The Real Value of Multiculturalism

It is ironic how much those who advocate multiculturalism and acceptance of foreign cultures in the West would also be appalled were they to go to Mumbai and see a Wal-Mart. This gives them away. They are not so attracted to multiculturalism as they are repulsed by the dominant culture in which they were raised. The word "multiculturalism" gives the impression that its proponents advocate the free mixing of various cultural elements -- that the more different kinds of culture there are in one place, the better. In practice, however, they seem more interested in diluting the Western culture that they see as vapid.

Westerners bored and disillusioned with the superficiality of Western culture. They see depth and meaning in most other cultures. Sometimes it's really there. It's not hard for a culture to have more meaning than Western culture does. But a lot of the time it's just a different kind of superficiality. And whenever they do spot that superficiality, they blame it on Western influence.

Ironically enough, multiculturalism is a predominantly Western value. Slavoj Zizek once pointed out that one of Western civilization's greatest achievements was to question the value of Western culture. You don't hear about movements in non-Western civilizations to be tolerant of immigrants and the cultural practices they import. There may be the occasional marginalized activist, but not movements as large as what you see in the West.

Western multiculturalism occasionally goes in unhealthy directions, giving undue deference to alien traditions merely because they are alien. Cosmopolitanism is great when it helps us realize where our own culture can improve, but is foolish when it compounds unhealthy practices onto other unhealthy practices, degrading all cultures involved.