“Multiculturalism is no longer a useful and necessary concept in approaching problems of identity in contemporary Britain”Multiculturalism from the critic point of view leans on “supposition” and a “dishonest pretense” (Dalrymple 2004, p. 1). This is contrary to the principle of multiculturalists that all cultures are equal and the likelihood of clashes between the customs, people, and idealistic attitude of two cultures is insignificant. It is a philosophy that has been embraced in Western societies aiming to put together “cultures of tolerance and equality for all citizens” (Poole and Richardson 2006, p. 123).
According to San Juan (2002, p. 6), multiculturalism is recognized today as the antiphony to the fall of the “evil empire” and the victory of the free market and unrestricted shopping for all. It is where all the boundaries, the immature and dependent societies are redeemed in a wholesome, standardized area where dissimilarities evaporates or are sorted out into their proper places in the level of national ideals and preference. It is a kind of “salad bowl” (Dalrymple 2004, p. 1) where a variety of ingredients all over the world mixed, all with “equal place and opportunity” (Dalrymple 2004, p. 1).
It seems that we are now expected to acknowledge plural cultures or ethnicities living together harmoniously, without critical disputes, in a free play of “monads” (philosopher’s term for god or the totality of all beings) in the best of all possible worlds. Our society is no longer a melting pot but again a salad bowl, a smorgasbord of cultures, a society exists on the mass consumption of multicolored and dissimilar lifestyles (San Juan 2002, p. 6). The politics of “identity and recognition” (Ford 2005, p. 44) and represent a divergent genre within political philosophy. In Britain, the theoretical backdrop of the issues of patriotism, culturalism, and toleration are compared with the modern-day facts signifying the degree to which they are appropriate to the world today and in the British society in particular in a holistic and cross-disciplinary discussion (Betts 2002, p. 17).
Multiculturalism in the 1990s Britain looks like very remote from any thought of the multicultural. The term seems to have faded from view. Multiculturalism is now just talisman of some bad old time when terrifying radicals still wandered the corridors of local authorities or when people were not knowledgeable or confident enough to think that racism could be treated through compassion (Bennett 2003, p. 242).
Furthermore, in previous years, modern-day British politicians, despite of their party attachment, would be irrational to disregard the wishes and desires of any faction able to cast a vote (Poole and Richardson 2006, p. 13). In the United States, the term seems to be clung to as the mantra, which will somehow dismiss the continuous threat of violence. In Australia, it seems to be regarded as heralding a “cutting of ties with old dead Europe” (Bennett 2003, p. 242) in favor of the new economic vitality of the Southern Hemisphere.
Back in the United Kingdom, a case is argued for the protection of British cultural supremacy and autonomy by opposing multiculturalism, regional devolution, and the political and immigration characteristic of Europeanization and its extension, together with the global multi-ethnic society. The repetition of global ethno-national struggle and autonomy is seen as substantiation of the lifelong need for a national distinctiveness, in addition to an appeal to nationhood, affinity, nationalism, and devotion to an ethnically homogenous nation-state.
The consequence of the failure of the United Nations and the international community to put an end to ethno-national struggles, along with the unpleasant impact of decentralization and Europeanization on the national identity, tradition, and sovereignty of the British nation-state could be the key issues arising from multiculturalism. Moreover, the potential risk of the toleration of pro-autonomy multiculturalism to the social solidity and security of the British nation-state (Betts 2002, p. 17). Multiculturalism, Betts (2002, p. 17) added, could become so widespread that Britain’s long-established culture could lose its unique features as is it being strengthen by unrestrained and indiscriminate migration into Britain jointly with the misuse of the outdated 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees as amended by the 1967 New York Protocol, and the collective rights demanded by economic migrants and fake refugees.
The rigid tribulations already noticeable in societies, which either are or have inherited multiculturalism, are used to fortify the case made for administering cultural diversity in Britain by controlled gradual assimilation, quota based, and discriminatory immigration.