Deschooling multiculturalism

Abstract

In recent work, Geoffrey Brahm Levey has argued that we can distinguish various schools of multiculturalism on the basis of their methodology (in particular, how they relate theory to practice), and their substantive normative commitments (in particular, their normative commitments regarding liberalism and nationalism). In this article, I offer some reservations about Levey’s analysis. I suggest instead that the various authors Levey discusses in fact share a surprisingly similar diagnosis and remedy. They all seek to expose the selectivity in liberals’ self-understanding of core liberal concepts such as impartiality, colour-blindness, equality, anti-discrimination, secularism, citizenship, civic nationalism, or constitutional patriotism. This selectivity operates in a way that impugns minority claims as always already sectarian, partial and exceptional, while rendering majority claims as always already universal, impartial, and normal. And these authors also broadly agree on the proper remedy to this bias, which is not to reject these core liberal values, but to reinterpret them in a more even-handed way. I offer several examples of how this shared mode of argument is found across the different authors that Levey identifies, and how Levey's attempt to put authors into distinct schools is potentially distorting.

Non-territorial Autonomy in East-Central Europe: What About Romania?

“…It has been noted that Western countries have granted TA to all national minority communities with more than 250.000 members who have manifested claims for such accommodation, but it has also been granted to smaller communities. 15 NTA has been implemented in many countries in the Central and Eastern European region as well. NTA is viewed as a means of granting national minorities the right to internal self-determination and self-government in identity matters (mainly culture and education) without compromising the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the State in the eyes of the majority.…”

Multiculturalism and nationalism: Models of belonging to diverse political community

“…This places diversity at the centre of the national register, constituting a distinctive approach to multiculturalism. However, this approach has received varied criticisms: that the BSM is not an alternative to liberal nationalist multiculturalism either generally or in its views on national identity (Kymlicka, 2019); that it is and that it misunderstands minority integration and majority entitlement (Goodhart, 2019); and that it constitutes a clear alternative theory of multiculturalism and national identity, outside the liberal approach, that requires further clarification (Levey, 2018b). In this way, there are present and real challenges about the BSM's existence and understandings of and relations to liberalism, multiculturalism and nationalism.…”

Modèles nationaux d’intégration de migrant·e·s et résultats PISA: éléments pour un débat

“…Pour l'école, il s'agit de promouvoir des politiques et des programmes permettant de réduire l'écart de réussite scolaire entre groupes ethnoculturels et d'offrir des opportunités éducatives équivalentes à toutes et tous les apprenant•e•s. En raison de la malléabilité de l'éducation multiculturelle, on observe une multitude d'approches qui peuvent schématiquement se situer entre une valorisation «folklorique» de la diversité et une volonté de mettre en oeuvre une pédagogie critique susceptible de changer radicalement les fondements de la forme scolaire (Kymlicka, 2019 (Porcher, 1981). L'éducation interculturelle se fonde sur l'importance des interactions et d'une relation symétrique et égalitaire entre les différents groupes.…”