In his regular column, our Singapore Correspondent Dr V Subramaniam has emphasised the need for migrants and locals to understand, appreciate and complement each other with their strengths and values.
“I believe that Singapore and New Zealand should expand the settings of public life where people with dissimilar backgrounds, cultures and viewpoints meet and become comfortable in each other’s presence (see Communitylink),” he said.
New Zealand is a truly multicultural society with various communities actively promoting the country’s progress and prosperity.
We must celebrate our cultural diversity and continue to respect each other.
Is multiculturalism bad?
Those arguing in favour of a multiethnic society would not accept the theory that new arrivals and people of some religious and social faiths would conscientiously promote their beliefs and ways of life.
It is a human rights issue, they say and they are right.
But the concept of multicultural society became a contentious issue, especially after the September 11 (2001) attacks, with many in the west questioning immigration laws which allow easy entry to people of varied ethnicity.
Radical Muslims in Australia have fanned that debate by calling for the adoption of the Sharia Law, which administers rigid codes of conduct and punishment.
That led the previous government in Canberra to express its disgust, sparking a debate on the efficacy and desirability of a multi-nation profile.
Critics charge that one of the dangers of pursuing multicultural social policies was that social integration and cultural assimilation could be held back. This can potentially encourage economic disparities and exclusion of minority groups from mainstream politics. An interpretation came from political commentator Matthew Parris who questioned whether the pursuit of particularistic multiculturalism is not apartheid by another name.
Ayn Rand, a forceful critic of multiculturalism, condemned the worldwide ethnic revival of the late 1960s as a manifestation of tribalisation that would lead to an ethnic Balkanisation, destructive to modern industrial societies.
Her philosophy considers multiculturalism based on the same premise as mono-culturalism, namely, ‘culturally determinist collectivism.’ This would undermine the concept of free will.
Social policy reflects this multiculturalist attitude. To be sure, its implementation in New Zealand and elsewhere has sometimes been warped by racism. But in general, it has tried to enable our ethnic minorities to live and be educated as they like.
Muslim schools, for instance, can get state funding, just as Christians can; nobody disputes (as they do in France) the right of Muslim girls to wear headscarves in schools.
For some, multiculturalism is a problematic creed. It is usually assumed that multiculturalism is the opposite of assimilation. But for a society to be truly multicultural, some degree of assimilatory mixing is necessary; otherwise communities would be living separately, divided rather than harmonious.
