Salman Rushdie pleit voor "open" waarden die de gemeenschappen verbinden:
If
we are to build a plural society on the foundation of what unites us,
we must face up to what divides. But the questions of core freedoms and
primary loyalties can't be ducked. No society, no matter how tolerant,
can expect to thrive if its citizens don't prize what their citizenship
means -- if, when asked what they stand for as Frenchmen, as Indians, as
Britons, they cannot give clear replies.
Over het multiculturalisme, dat niet in staat is groepen te verenigen:
Multiculturalism has all too often become mere cultural relativism, a much less defensible proposition, under cover of which much that is reactionary and oppressive -- of women, for example -- can be justified.
Met name het terugtrekken van minderheden binnen een "pure" variant van hun cultuur is levensgevaarlijk voor de sociale cohesie van een samenleving:
"So it is important to make a distinction between multifaceted culture and multiculturalism. In the age of mass migration and the internet, cultural plurality is an irreversible fact; like it or dislike it, it's where we live, and the dream of a pure monoculture is at best an unattainable, nostalgic fantasy and at worst a life-threatening menace -- when ideas of purity (racial purity, religious purity, cultural purity) turn into programmes of "ethnic cleansing" (...) or when Islamic ideologues drive young people to die in the service of "pure" faith, unadulterated by compassion or doubt. "Purity" is a slogan that leads to segregations and explosions. Let us have no more of it. A little more impurity, please; a little less cleanliness; a little more dirt. We'll all sleep easier in our beds."
Verschenen in The London Times.
If
we are to build a plural society on the foundation of what unites us,
we must face up to what divides. But the questions of core freedoms and
primary loyalties can't be ducked. No society, no matter how tolerant,
can expect to thrive if its citizens don't prize what their citizenship
means -- if, when asked what they stand for as Frenchmen, as Indians, as
Britons, they cannot give clear replies.Over het multiculturalisme, dat niet in staat is groepen te verenigen:
Multiculturalism has all too often become mere cultural relativism, a much less defensible proposition, under cover of which much that is reactionary and oppressive -- of women, for example -- can be justified.
Met name het terugtrekken van minderheden binnen een "pure" variant van hun cultuur is levensgevaarlijk voor de sociale cohesie van een samenleving:
"So it is important to make a distinction between multifaceted culture and multiculturalism. In the age of mass migration and the internet, cultural plurality is an irreversible fact; like it or dislike it, it's where we live, and the dream of a pure monoculture is at best an unattainable, nostalgic fantasy and at worst a life-threatening menace -- when ideas of purity (racial purity, religious purity, cultural purity) turn into programmes of "ethnic cleansing" (...) or when Islamic ideologues drive young people to die in the service of "pure" faith, unadulterated by compassion or doubt. "Purity" is a slogan that leads to segregations and explosions. Let us have no more of it. A little more impurity, please; a little less cleanliness; a little more dirt. We'll all sleep easier in our beds."
Verschenen in The London Times.
