Multiculturalism and Managing Migrant Communities

Debates on the nature and settlement of postcolonial migrations are often discussed in relation to discussions on identity, ethnicity, religion, migration and the impact of transnational populations upon settled communities.

Within a wide body of scholarship and sociological research we are better able to understand how notions of diaspora, hybridity and globalism intersect with social and class divisions, gender, ethnicity and class. Today, therefore, there is a growing literature which seeks to understand identities as multiple, fluid, dynamic and partial and which can only be understood in interaction with other identities, ethnicities and social structures. This understanding of identity as fluid and changing has led many commentators to conclude that, at specific times, a particular aspect of the group identity emerges. In Britain, for example, we have seen the emergence of a ‘renewed’ Muslim religious identity as part of South Asian Muslim communities⁵ and demands for the accommodation of religious systems of law to be made under this understanding of identity.

The term ‘multiculturalism’ in Britain today is debated, discussed, contested, challenged and more recently dismissed. Indeed some of the problems attributed to multiculturalism including the perceived lack of integration of minority ethnic communities into British society, the emergence of parallel and segregated minority ethnic communities and the failure to foster a national British identity only illustrates the

ShaTiaCocikaftdM-WstamFamify 99 سأ shifts and contradictions in its meaning and what it was originally perceived to stand for. Current public commentary therefore pays much more attention to its perceived principal failure rather than any real success. Whether the term has any epistemological value is itself open to question as are questions on measurable outcomes.

At its best, multiculturalism promotes tolerance, equality and respect for cultural and religious difference, promoting positive relations between minority and majority communities, but at its worst it promotes segregated, polarized and parallel communities who have little care or understanding how the ‘other’ may live. For many it is this politics of difference and the threshold of tolerance that remain problematic; for example, at which point does a cultural practice become intolerant and oppressive and to whom? For many liberal multiculturalists the threshold is to protect vulnerable members within communities and in Muslim communities this has often meant Muslim women being protected against what is often deemed oppressive, archaic and traditional religious practices. In other words, the principles of freedom and choice are seen as easily compromised in Muslim communities where the protection of Muslim women becomes the benchmark upon which we must fight for women’s rights and liberal values of freedom, justice and equality. In her work Lila Abu-Lughod warns of the dangers this can bring, explaining that

... generalizing about cultures prevents us from appreciating or even accounting for people’s experiences and the contingencies with which we all live. Lhe idea of culture increasingly has become a core component of international politics and common sense. Pundits tell us that there is a clash of civilizations or cultures in our world. Lhey tell us there is an unbridgeable chasm between the West and the ‘Rest’. Muslims are presented as a special and threatening culture - the most homogenized and the most troubling of the Rest. Muslim women in this new common sense, symbolize just how alien this culture is.⁶

Loday, in an age where the practice and discourse of multiculturalism and policies of diversity and managing diversity is coming under increasing attack from all sides of the political spectrum, questions of culture (whose culture?) and rights (whose rights?) become ever more urgent in the context of the settlement and management of minority ethnic and religious groups in Western democratic societies.

Lhe twin policies of social cohesion and integration has led to what Patel (2008) identifies as a move away from multiculturalism

and towards what she describes as ‘multi-faithism’, with government policies specifically promoting and nurturing ‘faith communities’. For Patel the encroaching of secular spaces that are increasingly being taken up by religious groups means that women from minority backgrounds are left with even less choice. She explains,

Ironically, the current promotion of faith based projects in all areas of civil society will compromise the gender equality agenda for black and minority women in particular. It will divert women away from the legal justice system into the hands of religious conservative and fundamentalist leaders. The cry of religious discrimination can and will be used to claim access to and control over resources, whilst at the same time it will serve to perpetuate discrimination against women and other sub groups and to deter state intervention in family matters.⁷

Not only does this lead to a denial of rights for women from minority ethnic backgrounds but this critique also flags up central questions of power, voice and representation and the use of male interlocutors in forging majority/minority relations between communities and the state. Further critique points to an outcome for minority ethnic communities who may feel disempowered from processes of power but the focus on cultural and religious difference that has in fact led to a form of limited autonomy over internal ‘community’ affairs, such as religious observance, dress and food. In other words the emphasis upon communities to focus on their culture and religion has in effect led to a shift away from public decision-making spaces. More worrying however it has also led to the emergence of community leaders who often have the undemocratic mandate to represent their communities. For example, male leaders, over time, have become the primary interlocutors and are afforded the right to speak on behalf of the whole community and are seen as both legitimate and with authority. Women are in effect then side-lined and given less voice and capacity to engage with community and state practices.

<< | >>

↑

Source: Bano Samia (ed.). The Sharia Inquiry, Religious Practice and Muslim Family Law in Britain. Routledge,2023. — 143 p.. 2023

More legal literature on Laws.Studio

Multiculturalism and Managing Migrant Communities

More on the topic Multiculturalism and Managing Migrant Communities: