Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Interculturalism is an ideological model for or approach to the political or social management of ethnic and cultural diversity. It is essentially an integrationist vision, based broadly on concepts of cross-cultural dialogue, consensus, and cultural commonality, and can be distinguished in this sense from multiculturalism, a policy that has been criticized for its tendency to result in social fragmentation in the form of separate ethnic ghettoes, as well as for encouraging an attitude of relativism that weakens the traditional institutions of a society. Interculturalism is perhaps best known in Canada, especially in Quebec, and in Europe, where it is increasingly seen as an alternative to the perceived shortcomings of multiculturalist policies.

Interculturalism is said by its proponents to embody an essentially pragmatic stance, in that it avoids what is seen as the extreme relativism of the multiculturalist model and the naïve and illiberal universalism of assimilationist ideology. In common with many other political philosophies, interculturalism stresses as a foundational tenet that the cohesive identity of a nation or society requires more than such factors as territory, a unified legal code, or an official language. Myths and symbols are also of paramount importance in creating a sense of national identity, and these are historical concepts, normally transmitted across generations of the majority group by institutions such as education, religion, and the family. At the same time, most Western-style democracies subscribe to a pluralist view with regard to their diverse populations, consciously opposed to any discrimination based on cultural difference.

The potential ensuing tension between the historical idea of the nation and the different values orientations embodied by minority groups or immigrants therefore requires a political response, the form of which depends to a large extent on a kind of national self-conception, or what Gérard Bouchard, a leading scholar and advocate of inter-culturalism, has called paradigms, for him the first level of analysis for ethnocultural diversity. Before going on to discuss the special characteristics of interculturalism, therefore, a review of Bouchard's paradigms is necessary in order to define the conceptual environment for any approach to the management of cultural plurality.

Bouchard's Paradigms

Bouchard's first paradigm is diversity, an orientation with an emphasis on individual freedom of expression exemplified by the United Kingdom, the United States, Anglo Canada (excluding Quebec), Australia, and India. Under this conception, the nation is a collection of theoretically equal individuals and ethnocultural groups under one law with no statutory recognition of majority and minority cultures. The diversity paradigm is thus the most likely to be associated with strictly egalitarian multiculturalist policies. In contrast to this situation is the paradigm of homogeneity, in which there is an insistence on a degree of ethnocultural similarity, at least in public life. Bouchard's examples of this mind-set include France, Japan, and Russia. The third paradigm is multipolarity, in which two or more ethnocultural groups are recognized as constituting the nation, as in Malaysia, Belgium, or Switzerland.

Bouchard's fourth paradigm, duality, stands for a conception of diversity as a somewhat unequal relationship between minority or immigrant cultures and a recognized majority culture that he calls foundational, referring to its long-term effect on the structure and outlook of the present society. National identity is therefore strongly influenced by this foundational majority, through its transmission of tradition and the collective memory by means of its institutions. The overwhelming majority of Western nations in the early 21st century, including the United States as well as Quebec, claims Bouchard, is either currently operating under this dualist paradigm or may be moving toward it. Although this conception of a nation can potentially lead to a divisive, “us versus them” mind-set, Bouchard argues that it is the social divisions that shape the paradigm, rather than the other way around, and that rather than challenging the paradigm itself, a more productive approach would be to tackle the factors that contribute to the existence and perpetuation of the divide. With its emphasis on dialogue and consensus, as well as its acknowledgment of a majority or foundational culture, the interculturalist approach is, Bouchard maintains, the best suited to this task.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading