Hollinger's postethnic ideal and culturism
John Press
July 11, 2008
David Hollinger´s Postethnic America: Beyond Multiculturalism is one of the most famous books on diversity in academia today. Hollinger seeks to gently guide us away from the excesses of multiculturalism, without totally abandoning our modern understanding of cultural pluralism. He has some great insights, he paints a portrait of a culture I'd like to live in. But, unfortunately, Hollinger thinks cultural diversity is much less important than culturists do.
Rather than embracing multiculturalism, Hollinger would have us adopt a "postethnic" perspective. Hollinger´s development of this idea includes some good analysis and subtlety. He knows that your color has no causal impact on your identity. His book does a service by pointing out that increasing numbers of Americans have blended heritage and that this makes our checking ethnic boxes silly. I would like to live in his postethnic world someday.
"Postethnic" denotes a concept by which we can both maintain and transcend our heritage. The "ethnic" part recognizes that there is some diversity and allows you to choose to identify with it. The "post" part means you recognize that the ethnic ascriptions are not solid. Sometimes you´ll want to play ethnic, sometimes you won´t. The good part about this vision is that it allows you to choose your identity and reflects that America will always have some diversity.
As his letting you choose between heritage and modernity indicates, Hollinger often provides compromises to balance out extremes. "Both" becomes the solution between international particularism and universalism too. In his investigation he notes that ethic nations have been the norm, but says culture neutral "civic nations" provide a new ideal. Rather than balkanization that leads to ethnic cleansing or bland anonymity he wants to construct national identities, "between the ethnos and the species." by creating a "people who honor a common future more than a common past."
Hollinger´s sanguine ability to wipe out conflict with compromises also rests on a failure to appreciate the depth of cultural diversity. While noting cultural diversity, his understanding of it apparently does not make it a possible complication worth really examining. He notes that warrior Masai masters treat their women with less respect than cattle. Clitoridectomy and Saudi values do not accord with those of western feminists. But once people with such values move here Hollinger assures us that we will be able to talk them into human rights culture via "intersubjective reason." This means all diversity will naturally and quickly give way to Western values without any culturist policies because diversity is apparent, but not real.
Hollinger believes we do not have to do anything in order to reach his "civil nation" ideal because all people everywhere, despite appearances, have a lifestyle conducive to first world economies, believe in democracy, freedom of speech and the separation of church and state. Culturism notes that diversity exists and is real. Hollinger is right in noting that our identities are fluid and that we will have, and can enjoy, some diversity in Western nations. But life is serious. Conflict happens. Economies tank. Some culture´s birthrates and dependency on welfare are sapping our infrastructure. Some cultures have seriously anti-Western values. Some cultures applaud criminality; some are violent. Diversity is real.
If cultures are not assimilating or promoting anti-Western values, we must stop immigration from those countries. Our public media need to send a message by not broadcasting anti-social music. Schools must enforce consequences for teen pregnancy and disrespect. We should try not to subsidize other nations via technology transfer, nation building and trade deficits. We need pro-active culturist laws that show we value our culture or we may lose it. People can assimilate and become helpful and productive Americans. We can regain our competitive edge again. But, celebrating and ignoring cultural diversity will not provide enough guidance to make that happen.
Rather than embracing multiculturalism, Hollinger would have us adopt a "postethnic" perspective. Hollinger´s development of this idea includes some good analysis and subtlety. He knows that your color has no causal impact on your identity. His book does a service by pointing out that increasing numbers of Americans have blended heritage and that this makes our checking ethnic boxes silly. I would like to live in his postethnic world someday.
"Postethnic" denotes a concept by which we can both maintain and transcend our heritage. The "ethnic" part recognizes that there is some diversity and allows you to choose to identify with it. The "post" part means you recognize that the ethnic ascriptions are not solid. Sometimes you´ll want to play ethnic, sometimes you won´t. The good part about this vision is that it allows you to choose your identity and reflects that America will always have some diversity.
As his letting you choose between heritage and modernity indicates, Hollinger often provides compromises to balance out extremes. "Both" becomes the solution between international particularism and universalism too. In his investigation he notes that ethic nations have been the norm, but says culture neutral "civic nations" provide a new ideal. Rather than balkanization that leads to ethnic cleansing or bland anonymity he wants to construct national identities, "between the ethnos and the species." by creating a "people who honor a common future more than a common past."
Hollinger´s sanguine ability to wipe out conflict with compromises also rests on a failure to appreciate the depth of cultural diversity. While noting cultural diversity, his understanding of it apparently does not make it a possible complication worth really examining. He notes that warrior Masai masters treat their women with less respect than cattle. Clitoridectomy and Saudi values do not accord with those of western feminists. But once people with such values move here Hollinger assures us that we will be able to talk them into human rights culture via "intersubjective reason." This means all diversity will naturally and quickly give way to Western values without any culturist policies because diversity is apparent, but not real.
Hollinger believes we do not have to do anything in order to reach his "civil nation" ideal because all people everywhere, despite appearances, have a lifestyle conducive to first world economies, believe in democracy, freedom of speech and the separation of church and state. Culturism notes that diversity exists and is real. Hollinger is right in noting that our identities are fluid and that we will have, and can enjoy, some diversity in Western nations. But life is serious. Conflict happens. Economies tank. Some culture´s birthrates and dependency on welfare are sapping our infrastructure. Some cultures have seriously anti-Western values. Some cultures applaud criminality; some are violent. Diversity is real.
If cultures are not assimilating or promoting anti-Western values, we must stop immigration from those countries. Our public media need to send a message by not broadcasting anti-social music. Schools must enforce consequences for teen pregnancy and disrespect. We should try not to subsidize other nations via technology transfer, nation building and trade deficits. We need pro-active culturist laws that show we value our culture or we may lose it. People can assimilate and become helpful and productive Americans. We can regain our competitive edge again. But, celebrating and ignoring cultural diversity will not provide enough guidance to make that happen.
Print
Email
