November 9, 2006

Polarization, the Enemy Within; Collaboration, the Power of Us

Good Morning, and welcome to the National MultiCultural Institute’s Fall conference. I’m Liz Salett, president and founder of NMCI. I’m going to say a few words and then Gwen Crider, NMCI’s Executive Director, will also make a few remarks and introduce our speaker for this morning.

Polarization and collaboration – this is the theme for our conference today! We live in an era of polarization both in the U.S. and abroad. I’m going to talk briefly about how the changing demographics in some countries are fueling polarization and extremism, and then ask us to think about the implications for our own multicultural society here in the U.S.

In the past 50 years over 192 million people have moved outside their place of birth. That’s about 3% of the worldwide population. It means that one in every 35 people in the world is a migrant. (International Organization of Migration). As a result of this migration, stemming from economic necessity, wars, human trafficking, or a search for a better life, many more societies than ever before have become multicultural, and have had to deal with unprecedented internal changes. This has been a 2-way phenomenon, as many countries, on the receiving end, have, over the years, also encouraged immigration, largely because their low birth rate has dramatically reduced the size of their workforce.

Let’s look for a moment at 2 countries, France and Britain, that several decades ago were considered homogenous nation states. Today, they are both struggling to find a way to minimize the dissatisfaction among the large number of migrants in their midst. Although they are taking different approaches to multiculturalism, they are nonetheless, experiencing some of the same challenges.

France has a state policy that does not recognize diversity as a feature of their public and political life, even though more than 10% of their population is Muslim from North Africa and the former French colonies. The French model assumes that immigrants will identify as fully French, and that there is no need to recognize the diversity within their population. For the large number of first, second and third generation immigrants, most of whom are considered French, this is not easy.

As was stated by a third generation Algerian immigrant living in a suburb of Toulouse, “Of course I am French, I was born here, my father was born here,… however, everyday I am reminded that I am not French. Me and my people are seen as impure and worthless, delinquents, unwanted.”

The riots that rocked Paris last year were a stark reminder that there is large un-assimilated and un-integrated population that feels hopeless and excluded. Increasingly French citizens of immigrant origin have been expressing their grievances, both social and economic, through an ethnic and religious perspective.

Britain, on the other hand, has had a more supportive national policy on multiculturalism, and has made some efforts to recognize the longstanding ethnic communities that have settled there. They have a national policy that encourages different ethnic groups to maintain their own identities and they have developed an infrastructure of organizations and leaders with whom they can dialogue. Nevertheless, there are still many disenchanted and unassimilated immigrants, including their British born children, who don’t feel they belong, and who also don’t believe they have opportunities for their future.

What seems to be happening, in some cases, particularly for groups of young people who feel disenfranchised, is that radical fundamentalist religious leaders are the filling a vacuum, They offer them a sense of identity, of belonging, of pride, and a purpose in their lives.

If we look at the other side of the coin, for a moment, there are a growing number of people in France and Britain, and elsewhere in Europe as well, who are feeling that their willingness to accept people of different cultures and backgrounds is beginning to threaten their national identity; many resent the immigrant population and fear they are losing control in their own countries and communities.

The tensions over the wearing of headscarves or the veil are a good example of how some of these conflicts play out, a symptom, an irritant, a challenge to those who set the rules…Not so easy…

Unlike France and Britain, the U.S. has always been a multicultural nation. As uncomfortable as we might sometimes feel about new immigrants and our policies about newcomers, whether they be documented or undocumented, we have a long history of absorbing people of different backgrounds from around the world.

However, much of the same criticism I described about France and Britain could apply to our own unfinished business. There are many individuals and groups of all backgrounds who are marginalized and who do not participate as full members of our own society. And not all are immigrants … We need to make sure that the negative aspects of what is happening in other parts of the world are not a preview of what might happen in our country as well.

As we saw in France and Britain, there are different philosophies about what it means to be a multicultural society and how to address it. From my perspective, what a multicultural society means is that we recognize and encourage pride in different ethnic and racial and religious and cultural identities, while at the same time, we subscribe to a common overriding belief in and respect for our basic values and the rule of law.

I invite you to picture our multicultural society as you would peering through the scope of a kaleidoscope. At any single moment what you see is a reflection of our society. Each element is in relation to every other. Think of these elements as our different cultures and regions, our unique mosaic that comprises who we are at any one moment. Then you twist the scope slightly and enter another element and the entire pattern changes, everything shifts and all relationships adjust.

We are a multicultural society in a continuing process of change.  Our role as multiculturalists is to help our society understand and learn who we are, how we are changing, how we can adjust, and, how we can become the society that best reflects who we want to be.

So, in that vein, I have 4 sets of questions I would like all of us to think about over the next few days: These are:

First, what happens when a nation’s or a community’s sense of identity is threatened? When certain segments of its population are not welcomed and are not assimilated or integrated into the larger community? When economic and social conditions lead to polarization and extreme reactions?

Second, what can we learn from experiences in other parts of the world?

Third, is there anything in our own experience of being multi-ethnic and multicultural, that we could offer to other countries and communities that are now undergoing great change?

And finally, how are these issues relevant here in the U.S. not just now, but for the future, for 2025 as well.

I firmly believe that the work we are all doing and will be doing here this week is important, precisely because we are thinking about the issues of inclusion, and identity, and respect and equity. There are no easy solutions, but by being here today, it’s clear that we recognize their importance and we’ve committed to working on them. As the theme for our conference suggests: Polarization is here; Collaboration is our choice and our power. Thank you very much!