Term Paper for Module F 2004

Multiculturalism & Ethics of Tolerance

By Prahlad Dahal

Introduction

All nation state in the universe comprises of multicultural and multi lingual citizens with multi traditions. The existence of multiculturalism and ethics of tolerance among the citizens is the base of economic development and good governance of the country. The tolerance can be found positive and negative.

The positive tolerance aspires for love, respect and universal brotherhood. The negative tolerance compels the group of people to compromise with the hatred, discrimination and prejudice in order to survive and lead a life, the life of living in fear and uncertainty.

Globalization

The cultures of globalization have deep rooted in the 21^st century. The advanced economy have been able to manipulate the developing nations in establishing large scale industries without taking into consideration the impact that would bring to the nation. No one can deny the fact that the peripheral benefit and some employment could be generated in the country. If we take an example of Bhupal gas tragedy, I believe that the employment would have been generated but the amount of human resource loss, the continuous diseases, the resources to combat it after the tragedy have added a set-back to the economic development of the nation. The owner of the factory who grabbed the fruit of the product could not be held responsible for the loss. However, it has kept a scar on the politics of the country. All developments, good governance are overshadowed by the victims of the Bhupal tragedy.

Democracy & Human Rights

The institution of Human Rights and Democracy in a country is unavoidable to promote the multicultural values and ethic of tolerance positively. The South Asian Region have experienced the autocratic rule of the regime if we look at the development of South Asian history. The colonialism have left behind the conflict which inculcated suspicion among citizens of a country and have drawn a “line of uncompromising state” for its solutions. We cannot spare the conflict of Kashmir dispute and stateless people of Bangladesh in South Asia. The colonialism on the other hand have enrooted the sense of nationalism and safety of nation state so strong that no people of the nation state would compromise with the state identity. The dawn of democratic nation like Nepal has yet to strengthen its multicultural, prural society interms of ethic of tolerance. The century old Monarchy still plays the vital role in state affairs, which is often found in the contrary to the tolerance of handing over the power and authority to the people’s representative. The South Asian nations comprises of multicultural “law of the land” in terms of ruling the state. India symbolizes as one of the largest and oldest democratic nation. Pakistan extends/projects the democratic values ruling the nation by a president cum army chief.

The Bangladesh government wraps the stateless Bihari’s and the Chittagong Hill Track refugees in the midst of the democratic set up of the state. Sri Lanka does not escape from the ethnic conflict despite constitutional amendment to protect and promote the ruling authority. It is appreciable that the peace initiative taken up by the conflicting parties with the mediation of Norway despite various hurdles of compromising, acceptance and tolerance.

The island country Maldives is little known except the protest that came up in 90s had been controlled with the assistance of India.

The Himalayan nation, Nepal, is gripped by the bloody war between the “under ground Maoists” and the government. Nepal is also over flown by the controversy of the constitutional Monarchy and Democracy. The existing multi-perception of the system of governance have weakened the multicultural, multi party, democracy of Nepal. The people tolerance in terms of religion, caste, creed, sex and political beliefs are intensified to suspicion and hatred due to the killing of innocent people and the soldiers of the conflicting parties. The so called  “last Shangri-La of the world”, Bhutan had produced ¹/₆ of its total population as refugees since 1989. The state sponsored terrorism and the discrepancy policy have compelled the Lhotshampas (Nepali speaking people of South) and Sharchops (Shangla speaking people of the East) to flee from the country. The coexistence of multicultural, multi religious and multi lingual people of Bhutan had been destroyed by the state in order to protect the supremacy of ruler creating a fear-psychosis among the citizens. The bond multicultural tolerance and respect had been so strong that we could not find the datas of the population on the basis of religion and ethnicity. Surprisingly the Royal Government of Bhutan that claimed 1.7 million population till 90s have abruptly dropped to 7 lakh plus. The existence of Monarchy, with a drafted constitution submitted to the King, have symbolized the King above all laws of the land.

The extreme enforcement of discrepancy laws that divided the family members into 7 categories, the Citizenship Act which demanded the 1958 documentary evidence to proof citizenship, high handedness of army personnel have created chaos and destroyed the multicultural respect and ethic of tolerance.

Economic Development

It is said that the economic development target under the authoritarian rulers could be achieved easily and timely. One can also argue that many decisions beneficial for the state could be finalized promptly under such rule. I would like to put forward the Bhutanese system of governance and its impact vis-à-vis economic development.

The National Assembly members are selected on the basis of their loyalty to the king. Any person raising voices on behalf of the people that contradicts with the king and the government are labeled ‘anti-nationals’.  The king selects the persons, among the beaurocrates, in the national assembly proceeding for a cabinet minister candidate. The assembly endorses it without any contestants and voting. This helps the people of the king’s coterie to strengthen their power and authority thereby protecting the interest of the ruler.  The expenditure incurred to maintain the ‘large royal family’ has no limit. The misappropriation of budget at the highest level of governance is unquestioned. The accountability lies at the lower level. The citizens are forced to provide free labour in construction of infrastructure like roads, schools, hospitals etc.  The economic development at ‘face value’ of tolerating the humiliation of its citizens. The Royal Government of Bhutan presents the slogans of “Gross National Happiness” suppressing the aspiration of people for political and social rights, economic rights and right to freedom of expression.

Though ¹/₆ of the population are living in exile, the contradiction lies with the state policy, Acts and laws. The inherit multicultural friendship, respect and ethic of tolerance still exist among the people. The unity in diversity is so strong that even the state fails to destroy it.

Ethics of Care and Justice: European citizenship question in the context of immigration

The European frame work which defines policies regulating migration flows as well as European citizenship has been increasingly determinant in the European countries.

Components of this European framework are:

1. Sorting out the divergence and convergence between national policies

2. Solidarity between the schenyen countries and

3. Attempts at defining a common European identity

With new issues concerning immigration policies like restriction of certain basic rights as the right to asylum, increasing differences between Europeans and non Europeans, and reinforcement of external controls as regard the European citizenship right from Masstricht treaty on the European Union of 1992 an its article8, Europe has decided to give birth to citizenship. In the content of an evolving political Europe. European citizenship has to cope with immigration. Among the various factors which contribute to the frame work and conceptualization of European citizenship, immigration plays an important part with in limits Charies Tilly says " Citizenship grew up as feature of strong, centralized states, yet today the European unions form of citizenship attaches its members to an institution that is not a state and may well undermine states as European hitherto known them.

Compared with Jean Bodin’s definition of national citizenship European citizenship; the nation state has lost its monopoly of references; this challenges the former relations between nationality and citizenship. It is an evolving citizenship in an evolving territory with non-fined member state, populations and cultures, beyond the national framework and challenged by immigration.

Although citizenship is challenged on several fronts this ordinarily threatened by crisis of content, it survives inspite of everything is as well. Compared to other alliances; In Europe the citizen was not ousted by the comrade neither by the consumer nor user.

European citizenship, established by the Masstricht Treaty funded on reciprocity of rights between European of the union, opens a constitutional chase in the practice of citizenship which yesterday was reserved for nationals. Other examples of the local rights vote accorded to reigners, generally those from outside of the community. Moreover, the appearance of newly excluded individuals from enjoyment and practice of European citizenship. Citizenship today is threatened by the excess of individualism by the triballsticidentity and by world wide ultraliberal consumerism.

European citizenship has three characteristics; it is a citizenship of attribution, a citizenship of reciprocity and a hierarchical citizenship. In recent years immigration has raised the question of divergence on philosophies of rights. The game is not the same for all; each country has its own definition of who is a national, thus who is a European depends on its history, its colonial past, its geography, its neighborhood and its geopolitical strategies.

The consequences are important its terms of identification of internal borders towards the other.

European citizenship is a hierarchical one, built on a series of concentric circles- at the centre we find the national of the state where s/he is living, them the European whose rights are reciprocal with those given to foreignness in other European state, then the long term non-European residents, then the non-European non residents, the refugees, and at the margins, the asylum seekers and the illegal residents.

For Europeans, the rule is almost the same for all, but in each European state the border between European and extra Europeans varies, introducing a new institutional border in substitution for the former territorial border, with some troubling hierarchies around colour, religion or former colonial status. Faced with the realization of the rights of European citizenship. The European immigrants motto citizenship residence has lost much of its strength and legitimacy. For those who have been living in Europe for more than twenty years immigrant-workers having sometime benefited from the freedom of circulation in the national colonial past, European citizenship is a regression, juridical and politically speaking, because it undermines years of mobilization around the legitimacy of stay basted on work and residence.

Contributions of immigration to European citizenship

Extra-European immigration has three main facts of an evolving European citizenship; a legal approach, dissociating nationality from citizenship and focusing on the disparities resulting from various nationality regimes all over Europe; a cultural content brining multiculturalism and a civic insight for new values.

Putting on the political and constitutional issues of the new citizenship claims were preceded by the fight for local political rights in the second part of the 70’s spreaheaded by Federation Des Associations desoutien and Travailleurs immigres in 1976 and then by the league for human rights in 1985. For all of them the pre condition for giving local political rights was constitutional reform to allow all foreign residents to vote in local elections.

Migration has introduced cultural inputs also into the content of Europe citizenship. Long term residents of non-European states are deprived of complete freedom of movement. Settlement and work in Europe, although European citizenship marks an important stage in the evolution of the concept of citizenship.

Multiculturalism seems to be an unavoidable dimension of European citizenship. European countries in relation to immigration defining what type of multiculturalism we want for Europe.

Not fragmented, folklorized and undervalued, but a multiculturalism able to include Islam and to encompass a definition of Europe not limited to Christianity, emphasizing Europe cultural specificity beyond national histories such as the philosophy of enlightenment, liberalism, socialism, nationalism, industrial revolution, secularism and democracy. Immigration brings mobilization around anti-racism, right to stay and move, family reunification. It has introduced new civic values not formerly included in the classical definition on 1989. While these values are universal, they are critical of the management in Europe policies on immigration and living together.