Lights and shadows of multiculturalism

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

The interested reader is referred to the discussion in Cesareo (2000).

Petrosino highlights further subcategorisations of ethnicity based on different readings: in particular, the primordial approach defines ethnicity as a modality of belonging so deeply rooted as to appear innate and thus substantially unchanged through time, whereas the instrumentalist approaches consider ethnicity an opportunity to spend in the political market in order to obtain an advantageous redistribution of available resources (Petrosino 1996).

We can refer to the American example to understand the consensual version of pluralism. There the various groups have mantained their traditional elements and simultaneously have conformed to the models publicly shared, ultimately summed up as the ‘American Way of Life’. At the beginning of the 20th century, Kallen, preoccupied******with the increasing mass-Americanisation of the United States, called for an economic and political recognition of cultural diversity: this marked the beginning of the ‘hyphen-Americans’ forms (Italian-Americans, etc.). These forms assigned to the left element—that is the part which reflects the cultural dimension—more relevance than to the right element, which captures the political-economic dimension (Kallen 1924). Later, this asymmetry was remedied by assigning equal value and dignity to both specifications of these hyphenated forms (Walzer 1992).

The classical liberal model does not ensure the integration of minority ethnic groups, but tends to eliminate ethnic differences and to bring about a radicalisation of inter‐ethnic conflicts. The model defined here as ‘neoliberal differs from the classical liberal model because it strives to reach a balance between unity and fragmentation.

The change in marketing strategy adopted by McDonald's is emblematic, in that they decided to offer their standardised food (e.g. the Big Mac) side to side with local foods and flavours in the different geographical areas. This can be considered a key cultural answer demonstrating how globalisation can be viewed in terms of both homogenisation and differentiation.