Multiculturalism Can Be Dangerous. Few

Multiculturalism can be dangerous. Few people would, in their casual understanding of the concept, understand how many harmful effects have been the result of multiculturalism. It is true that multiculturalism is a very broad term. This in itself makes the concept problematic. It is also a multi-dimensional topic as it is understood and manifested differently in every country. Today however critics of the concept are increasingly in agreement that multiculturalism in the end does more harm than good: indeed, the fields of language, art, culture and everyday human relations suffer under the bureaucratic guise of "equality."

Multiculturalism has been a central issue in many countries to where immigration occurs as a result of push factors from homelands. The United States has been a prime candidate for such immigration almost since the inception of the country as the "land of the free." Not having an established American culture during approximately the first century made the multicultural paradigm seem attractive. Nonetheless, British elitist culture brought with it several oppressive practices that critics now recognize as defeating the very goal not only of freedom but also of integration and healthy race relations. The language issue is one of the ways in which multiculturalism has caused the opposite of its intention: marginalizing different culture. This means that catering to every different language within a country causes cultural marginalization and stereotyping more than an attempt at integration does. This can be seen in countries where there is an attempt to produce all instructive literature and other public documents in every conceivable language within the country. This not only has the drawback of limiting foreigners' attempts to become part of a national identity, but also of costing the government, and thus the taxpayer, money. This cultivates resentment rather than an open and free relationship among citizens of a country. By emphasizing differences within a population, these differences are exacerbated and negative feelings abound.

A further problem with multiculturalism is manifested in art, which marginalizes cultures in the same way that language does. In the United States for example, art from different cultures manifest their struggle during a particular era. This is also true of art in other countries such as South Africa, which has its own multicultural issues to contend with. The 1960's for example represent the struggle for freedom, and for a voice in a field reserved for the elite at the time. The nature of the struggle has however changed over the forty years since this era. Yet the change has not been allowed to manifest itself in art from the various cultural sectors of society. Whereas in culture, African-Americans, as well as other persons of various cultures, have begun to explore artistic and cultural views beyond the visual fact of race. The art world however still marginalizes these artists by attempting to limit their work to the eras of a particular struggle for a particular issue. In this way, under the guise of honoring the struggle of cultures to make themselves heard, this very struggle continues by not being allowed to fade into the past where it belongs. Once again, intercultural resentment begins to manifest as a result of apparent favoritism for the "struggle" and those who were part of it during the 1960's and 1970's. This has become so evident that many prominent colored artists' work has come to be referred to as "victim" art. This of course does nothing to alleviate already pronounced racial tensions because of multiculturalism.

The strongest argument against multiculturalism is the already mentioned concept of a national identity. The United States, South Africa and Australia are countries that, like many others, have been colonized by Britain and Europe. Unlike Britain then, these countries were already composed of a variety of cultures when they began to be established as the countries they grew into being today. The difficulty here is that various cultures were brought over from abroad, and a single national culture was difficult to form. Especially in the United States then, the ideal of multiculturalism was originally to provide each culture with "equality" and the sense that it was important in its own right. This equality was referred to as the "salad bowl" of culture, where every flavor was to blend in with every other flavor. The problem is however when cultural ideals differ, division occurs. There is almost no national unity and without unity it is impossible to form a strong national consciousness. The United States for example was so caught up in its salad bowl mentality during 2001 that the country was completely overcome by the terrorist attacks of 9/11. This is also the reason for the national division occurring after these events, and the apparent inability of either the country or the President to reach a single resolution regarding what should be done about the problem of terrorism. This is an extreme example of the dangers inherent in multiculturalism. Furthermore, the absence of a national identity pushes individuals back to their cultural roots, which may be harmful for intercultural relations and the development of elements such as art, religion and national cultural depth. Multiculturalism in this way leads to further marginalization, which detracts from national identity and strength.