on matters of overall spiritual concern. As exemplified by developments in Rwanda, a national-cultural identity (or peoplehood) often is not synonymous with citizenship in a geographic country (Gurr, 1993; Hoffman, 1982). If their identity is challenged or threatened these days, minority peoples such as the Armenians or Basques tend to react violently.

After centuries of elitist rule, we find serious “minority-majority” conflicts in such diverse countries as Belgium, Canada, Cambodia, Germany, India, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Liberia, Rwanda, Spain, South Africa, the former Yugoslavia, the United States, and the former Soviet Union. The lot of Gypsy, Asian, or black population groups is still difficult throughout the Western world. In light of the disruptive and costly consequences of continuing a “separate and unequal” policy, business as usual is becoming very risky.

As humankind prepares to enter the twenty-first century, it becomes urgent that leaders and professional disciplines develop new basic concepts or paradigms and find ways to set them into operation. Coexistence is one such paradigm. Accordingly, ethnic groups now become “separate and equal.” While continuing to honor their ethnic or national identities, our planet’s social units also become world citizens. For example, both the Dutch and the Jews, who are small in numbers and speak a very particular language, have had to become multilingual to get along in the world. In fact, during its golden age in the seventeenth century, tolerance of others and coexistence with different cultures became a cornerstone of Dutch culture. The works of Erasmus and Spinoza opened Dutch culture to other Europeans without losing any of its uniqueness or identity. An equivalent process took place for the Jews during the French enlightenment in the eighteenth century, before the emergence of the Zionist movement.

The idea of tolerance (i.e., acceptance of others unlike oneself) is not to be associated with weakness or permissiveness. Living together with respect for one another, despite our differences, requires emotional strength, patience, learning, even bravery. It is also based on everyone respecting and keeping the law—so that our efforts can be made in a stable social setting.

The survival of small countries such as Holland or Denmark, in the teeth of powerful environmental pressures to assimilate into, say, the European Union, presents another facet of the issue. Preserving language alternatives in the public schools of multicultural societies (as is done in some North American and European countries) seems one of the steps toward celebrating diversity and making coexistence operational in the twenty-first century (Chetkow-Yanoov, 1997; Gurr, 1993).

PURPOSE OF THIS BOOK

This book focuses on the essential requirements of a workable, twenty-first century, urban, culturally pluralistic coexistence society (see definitions in Chapter 3). My intention is not only to identify some of the basic elements of a functioning coexistence society but also to design some first steps for implementing these basic elements within a period of perhaps five years (Boulding, 1988). If this effort can devise something workable, the product might serve as a model for many countries.*

Hawaii, Holland, and Israel are appropriate places in which to test some of these coexistence ideas. These are pluralistic, highly urban, multilingual environments, yet they remain essentially different from one another. They are representative of a trend toward pluralism on the global scene. Much might also be learned from looking at current developments in Canada, Namibia, or Switzerland. It is safe to hypothesize that, despite the cultural diversity of these six places, their multiculturalism might have significant elements in common.

The project requires that we first explore and clarify a number of theoretic concepts and issues. These will be supplemented with detailed case examples from various countries, especially countries that show a transition from segregation to coexistence.

FOCUS OF THE BOOK’S CONTENTS

Chapter 1 begins with a look at examples of intergroup plural-ism today, and it outlines my growing interest in the subject.

Chapter 2 explores two recognized approaches to intergroup relations: segregation (or separation and coercive control of minority groups) and integration (or the assimilation of minority groups into the majority culture). The advantages and disadvantages of both paths are explored.

Chapter 3 focuses on the nature and requirements of coexistence—in which diverse cultures flourish side by side in a pluralist society. This approach is seen as essential for life on this planet in the twenty-first century.

Chapter 4 examines various types of deliberate social action which might help us move from preserving the status quo to a readiness for a coexistence reality—including protest, activating grassroots or citizen groups, advocacy, and lobbying.

Chapter 5 describes educational efforts for coexistence that are judged to be successful. It will analyze some of the factors that helped these efforts succeed. I also suggest a number of ways for bringing about coexistence in culturally mixed societies. Both governmental and voluntary/citizen efforts will be described and related to each other.

Chapter 6 presents coexistence efforts of five different countries and looks at the implications for achieving positive results everywhere.

Chapter 7 suggests a number of relevant topics worthy of further research attention.

Chapter 8 deals with implications of the book’s theme and its findings. Recommendations are made for the next operational and policy-level steps.

SUMMARY

Our planetary history includes, alas, many examples of elitist control of large population groups—usually accompanied by the elite’s biases (e.g., racism) and exploitation of outsiders. This book focuses on some subsequent developments—that is, the shift from culturally homogeneous societies to pluralistic ones.

By the end of the twentieth century, cultural diversity is becoming a legitimate part of social policy. The ways of segregation and integration are proving bankrupt. In many ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Celebrating Diversity
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• About the Author
• Table of Contents
• List of Figures and Tables
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Chapter 1. Preparing for Life in a Pluralist World
• Chapter 2. Three Archaic Patterns of Establishment-Minority Relations
• Chapter 3. Coexistence
• Chapter 4. Creating Community Readiness for Coexistence
• Chapter 5. Specific Efforts for Achieving Coexistence
• Chapter 6. Coexistence Efforts Around the World
• Chapter 7. From Doubts to Positive Findings
• Chapter 8. Implications
• References
• Index
• Haworth Social Work Practice