ぼやかせていただいております。

欧米でも多文化主義は多難。

2017年02月13日 14時36分41秒 | Weblog
ulala france
‏@ulala_go



「日本は多文化共生に耐えらないので移民受け入れは無理」と言う話に反論する人が多いのは理解できるけど、個人的には同意見。

でもそれは日本が単一民族だからと言う理由ではなく、欧米は個人単位の集まりなのに対し、日本は文化的に集団が基本だから、価値観が根本的に違うと成り立たなくなるから


例えば、フランスが成功しているか、というと、


Police brutality is nothing new, for many Parisians of color


全然成功していないのが露呈している真っ最中なわけで。

そもそも、ドイツのメルケル氏
Merkel says German multicultural society has failed


イギリスのキャメロン氏

After Merkel, Cameron too says multiculturalism has failed

フランスのサルコジ氏らが


Sarkozy Joins Cameron, Merkel, Condemns Multiculturalism


多文化主義は失敗だ、と宣言しているわけですね。



buvery
‏@buvery



『多文化共生』は無理だけれど、日本に同化という形なら、別に今までやってきたことと、変わらないと思うよ。

たとえば、米国の都市部で、『多文化共生』などやっているように思っているかもしれないけれど、そんなことはありません。移民には無料の英語教育を行い、子供は米国籍を取得して、小学校で星条旗に忠誠を誓わせる。『自由』と『公平』を子供の時から叩き込む。『同化』とは良いことです。


星条旗への忠誠は、合衆国への忠誠です。いう言葉まで決まっております。RT @yuko_hirom: https://twitter.com/buvery/status/830695168697257986 … 星条旗への忠誠は自由への忠誠であって



スーパーボールのレディーガガのショーでも、反-排外主義で、inclusion のメーセージを送っているわけだけど、

Lady Gaga began the halftime show with a medley of "God Bless America" and "This Land Is Your Land" before reciting a portion of the Pledge of Allegiance.


愛国・忠誠が真っ先にくる。

多様性を強調しすぎると、バラバラになってしまうから、愛国心で一つに引き締める。そういったなんというか、多様性と統合の揺れが常にある。

そもそも、多文化主義とはなにか、というと、その意味についても、いろいろな問題がある。

Multiculturalism: What does it mean?


もっとも、 ごく大雑把に言えば、

multiculturalism

Oxford
[mass noun] The presence of, or support for the presence of, several distinct cultural or ethnic groups within a society:


Webster
the policy or practice of giving overt recognition to the cultural needs and contributions of all the groups in a society, esp. of those minority groups regarded as having been neglected in the past



多様な文化や民族が一つの社会に存在すること、あるいは、そうした多様なグループの存在を斉しく認知、支援し、その必要性に応えること、という具合に、記述的と規範的な意味で定義されるのが普通。

日本は、記述的な意味ではすでに、多文化、多民族が存在する社会なわけですね。

昔のように、国家神道をみなに押し付けるような同化政策はもってのほかではあるけど、どこまで、多民族の個性を認めて、その要請に応えてあげるべきか、はまた、難しい問題。

多文化主義の側から具体的にどのような主張、あるいは、要請があるか、というと、


Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Multiculturalism



Examples of cultural accommodations or “group-differentiated rights” include exemptions from generally applicable law (e.g. religious exemptions), assistance to do things that the majority can do unassisted (e.g. multilingual ballots, funding for minority language schools and ethnic associations, affirmative action), representation of minorities in government bodies (e.g. ethnic quotas for party lists or legislative seats, minority-majority Congressional districts), recognition of traditional legal codes by the dominant legal system (e.g. granting jurisdiction over family law to religious courts), or limited self-government rights (e.g. qualified recognition of tribal sovereignty, federal arrangements recognizing the political autonomy of Québec) (for a helpful classification of cultural rights, see Levy 1997).




Internet encyclopedia of philosophy
Multiculturalism


In the case of some Muslims, this can mean addressing the problem of Muslims living in a Christian country and demanding different public holidays than the majority to celebrate their own festivals such as Eid-al-Fitr.


Exemptions to laws are usually rights based on a negative liberty of non-interference from the state in a specific affair, which would cause a significant burden to a certain group. Or, to put it another way, exemptions to the law happen when the state abstains from interfering with or obliging a certain group who desire to practice something in order to diminish their burden. Exemptions can also be a limitation of someone else’s liberty to impose some costs on a certain group. Imagine that there is a general law that decrees corporations have the right to impose a dress code upon their employees. However, having this general law would burden those groups for whom dressing in a certain manner (that is, different from the one required by the company) is a very important value. For example, for many Sikh men and Muslim women it is very important to wear turbans and headscarves, respectively. Hence, it can be claimed that giving these individuals the option of either finding another job or rejecting their dress code can be a significant burden to them; given that the choice of dressing in a certain way is sometimes much harder for Sikh men and Muslim women than for a Westerner, and that it would undermine their identity, an exemption may be justified (Levy, 2000, pp. 128-133). Hence, these groups would be able to engage in practices that are not allowable for the majority of citizens.

Assistance rights
aim to aid individuals in overcoming the obstacles they face because they belong to a certain group. In other words, assistance rights aim to rectify disadvantages experienced by certain individuals, as a result of their membership of a certain group, when compared to the majority. This can mean funding individuals to pursue their goals or using positive discrimination to help them in a variety of ways. Language rights are an example of this approach. Suppose that some individuals from Catalonia cannot speak Spanish. An assistance measure would be having people speak both Spanish and Catalan at public institutions, so that they can serve people from the minority as well the minority language group. Another example would be awarding subsidies to help groups preserve their cohesion by maintaining their practices and beliefs, and by allowing individuals from a minority to participate in public institutions as full citizens. Most of these practices are temporary, but they do not need to be (language rights, for example, are often not temporary) (Levy, 2000, pp. 133-137).

Symbolic claims refer to problems which do not affect individuals’ lives directly or seriously, but which may make the relations between individuals from different groups better. In a multicultural country, where there are multiple religions, ethnicities and ways of life, it may not make sense to have certain symbols that represent only a specific culture. Symbolic claims are ones that require, on the grounds of equality, the inclusion of all the cultures in a specific country in that country’s symbols. An example would be including Catholic, Sikh, Muslim, Protestant, Welsh, Northern Irish, Scottish, and English symbols on both the British flag and in the national anthem. Not integrating minority symbols may be considered as dispensing a lack of respect and unequal treatment to minorities.

Recognition is a demand for integrating a specific law or cultural practice into the larger society. If individuals want to integrate a specific law, they can ask for the law to become part of the major legal system. Hence, Sharia law could form part of divorce law for Muslims, while Aboriginal law could run in conjunction with Australian property rights law. It could also be a requirement to include certain groups in the history books used in schools–for example, to include the history of Indian and Pakistani immigrants in British history textbooks. Failing to integrate this law may bring a substantive burden to bear on individuals’ identity. In the Muslim case, because family law is of crucial importance to their identity, they may be considerably burdened by having to abide by a Western perspective of divorce. With regards to Aboriginal law, because hunting is essential for their way of life, if other individuals own the(ir) land this may undermine the Aboriginal culture.

Special representation rights are designed to protect groups which have been systematically unrepresented and disadvantaged in the larger society. Minority groups may be under-represented in the institutions of a society, and in order to place them in a position of equal bargaining power, it is necessary to provide special rights to the members of these groups. Hence, these rights aim to defend individuals’ interests in a more equal manner by guaranteeing some privileges or preventing discrimination. One way to achieve this is by setting aside extra seats for minorities in parliament (Kymlicka, 1995, pp. 131-152; Levy, 2000, pp. 150-154).

Self-government rights are usually what are claimed by national minorities (for example, Pueblo Indians and Quebecois) and they usually demand some degree of autonomy and self-determination. This sometimes implies demands for exclusive occupation of land and territorial jurisdiction. The reason groups sometimes may need these rights is that the kind of autonomy they give is a necessary condition by which individuals can develop their cultures, which is in the best interest of a culture’s members. More precisely, a specific educational curriculum, language right or jurisdiction over a territory may be a necessary requirement for the survival and prosperity of a particular culture and its members. This is compatible with both freedom and equality; it is compatible with freedom because it allows individuals access to their culture and to make their own choices; it is consistent with equality because it places individuals on an equal footing in terms of cultural access (Kymlicka, 1995, pp. 27-30; Levy, 2000, pp. 137- 138).



 キリスト教に基づく祭日だけ、というのはずるいから、イスラム教徒の風習に基づく祭日もつくってくれええ、とか、公共の場所では、英語と中国語で話してよ、とか、法律に、イスラム教徒のための家族法を組み込め、とか、仕事場でターバン着けるの認めろ、とか、国会では少数民族議員を割り当てる枠を設けてくれ、とか、国旗や県旗など、社会を象徴するものに、例えば、神道っぽいのを使うなら、同様に、イスラム教やキリスト教っぽいマークもいれてくれええ、とか、少数民族の準自治権を認めてくれ、とかの要請があるわけですね。

 こんなことすべてやっている国なんてまずない。




French PM calls for ban on Islamic headscarves at universities
 

 例えば、フランスの首相は、大学でのイスラムスカーフ着用の、認知どころか、禁止を呼びかけている、と。

 じゃあ、まったく無視していいか、というと、それも可哀想だし、自由や平等の原理に反することもある。

 自分が自分である、ということは、自分がある特定のグループに属していることを媒介にしているから、その属しているグループが大きな社会で、無視されていたり、軽蔑されていたりすると、自分が自分であるということも難しくなっていく。

 また、個人はそのライフスタイルを選択する自由・権利があるわけで、その価値は斉しく認められるべきだし、属するグループのやり方にしたがって生きる・自由・権利もある。

 ところが、じゃあ、その民族が、女性蔑視だったり、人種差別的だったりしたら、それも認めるべきか、というと、そうした人権無視の風習を認めるわけにもいかない。

 中国語の表記をつけてあげるとか、ターバンを着けるのを認めるのを好意でやってあげる分には構わないし、そのくらい認めてあげてもよい、と思いますけど、法的に権利として認めるべきか、というと、これから議論があるのかな、といったところ。

 日本でも、外国人移民は不可欠の存在になってきており、これからも増えていくことはたしか。

 さまざまな議論がこれからでてくるのではないかな。いまの段階で結論めいたことはいえまい。





 

 








ジャンル:
ウェブログ
コメント   この記事についてブログを書く
この記事をはてなブックマークに追加
« US stands behind Japan '100... | トップ | 根拠となる記事の引用がない... »
最近の画像もっと見る

コメントを投稿

Weblog」カテゴリの最新記事