Introduction to Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship

In the Winter, 1998 semester, the first section of Sociology 304 will be based on the book, WillKymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Clarendon Press, Oxford,1995).

Kymlicka in Multicultural Citizenship focuses on both theory and on a contemporary problem ­ thatof multiculturalism and group rights.

Liberalism either inadequate or has not been able to consider group rights within its model. Thatis, the liberal model is often considered to be concerned exclusively with individual rights.Considers issues that have been raised by social movements and individuals.Attempts to provide a model and policy guidelines.Many examples, of which the bulk are Canadian ­ Quebec, first nations, immigrants, ethnicgroups.

Kymlicka's analysis is rooted in contemporary social analysis in that it examines the ethnic and racialdiversity of societies, and the increasing connection among these societies (with modern forms oftransportation and communication). These increased connections have raised the issues of identityand rights to the forefront in social movements, individual experiences, and in public policy. Hisanalysis is theoretical in that he considers the nature of the individual and of culture; the meaningof freedom, liberty, the good life; the connection between the individual and culture, groups andsociety; and the nature of society as a whole (see pp. 80­81). He sets this analysis in the liberaltradition, one that is more clearly political than sociological. At the same time, much of sociologicalanalysis can be considered to have emerged out of the liberal tradition, either positively (Durkheim,Weber, Parsons) or in reaction to some of the problems associated with liberalism (Marx). Kymlickadevelops an analysis that leads to policy implications and to implications for the way that we lookat ourselves and others, and how we as individuals, and in groups and in society, relate to eachother. In societies that will be increasingly diverse in terms of ethnicity in the next century, theseare especially important issues to consider.

Will Kymlicka

Professor in the Department of Philosophy, University of Ottawa and Research Director of theCanadian Centre for Philosophy and Public Policy. Kymlicka's writings are philosophical, but are alsoapplied to current issues and debates. His Liberalism, Community, and Culture analysescommunitarian writers and issues related to cultural membership. Kymlicka has written aboutcitizenship issues and multiculturalism for the federal government. Among the other writers hediscusses and uses are Rawls, Charles Taylor, Walzer, and Sandel. Kymlicka's work appears to be inthe area of political theory, with his work being in the liberal tradition, attempting to defend andexpand the liberal view of rights, and the individual and society.

The arguments in Multicultural Citizenship are clear and well presented, with many Canadianexamples ­ aboriginal peoples, Quebec, immigrant groups, and multiculturalism. Kymlicka's carefullyreasoned arguments force the reader to rethink his or her approach to issues related to minorities andgroup rights, and deal with prejudice, misconception, and fuzzy thinking.

Click here to view the web page of Will Kymlicka. His e­mail address is kymlicka@uottawa.ca. WillKymlicka received his B.A. in philosophy and politics from Queen's University in 1984, and hisD.Phil in philosophy from Oxford University in 1987. Since then, he has had research fellowships atvarious universities in the United States (Princeton), Canada (Queen's; Toronto; Ottawa), and overseas(European University Institute). He is the author of three books published by Oxford University Press:Liberalism, Community, and Culture (1989), Contemporary Political Philosophy (1990), and

Multicultural Citizenship (1995), which was awarded the Macpherson Prize by the Canadian PoliticalScience Assocation, and the Bunche Award by the American Political Science Association. He is alsothe editor of Justice in Political Philosophy (Elgar, 1992), The Rights of Minority Cultures (Oxford,1995), and Ethnicity and Group Rights (NYU, 1997). He is currently Visiting Professor of Philosophyat both the University of Ottawa and Carleton University, and coordinator of a SSHRC­fundedresearch network on "Citizenship, Democracy and Identity in a Multiethnic State".

The CCPPP Project on Citizenship, Democracy and Ethnocultural Diversity

Professor Kymlicka edits and distributes a quarterly electronic newsletter updating recentdevelopments in the field, of which eight issues have now been produced. The newsletter containsinformation about upcoming conferences, recent publications, journals, internet resources, and relatedresearch programs. The full text of the eight back­issues and other parts of the project can be viewedat the website of the Project on Citizenship, Democracy and Ethnocultural Diversity .

Selection of Book. I came across the book by chance, but it appeared to be closely connected to someof the research that I was working on. In 1992­3, I coordinated a research study of fifty­fiveindividuals who had arrived in Regina as refugees from Southeast Asia, Central America, EasternEurope, and the Middle East. This study asked these people about a great variety of issues related totheir past, their arrival in Canada, their settlement, and their views on a number of immigration andsettlement related issues. Among these were English language knowledge and acquisition, labourforce history, health related issues, and family and community issues. The aim of the project was todetermine some of the barriers faced by these immigrants, with a view to improving the welcoming,settlement, and integration process. This resulted in a report Refugee Settlement and Integration inRegina, 1995. Note that immigration and refugee arrivals are not great in number in Saskatchewan,but are steady and non­negligible.

Among the issues that we asked these immigrants to comment on was mutliculturalism. We asked theimmigrants whether they were aware of the policy of multiculturalism, and if so, "what doesmulticulturalism mean to you." Thirty­four of the fifty­five said that they were aware ofmulticulturalism and volunteered a meaning for it. We had not analyzed these comments until thesummer of 1996. Christopher Fries, a Sociology honours student, and I examined these comments indetail last summer and wrote a paper "A 'Great' Large Family: Understandings of MulticulturalismAmong Newcomers to Canada," which we presented at the National Symposium on Immigration andIntegration in Winnipeg in October, 1996.

As part of this section of the course, we will look at the comments and the issues raised in this paper.In the process of working on the issue of multiculturalism, I came across Kymlicka's book and foundit useful. In addition, our Department had become part of the Prairie Centre of Excellence forResearch on Immigration and Integration, centred in Edmonton. Multiculturalism seemed closelyconnected to research in this area.

Outline of Multicultural Citizenship

Cultural diversity has become a central feature of contemporary society, and seems likely to becomemore so in the immediate future. Increasing contact among societies as a result of improvedcommunication and transportation has made for population movements and population change.Increased diversity in Canada is the result of changed patterns of immigration, with many more peopleof colour immigrating to Canada. Ethnocultural conflicts have become the main type of politicalviolence around the world ­ Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, Middle East, etc.

Political and social action of various ethnic/minority groups have made their presence felt. InCanada, first nations peoples have become more politically active and have demanded that theirrequests be honoured. The issue of the relations between Quebec and Canada have dominated much

political discussion in Canada in recent years. This raises the issue of rights for individuals andgroups who feel that they have not been equitably or justly treated. What are these rights, howextensive are they, and do they adhere to the group or just the individual? Finally, government policyand programs have changed in an attempt to deal with some of these demographic, social, andpolitical changes. Policies related to immigration, land claims, self­government, language, andcustoms have all changed in recent years. The multicultural policy of Canada is a notable example.

Multicultural and multiculturalism have been used in various ways. One approach is to include the"perspectives of women, minorities, and non­Western cultures in recognition of the increasinglydiverse character of life in modern Western societies." (The Columbia Dictionary of Modern Literaryand Cultural Criticism). Viewed this way, all the social categories of Folbre could be included. WhileKymlicka's approach might be extended to include all of these, his focus is on ethnocultural groups ­ethnic groups, national minorities, nations, and peoples. Part of the next section will be to define andunderstand what these mean ­ these are some of the most confusing aspects of contemporary theory,partly because of the variety of meanings and the politically charged atmosphere that is part of thediscussion of these.

Liberal theory. Kymlicka sets his analysis firmly within the tradition of liberalism. This is thepolitical theoretical counterpart of neoclassical economics. That is, liberalism looks on the individualas autonomous and able to act. Emphasis is placed on "individual freedom, whether defined asfreedom from coercion, as moral self­determination, or as the right to individual happiness" (Seidman,p. 15). Tolerance and respect for the rights of others are part of this, so that pluralism in social andpolitical affairs is a necessary feature of a liberal society. Freedom of expression, freedom ofconscience, freedom of association are some of the rights that have typically been associated withliberalism and liberal democracies. As a political philosophy, liberalism has often been seen as"primarily concerned with the relationship between the individual and the state, and with limiting stateintrusions on the liberties of citizens" (Kymlicka, Liberalism, p. 1).

Individualism and individual rights are often viewed as the defining characteristic of liberalism, sothat there are minimal or no group rights that are part of collectivities. All rights adhere to theindividual, and liberalism has often been criticized for being excessively individualistic. In contrast,Kymlicka argues that "liberalism also contains a broader account of the relationship between theindividual and society ­ and, in particular, of the individual's membership in a community and aculture" (Kymlicka, Liberalism, p. 1). It is this argument that Kymlicka pursues in MulticulturalCitizenship, and where he argues that group rights are part of liberal thought. Group rights can beviewed as admissible within liberalism and even necessary for freedom and equality.

Kymlicka distinguishes two types of ethnocultural groups ­ (i) national minorities in multinationstates and (ii) ethnic groups in polyethnic states. A particular state could be a combination of these,as is Canada. Most states have aspects of each, although Canada is more clearly an example of acountry with at least two national minorities and many ethnic groups.

National minorities are groups that have in common some or all of history, community, territory,language, or culture. Each of these is sometimes referred to as a nation, people, or culture. Each ofthese may have become a minority involuntarily through conquest, colonization, or expansion, or itcould have voluntarily agreed to enter a federation with one or more other nations, peoples, orcultures. Kymlicka defines national minorities in terms of culture, and argues that if these minoritieswish to retain their cultures, they should be recognized as distinct. The group rights that may beassociated with national minorities are self­government rights or special representation rights.While these have to be worked out on a case by case basis, Kymlicka makes a strong case for theserights where national minorities have a claim to be peoples or cultures. For Kymlicka these are nottemporary rights, but are rights that should be recognized on a permanent basis, because these areinherent rights of the national minority. Of course, these groups could decide to secede, and this maybe the best solution in some cases. But in other cases, it may be possible to accommodate the rights ofnational minorities through a combination of self­government and special representation rights.

Polyethnic Rights. In contrast, Kymlicka argues that immigrant groups are generally ethnic groups,and can be accorded what he calls polyethnic rights in a polyethnic state. Kymlicka notes thatimmigration is voluntary (he deals separately with the issue of refugees) and argues that immigrantsgenerally wish to integrate into the society and culture that they enter. At the same time, they maywish to retain some aspects of their culture, and retention of these is especially important to them.Among the rights that Kymlicka argues could be given to these ethnic groups are policies related toending racism and discrimination, education, some types of affirmative action, exemption from somerules which may violate religious practices, and public funding of cultural practices.

Culture. Why such rights are so important to national minorities and ethnic groups is outlined inChapter 5 and is related to culture. Kymlicka has many useful comments concerning the meaning ofculture and the importance of culture for individuals. The particular culture that is discusses is societalculture, the history, traditions, and conventions that go along with the society, and the set of socialpractices and institutions that are associated with the societal culture. Culture of origin provides abasic resource for people, and integration into a new culture is difficult for people. In thesecircumstances, it may be important to strengthen the culture and provide protections for variousminority groups. But note that this leads in quite different directions for national minorities than forimmigrant ethnic groups. That latter generally wish to integrate, the protections may not need bepermanent, and are often fairly limited. For national minorities, the argument may lead in the directionof strengthening their societal culture, as a permanent feature, with extensive self­government rights.Kymlicka does not argue for self­government rights for ethnic groups.

Problems. Kymlicka does not shy away from dealing with problem cases and examples which do notfit his approach. He recognizes that each group, or parts of groups, may require different types oftreatment. One example is African­Americans in the United States ­ neither a voluntary immigrantgroup nor a national minority. In general, African­Americans have desired integration and anextension of full individual rights to them, rather than requesting group rights. A second group thatmay not fit is refugees, who leave their country and culture involuntarily, and may or may not wish toenter the culture of the new country where they find refuge. Some may wish to return to their countryof origin, others may become more similar to voluntary immigrants. Note though that in the ReginaRefugee Study, there were a number of refugees for whom Canada did not seem to be the first choice,and who were quite unhappy with their situation here.

Illiberal Cultures. A considerable part of the discussion involves illiberal cultures and how liberalscan deal with them. These are cultures which limit the liberty of members and where respect forindividual freedom of choice is limited or nonexistent. These could be national minorities or societalcultures that people decide to leave when they become immigrants. Both groups may try to maintainilliberal traditions in North America. Being a liberal, Kymlicka does not agree with these traditionsand practices, but argues that if national minorities are to be self­governing, then liberals cannotselectively intervene on some of these issues. This is an important policy point, because some firstnations groups may argue that they should not be subject to the Charter and to Canadian courts if theyare to be truly self­governing. For ethnic groups, maintaining such practices is inconsistent withintegration into a liberal society. For example, treatment of girls and women within some culturesseems inappropriate ­ customs like arranged marriage, female circumcision, etc. For these groups,Kymlicka argues that internal restrictions on group members be limited or nonexistent. He arguesfor external protections for these groups, but that liberal rights should exist for individuals withinthese groups.

Liberal Tradition. Kymlicka notes that the liberal tradition is not exclusively individualistic, but thatthis exclusive focus on individualism is of recent origin. He argues that all liberal societies recognizegroup rights in some form ­ even the United States, where liberal democracy is considered mostdominant. There, Kymlicka notes that the rights of aboriginal peoples and native Hawaiians maydiffer from those of other Americans. One of the ways that liberals considered groups to be importantwas through recognition of the nation­state as the basic unit of society. John Stuart Mill, one of the

most consistently liberal political theorists argued that a liberal system of self­rule would work only ifthe population constituted a national group or a single background. Nineteenth century liberalsgenerally supported assimilation of minority groups, colonization, and imperialist expansion.

The Marxist and socialist tradition in the nineteenth century was little different, with the assumptionthat the great powers ­ France, Britain, Germany ­ should be nation­states, but that small nationalitiesshould disappear. More recently socialists have adopted a variety of different approaches, but many ofthese have the same problem as noted by Folbre, they emphasize class and the achievement ofsocialism over the cultural and national issues. Many assume that these issues are part of ideology thatis used by the economically and politically powerful to divide the weak and oppressed. As a result, thesocialist tradition does not have a strong theory of culture.

In Chapter 8, issues of tolerance within the liberal tradition are addressed. By requiring freedomwithin and equality between groups, Kymlicka's approach may fall into the same trap that Mill andMarx did. Some have questioned on what basis liberal emphases on individual rights could be forcedon cultures that do not have such a tradition. Kymlicka argues that liberals cannot force suchtraditions on other countries, and should go easy on attempting to enforce such individual rights innational minorities. However, for ethnic groups that voluntarily come to a liberal, democratic country,and who wish to integrate into such a society, requiring recognition of individual rights in thesegroups does not seem unreasonable. In fact, rights such as those in the Charter may generally besupported by such immigrant, ethnic groups and individuals in those groups.

Basis for group rights. As a basis for group rights, Kymlicka makes two arguments. The equalityargument is that some minority rights actually increase equality, and that true equality requiresdifferent treatment for different groups. The problem is that depriving groups of rights such aslanguage and access to land may leave a group culturally disadvantaged, and unable to fullyparticipate in society. Examples include land and fishing rights for aboriginal people, imposing fewrestrictions on the minority but having an especially important impact on improving the position ofaboriginal people. Part of the argument here is that the state cannot be culturally neutral, there isusually an official language, has particular procedures used in the exercise of power, and determinesboundaries that my affect representation for communities of interest. With respect to polyethnicrights, holidays, work week scheduling, education, and public symbols may all present problems forsome ethnic groups.

Historical agreements such as treaties, terms of federation, agreement concerning boundaries and useof language should be recognized, especially for national minorities. This may create problems forgroups that never did cede control, and there the equality argument would have to be used. Somedifficult cases such as the Hutterites may emerge here, where promises were made many years ago,and where internal restrictions are severe. Note that individuals in these groups do have the possibilityof exit, but when doing so may be severely disadvantaged culturally and economically.

Cultural diversity is a third argument that is sometimes used to argue for special minority rights.Kymlicka is generally skeptical of these, arguing that national minority rights may do little to increasediversity within the majority culture, and could even reduce diversity. For example, it would seem thatspecial rights for Quebec might reduce cultural diversity in Western Canada. The argument here isthat one has to be clear concerning diversity within a culture as opposed to diversity between cultures.For the majority, increased cultural diversity is likely a positive development, but this is diversitywithin the culture. This can be achieved, and presently is occurring, by having more immigrant groupsintegrate into the majority culture.

Note that group rights adhere not just to the national minority or ethnic groups but may be part of therights of individuals in these groups. For example, special land rights for aboriginal people may bepart of the rights of the aboriginal group. But hunting and fishing rights may be primarily importantfor individuals in these groups. Similarly, allowing Sikhs to avoid wearing motorcycle helmets is aspecial right that individual Sikhs may wish to exercise.

Representation is deal with in Chapter 7. This is a more specifically political issue, in that the typesof formal representation and the types of groups represented in political bodies is discussed there.

Solidarity and social unity in the nation state. Chapter 9 deals with these issues, and may seem tobe a pessimistic conclusion to an otherwise optimistic approach. For ethnic groups, integration is key,and many newcomers are among the most committed citizens. In Canada, through multiculturalism,these newcomers are tolerant of and welcome diversity, and seek to work to create a better society.With respect to ethnocultural minorities, Kymlicka is very optimistic in terms of creating a sharedcivic identity. Where he is more pessimistic is with respect to national minorities. While he supportsgroup rights for these, he also recognizes that these rights are inherently divisive, are not integrative,and do not suport the same sense of shared civic identity. Kymlicka does note though that as a liberal,if a group wishes to separate, and members of the group consider that this improves their situation, theliberal solution would be to permit or encourage separation. Finally, Kymlicka notes that the sharedidentity associated with the nation state may be difficult to develop in a multination, polyethnic statelike Canada. In fact, he refers to Canada as having a situation of deep diversity, with diverse culturalgroups and diverse ways of belonging. He presents no magic solution or national goals, but arguesthat we have to work at developing the sense of shared identity if we want Canada to stay intact.

List of Some Possible Applications of Multicultural Citizenship

1. Practical Importance

For Canada and world.Increased immigration and population movement around world.Globalization.Diversity or common global culture ­ global village?Diversity within ethnic groups ­ See analysis of Peter LiIssues important for individuals and for collective identity.Important for policies related to national minorities and immigrants.Freedom, justice, equality and inequality.Liberalism ­ dying ideology or basis of current and future society.Multiculturalism.Future outcomes for polyethnic, multination societies?

2. Theoretical Importance

Political theory. No doubt of importance of these.Look for sociological implications and applications.Nature of individual and collective identity (see analysis of Folbre in next section of class).Interdisciplinary ­ politics, philosophy, and sociology.Liberalism and origins of sociology.Social order, individualism, and groups.

3. Specific Theoretical Issues

Culture ­ not theorized well in sociology.Integration ­ various meanings, approaches, and implicationsNation, people, ethnicity, community, imagined community, national minorityCollective identity and structure­agencyRights and group rightsVarious meanings of multiculturalism.

These notes were originally written for class on February 13, 1997. They were last edited onDecember 23, 1997.

Back to Sociology 304 home page.