Is the post-multicultural era pro-diversity?

Abstract

This commentary discusses the claim of Zapata-Barrero that Western countries have historically entered a ‘post multicultural’ phase, in which the emergence of the intercultural policy paradigm must be placed. It argues that this claim is mistaken, or at least too imprecise, and a potential danger for any pro-diversity management strategy, including interculturalism. Moreover, it is highlighted that Zapata-Barrero acknowledges that the contrast between intercultural and multicultural strategies has been overstated in the intercultural literature and that they are in fact complementary. For this reason, instead of reaffirming that interculturalism is temporally post multiculturalism, we should work towards creative synthesis of intercultural and multicultural strategies.

The majority oppressed? On asymmetrical multiculturalism and majority rights

“…In the wake of both public and academic debates on the failure or even death of multiculturalism over the last three decades, analyses of 'superdiversity' have emerged (De Waal, 2018). These analyses provided, among other things, an influential discourse to discuss public policies, especially at the city level in Europe.…”

Дискуссии О Мультикультурализме. Академический Контекст. Часть I

“…Продолжая рассуждение Р. Запата-Барреро, Тамар да Вааль отмечает, что интеркультурализм неизбежно продолжает начинания мультикультурализма, не только сходясь в общности целей создания предпосылок многосоставного общества, основанного на принципах индивидуальной свободы, равенства и чувства общности, но и пользуясь всеми достижениями мультикультурализма В Л А С Т Ь 2 0 2 2 ' 0 6 [Waal 2018]. Ведь почти невероятной представляется ситуация, когда государства и общества, ранее дискриминировавшие меньшинства, станут толерантными к индивидуальным различиям.…”