Katharyne Mitchell Geographies of identity: multiculturalism unplugged
State-sponsored multiculturalism is in retreat. At the same time assimilation is shedding its tarnished image and regaining its stature as a key conceptual and political tool. This incipient process of change is under way in numerous countries and in both academic and political spheres. How can we understand these trends and how can human geographers contribute to a better grasp of the contemporary backlash against multiculturalism? While the concept is used with great variation in different venues, there is currently a generalizable discourse of state-sponsored multiculturalism as ultimately failing, as ‘having exhausted itself’. This critique comes from a variety of sources and comprises quite different analytical foci vis-a-vis different aspects of multicultural politics. In some quarters it encompasses identity politics or the ‘differentialist moment’ of the last three decades in toto. Rather than identifying the multiple points of critique however, I am interested here in exploring the general tenor of this backlash, and investigating some of its causes and effects. While most of the academic rhetoric on this score has occurred outside the field of human geography, the multicultural backlash is one that is having and will continue to have major repercussions for geographers, especially for migration scholars and for those working on racial and ethnic formations.
State-sponsored multiculturalism is in retreat. At the same time assimilation is shedding its tarnished image and regaining its stature as a key conceptual and political tool. This incipient process of change is under way in numerous countries and in both academic and political spheres. How can we understand these trends and how can human geographers contribute to a better grasp of the contemporary backlash against multiculturalism? While the concept is used with great variation in different venues, there is currently a generalizable discourse of state-sponsored multiculturalism as ultimately failing, as ‘having exhausted itself’. This critique comes from a variety of sources and comprises quite different analytical foci vis-a-vis different aspects of multicultural politics. In some quarters it encompasses identity politics or the ‘differentialist moment’ of the last three decades in toto. Rather than identifying the multiple points of critique however, I am interested here in exploring the general tenor of this backlash, and investigating some of its causes and effects. While most of the academic rhetoric on this score has occurred outside the field of human geography, the multicultural backlash is one that is having and will continue to have major repercussions for geographers, especially for migration scholars and for those working on racial and ethnic formations.
State-sponsored multiculturalism is in retreat. At the same time assimilation is shedding its tarnished image and regaining its stature as a key conceptual and political tool. This incipient process of change is under way in numerous countries and in both academic and political spheres. How can we understand these trends and how can human geographers contribute to a better grasp of the contemporary backlash against multiculturalism? While the concept is used with great variation in different venues, there is currently a generalizable discourse of state-sponsored multiculturalism as ultimately failing, as ‘having exhausted itself’. This critique comes from a variety of sources and comprises quite different analytical foci vis-a-vis different aspects of multicultural politics. In some quarters it encompasses identity politics or the ‘differentialist moment’ of the last three decades in toto. Rather than identifying the multiple points of critique however, I am interested here in exploring the general tenor of this backlash, and investigating some of its causes and effects. While most of the academic rhetoric on this score has occurred outside the field of human geography, the multicultural backlash is one that is having and will continue to have major repercussions for geographers, especially for migration scholars and for those working on racial and ethnic formations.
State-sponsored multiculturalism is in retreat. At the same time assimilation is shedding its tarnished image and regaining its stature as a key conceptual and political tool. This incipient process of change is under way in numerous countries and in both academic and political spheres. How can we understand these trends and how can human geographers contribute to a better grasp of the contemporary backlash against multiculturalism? While the concept is used with great variation in different venues, there is currently a generalizable discourse of state-sponsored multiculturalism as ultimately failing, as ‘having exhausted itself’. This critique comes from a variety of sources and comprises quite different analytical foci vis-a-vis different aspects of multicultural politics. In some quarters it encompasses identity politics or the ‘differentialist moment’ of the last three decades in toto. Rather than identifying the multiple points of critique however, I am interested here in exploring the general tenor of this backlash, and investigating some of its causes and effects. While most of the academic rhetoric on this score has occurred outside the field of human geography, the multicultural backlash is one that is having and will continue to have major repercussions for geographers, especially for migration scholars and for those working on racial and ethnic formations.