Monday, February 07, 2011

Memo To UK PM, David Cameron: (Eyes Only) Multicultarism In Sports & Politics!

Isoa Damu of England races away in the semi final match against Samoa during the IRB Sevens tournament at the Dubai Sevens Stadium on December 5, 2009 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Isoa Damu of England races away in the semi final match
against Samoa during the IRB Sevens tournament at the Dubai Sevens Stadium on December 5, 2009 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
(December 4, 2009 - Photo by David Rogers/Getty Images Europe)Isoa Damu of England races away in the semi final match against Samoa during the IRB Sevens tournament at the Dubai Sevens Stadium on December 5, 2009 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.






British P.M, David Cameron's speech recently in Munich, Germany that bad-mouthed multiculturalism,
has ignited the forums of discourse far and wide among the inner and outer spans of the internet.

David Cameron's speech (video posted below).



A careful scan of the audience race quotients during that particular speech in Munich, really does portray a single thimble, aside from others from the entire color spectrum.



What does the word 'multiculturalism' mean?

Man walking with Union flag umbrellaThe multiculturalism debate is guaranteed to whip up a storm

Pundits have been reacting to a speech by David Cameron in which the prime minister argued multiculturalism had "failed". But what do commentators actually mean by the term?

It is one of the most emotive and sensitive subjects in British politics.

But at times it seems there are as many definitions of multiculturalism as there are columnists, experts and intellectuals prepared to weigh into the debate.

The subject has become the focus of renewed scrutiny in the wake of a speech by prime minister David Cameron, in which he told a security conference in Germany that the UK needed a stronger national identity to prevent extremism.

In his speech, which has provoked a political storm, Mr Cameron defines "the doctrine of state multiculturalism" as a strategy which has "encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream".

This characterisation is not new. In 2004 Trevor Phillips, chairman of the the Commission for Racial Equality - now the Equality and Human Rights Commission - told the Times that multiculturalism was out of datebecause it "suggests separateness" and should be replaced with policies which promote integration and "assert a core of Britishness".

But is everyone who uses the term referring to the same phenomenon?

Academics' definitions of multiculturalism refer to anything from people of different communities living alongside each other to ethnic or religious groups leading completely separate lives.

Likewise, columnists who write about multiculturalism don't often define what they mean by the term, looking instead at what it is not.

The Oxford English Dictionary offers a broad definition of multiculturalism as the "characteristics of a multicultural society" and "the policy or process whereby the distinctive identities of the cultural groups within such a society are maintained or supported".

Click to play

David Cameron said Britain had encouraged different cultures to live separate lives

Lord Sacks, Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth says in the Times that multiculturalism was intended to create a more tolerant society, one in which everyone, regardless of colour, creed or culture, felt at home. But, he says, multiculturalism's message is "there is no need to integrate".

He distinguishes between tolerance and multiculturalism - using the Netherlands as an example of a tolerant, rather than multicultural, society.

Additionally, he says the current meaning of multiculturalism is part of the wider European phenomenon of moral relativism and talks of multiculturalism as dissolving national identity, shared values and collective identity which "makes it impossible for groups to integrate because there is nothing to integrate into".

Others, however, see the term as offering a range of meanings. In theObserver, the editor of Prospect magazine, David Goodhart, insists the strategy has taken on different forms within the UK over the years.

He distinguishes between the "live and let live" multiculturalism of the 1950s, which "assumed that if people could keep significant aspects of their culture they would choose to integrate in their own way"; the 1980s "'soft' multiculturalism of tolerance and equal rights"; and the more recent "hard" multiculturalism "of positive promotion of religious and ethnic identities".

Rod Liddle says in the Spectator that multiculturalism is a notion that cultures, no matter how antithetical to the norm, or anti-social, should be allowed to develop unhindered, without criticism.

Melanie Phillips takes this argument further in the Daily Mail, arguing that multiculturalism is a form of reverse-racism and "sickeningly hypocritical".

However, Madeleine Bunting of the Guardian says Mr Cameron has offered "a straw man version of multiculturalism". Instead of promoting segregation, she says, it is "a matter of pragmatism" - reaching out to organisations within ethnic communities who can help the government achieve its goals of maintaining good community relations.

In the same newspaper in March 2010, Antony Lerman, a former director of the Institute for Jewish Policy Research, pointed to some of theacademic work on multiculturalism to show it is the opposite of a philosophy of separateness. He cited Professor Bhikhu Parekh's definition which says, far from "putting people into ethnic boxes", multiculturalism is a "fusion in which a culture borrows bits of others and creatively transforms both itself and them".

Professor Tariq Modood is director of the Centre for Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship at the University of Bristol and wrote Still Not Easy Being British: Struggles for a Multicultural Citizenship. He says in a Runnymede Trust web chat that multiculturalism has many meanings, but the minimum is the need to politically identify groups, typically by ethnicity, and to work to remove stigmatisation, exclusion and domination in relation to such groups.

The debate around multiculturalism may be an important one. But while public discussion of the subject may have become more familiar, there remains little consensus about what the word actually means.



Comments

  • This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.

  • This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.

  • This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.

  • This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.

  • This comment is awaiting moderation. Explain.

  • In 2009, less than 1% of terrorist attack in Europe were carried out by Muslims (Source - Europol, TE-SAT 2010). Cameron talking about "Muslims do not become terrorists overnight..." is purely populist talk that taps into misplaced, developing prejudice among the electorate. We need genuine leadership from our Prime Minister, not political posturing.

  • Really this is David Cameroon's "rivers of blood" speech, which encourages newspapers columnists and others to spout blatant racism. "Failed Multiculturism" is "Political Correctness Gone Mad" for the 21st Century!

  • This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke theHouse Rules.

  • moral relativism is anti excellence. it is a pig philosophy that denies there is anything called the good. if human rights for all is good then why tolerate and promote cultures that are anti human rights for all as a 'good'? The bbc is promoting pig philosophy all the time as a good. The highest idea of humanity on 1 xtra seems to be some gang banging drug dealer who uses extreme violence?

  • The French have favoured "uniculturalism" over multiculturalism, believing that everyone who lives in France (or in the DOM/TOM) should basically adopt French culture. That does not preclude them from retaining elements of their own native culture in parallel, but it does mean that people are encouraged to integrate rather than remain totally separate. It is not 100% succesful but it works better.

  • I am all in favour of multicultureism in the UK and intergration but surely it shouldnt be forced on people of different ethnic backgrounds

  • Whatever the word multiculturalism means, if David Cameron and Melanie Phillips are against it, then it must be bad. So, let's have the opposite - monoculturalism. Let's all wear the same clothes, eat the same food, listen to the same music, read the same newspaper, believe the same ideas, and vote for the same politicians. Yes?

  • Very disappointing that the most senior politician in the country should come out with such an ill-advised and potentially inflammatory statement. You've not even been in office a year David but the majority of the electorate are already counting down the days until they can be rid of you, comments such as those about "failed" multiculturalism serve only to enhance your rap sheet!

  • It hasn't worked is because it was foisted on the population without consent or debate, and then we were lambasted for not liking it. The problems were always ours, never the fault of the immigrants. Political interference made it worse, promoting positive discrimination, hauling people into court, awarding huge damages for perceived racism, giving special "rights". It made minorities of natives

  • isn’t it the human condition for people to search out those who are similar? at the beginning of this article I thought that multiculturalism hasn’t failed we live largely at peace with one another, however the more you think about it, the less we actually integrate together, perhaps an introduction of the Dutch Citizenship test, where ppl need to be comfortable with the countrys ideals

Add to: Digg Add to: Del.icio.us Add to: Reddit Add to: StumbleUpon Add to: Furl Add to: Yahoo Add to: Spurl Add to: Google Add to: Technorati Add to: Newsvine
Translate
Recent Posts
Community
Share

Monday, January 17, 2011

Clinton On China-US relations.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speech on US-Sino relations. Clinton speech at the new Richard Holbroke series of lectures held in the Benjamin Franklin room. Clinton's remarks on human rights issue was skillfully inserted at the end of a long and winded description on the need for cooperation of two great nations. Also reminding us that this is not a G-2 relationship but a multi-polared and multi-layered relationship. Clinton speech also welcomed China's role in a comprehensive new area which the world finds itself.

Clinton stressed that relations have reached a critical point and the two counties need to work together more effectively. "We’re no longer in a 'zero-sum' world of foreign policy where the rise of one country diminishes another," Sec. Clinton said. She added, "In this more complicated world, the U.S. and China are entangled and China’s rise is good for the U.S."

Chinese Pres. Hu's State Visit begins Tuesday | C-SPAN

Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
Social Bookmarking
Add to: Digg Add to: Del.icio.us Add to: Reddit Add to: StumbleUpon Add to: Furl Add to: Yahoo Add to: Spurl Add to: Google Add to: Technorati Add to: Newsvine

A Tribute To Dr. M.L King Jnr.

SiFM considers and ponders on the timeless words of Martin Luther King Jnr on this day.

According to Wikipedia that particular speech:

King delivered a speech titled "Beyond Vietnam".[87] In the speech, he spoke strongly against the U.S.'s role in the war, insisting that the U.S. was in Vietnam "to occupy it as an American colony"[88] and calling the U.S. government "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today".[89] He also argued that the country needed larger and broader moral changes:

A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth. With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: "This is not just."[90]



More at The Real News



Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
Social Bookmarking
Add to: Digg Add to: Del.icio.us Add to: Reddit Add to: StumbleUpon Add to: Furl Add to: Yahoo Add to: Spurl Add to: Google Add to: Technorati Add to: Newsvine

Thursday, January 13, 2011

The Embedded Point Of View- Fiji Friends & Neighbors



East Asia Forum website published an opinion article from Sandra Tarte of University of South Pacific, regarding Fiji's growing circle of Friends and the circumstances surrounding the geo-political axial shift.



The excerpt:

Fiji’s search for new friends

January 13th, 2011

Author: Sandra Tarte, USP, Suva

In 2010, Fiji marked 40 years of independence. Significantly, the Prime Minister, Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama, chose to celebrate the anniversary at the World Expo in Shanghai, rather than at home.

In many ways, this choice underscored the focus of Fiji’s leadership in 2010, which was to diversify and broaden international partnerships. Motivated by the need to deal with pressing economic problems at home and counter diplomatic sanctions that have isolated it from close neighbours Australia and New Zealand, and from the Pacific Islands Forum, Fiji adopted an increasingly proactive foreign policy in the past year.

This approach was matched by an evident willingness on the part of new and old friends to engage with Fiji and its government, notwithstanding the lack of progress towards democratic elections. This shift reflected a mix of opportunism, pragmatism and geo-political design (if not disquiet on the part of some at the shifting patterns of influence in the region).

Addressing the United Nations General Assembly in September, Prime Minister Bainimarama described Fiji’s new foreign policy orientation as an integral part of his Government’s Strategic Framework for Change – the set of reforms that he was committed to implementing before Fiji would return to elected government in 2014. But the search for alternative foreign partners has also been borne out of necessity, as a way to counter the effects of Fiji’s suspension in 2009 from key regional and international groupings (the Pacific islands Forum and Commonwealth).

Although often dubbed Fiji’s ‘Look North Policy’, the foreign policy trend in 2010 was to collaborate with everyone and anyone. Fiji sought membership of the Non Aligned Movement and announced the setting up of three new embassies in 2011 – in Indonesia, Brazil and South Africa. It hosted a visit from a Russian delegation, led by the resident Ambassador in Canberra, which aimed ‘to find concrete areas of cooperation’. Fiji’s Prime Minister and Attorney General also took part in a first-ever Pacific SIDS (Small Island Developing States)-Arab League Summit, which was hosted by Abu Dhabi in June. This initiative appeared to be in appreciation of the support of Pacific island members of the United Nations for the United Arab Emirates’ bid to host the International Renewable Energy Agency. One outcome of this summit was a proposal to open an Arab League office in the Pacific (possibly in Fiji – which was recognised by the Abu Dhabi host as ‘an administrative, economic and geographical hub’ of the region.)

The Pacific-Arab League summit underscored the growing role in the United Nations of the Pacific-SIDS group, and the diminishing significance of the Pacific Islands Forum bloc (of which Australia and New Zealand are members). This appeared to be the direct, though probably inadvertent, consequence of Fiji’s suspension from the Forum. The impact of this shift for Australia was remarked upon when Canada lost a crucial vote for United Nations Security Council rotating membership.

By far the most frequent high-level traffic in 2010 was to China. In part this was due to the World Expo in Shanghai, as mentioned earlier, which was seen as a golden opportunity to promote Fiji’s products and raise its profile (mainly, but not only, to China). There were several so-called trade missions to China led by the Prime Minister, a visit by the Foreign Minister and a visit by the country’s President, at the invitation of the Governor of Ningxia Province. Although the visits appeared mainly exploratory and few concrete outcomes were announced, a number of future deals were mooted, including new arms procurement (to support Fiji’s peacekeeping operations) and Chinese investment in the expansion of the Government shipyard and slipway in Suva.

Not to be outdone, Japan included Fiji’s Foreign Minister in its first ever PALM Ministerial Interim meeting, held in October in Tokyo. (This meeting aimed to follow-up and review the outcomes of the Fifth Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting – PALM 5). The meeting also provided an opportunity for bilateral talks between the Fiji Foreign Minister and his Japanese counterpart, signaling a shift in policy by Japan towards closer engagement with Fiji.

The United States also announced a policy of more direct engagement with the Bainimarama Government in 2010, in line with its broader policy of ‘re-engagement’ with the Pacific islands. But there was little to show for this by the year’s end. Relations soured in the wake of the non-issuing of visas to senior Fiji government officials to attend international meetings, including at the United Nations. This reportedly prompted Prime Minister Bainimarama to suggest the relocation of the UN to China.

These diplomatic disputes with the US echoed tensions that continue to mar Fiji’s relations with its closest developed neighbors and trading partners – Australia and New Zealand. Despite some promising signs at the beginning of the year of a warming of ties, this failed to eventuate. The expulsion of Australia’s acting High Commissioner in July signaled a low-point in bilateral relations, with implications for regional politics.

The context of the diplomatic expulsion was reportedly Australia’s efforts to derail a meeting of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) in Fiji – and deny the Fijian Prime Minister the opportunity to assume chairmanship of the sub-regional group. Fiji had planned to turn the meeting into a broader MSG-Plus (including other Pacific island countries) and build the MSG into an alternative conduit for aid and diplomacy. The sudden cancellation of the meeting by MSG Chair (Vanuatu’s Prime Minister) was viewed by Fiji as a direct result of Australian and New Zealand pressure. But the situation was salvaged by turning the planned event into a politically successful ‘Engaging with the Pacific’ meeting at which Prime Minister Bainimarama played generous host and offered bilateral and regional assistance to his Pacific SIDS neighbors. A reconciliation ceremony in December subsequently served to heal the rift within the MSG between Fiji and Vanuatu.

While there remains support within the Fiji foreign affairs establishment for dialogue and engagement with Australia, New Zealand and the Forum, there is also a sense that time is running out. If Australia and New Zealand do not ‘restore ties’, so the argument goes, a generation of foreign affairs officers will emerge who, along with their counterparts in the Fiji Military Forces , will only know and want to ‘Look North’. Judging by events of the past year, Fiji’s realignment of its international relationships seems set to continue.

Dr Sandra Tarte is Director, Politics and International Affairs Program at the University of the South Pacific in Suva, Fiji.

This is part of a special feature: 2010 in review and the year ahead.

Print this post Print this post
Share:
View more posts by Sandra Tarte

Related Articles:

  1. Preventing Fiji from becoming the pariah state of the Pacific
  2. Fiji and The Forum
  3. A year of greater entrenchment for Fiji’s military regime
  4. Fiji’s Long Shadow

What other people are reading:

  1. Japan’s foreign economic relations
  2. US engagement with Asia – Weekly editorial
  3. The challenge of becoming a ‘multiethnic Korea’ in the 21st century


A different take on the issue of Fiji, was a parting short from Lowy-Institute, Meyer Foundation Melanesia Program, where Jenny Hayward Jones interpreted her perceptions from a skewed prism.


The excerpt from Jones last post from Melanesian Program:

THE MYER FOUNDATION MELANESIA PROGRAM

What have I changed my mind about this year? China in the Pacific

By Jenny Hayward-Jones - 23 December 2010 11:41AM

I have for some time been relatively sanguine about the rise of China in the Pacific. I believed that, like most powers which engage with Pacific Island countries, China wanted a stable and prosperous Pacific region. Chinese trade, aid and investment in the Pacific were good if they created wealth and improved infrastructure. China's truce with Taiwan over the race for diplomatic recognition in the Pacific offered an opportunity for China to mature as a donor.

It is also vital for the Pacific to have access to a greater range of advice than that provided by Australia and New Zealand, and to have advice from other developing countries. China provides an alternative development model that offers some useful lessons for decision-makers in Pacific Islands.

But I am no longer convinced that China is a force for good in the Pacific:

Chinese infrastructure aid does not usually use local suppliers or employ many local citizens, thus constraining opportunities and creating seeds for anti-Chinese sentiment which has, in a number of countries, already resulted in racially-motivated violence.
Pacific Island nations are experiencing or will experience difficulties repaying Chinese loans, resulting in higher debt-to-GDP ratios and downgrading their credit ratings.
China has shown little interest in aid coordination and its methods of aid delivery could undermine the efforts of other donors in some Pacific countries.

The Fiji Government has invoked the Chinese model of development as justification for censoring the media and ruling by decree. This interpretation of the China model, particularly if replicated by other Pacific Island countries, has the potential to wind back progress across the region in governance and transparency.

China's inability to curb illegal Chinese immigration in Papua New Guinea and elsewhere, or to encourage Chinese companies to improve their relations with local communities or address Chinese organised crime, is likely to create more local resentment.

The rapid increase in China-Pacific Islands trade means that the two major trading partners (Australia and China) of most Pacific Island countries are strategic competitors, posing some potentially difficult choices for countries which benefit from the security umbrella provided by Australia.

China's desire to project a global presence through its economic might, diplomacy and its ability to project power into the 'second island chain' raises the possibility that it will come into conflict with US, French, Australian and New Zealand military interests in the Pacific.







It also appears that Meyer Foundation has established a different tack; moving away from the Melanesia Program which Jones was Director of, to the new sub-blog of "The Interpreter" titled "Interpreting The Aid Review".

Equally interesting is the role of Foundations, in the formation of Foreign Policy; heretofore demonstrated as a waste of resources and intellectual capacity.

Poised and seemingly benevolent these financial vehicles are, the capacity for these foundations to dictate what the policy priorities a nation undertakes makes one want to re-think, and review the proceeding steps, determining how far that logic train would extend to.

Another change in tack, also comes from Kevin Rudd, doing a fabulous P.R job in rescuing baggage from Brisbane homes, featured in an ABC video article. Suffice to say, the ABC reporter aided and abetted(even assisting in baggage handling) the PR campaign, that may be perceived as staged. Another embedded reporter?


(Video Posted below)




One should not dismiss, Rudd's ability to seize the window of opportunity, given the situation; since it was Rudd was just visiting troops in the Mid-East, according to the Foreign Minister's own Youtube channel.



Video of Rudd visiting troops and others(posted below):












Save Page As PDF
Zemanta Pixie
Social Bookmarking
Add to: Digg Add to: Del.icio.us Add to: Reddit Add to: StumbleUpon Add to: Furl Add to: Yahoo Add to: Spurl Add to: Google Add to: Technorati Add to: Newsvine