The evidence shows that multiculturalism succeeded in promoting a sense of belonging, but paid little or no attention to white natives, taking their identity and values for granted
These days, there seems to be a queue of people lining up to pronounce that ‘multiculturalism’ has failed – Cameron, Merkel and Sarkozy have already done that. In the UK, a certain smug satisfaction that it had been relatively successful in building a multicultural society has turned to dismay expressed from all parts of the political spectrum as some young Britons turn suicide bombers. But is this assessment correct? My research suggests it is not.
First, let us try to understand the most important features of multiculturalism. I think it is fair to say that the essence of multiculturalism is the idea that, if one makes immigrants feel welcome by allowing them to retain their culture and by seeking to address discrimination against them, immigrants would reciprocate by embracing a British identity and the values needed for a harmonious society. In 1966, the then Home Secretary, Roy Jenkins said that “I do not regard [integration] as meaning the loss, by immigrants, of their own national characteristics and culture. I do not think that we need in this country a ‘melting pot’, which will turn everybody out in a common mould, as one of a series of carbon copies of someone’s misplaced vision of the stereotyped Englishman… I define integration, therefore, not as a flattening process of assimilation but as equal opportunity, accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance”, a quote that, while showing respect for other cultures, also betrays its antiquity by its neglect of women, the Scottish, Welsh and Irish.
Why did anyone ever think multiculturalism was a good strategy? Often these days, it is thought to be the product of cultural relativism, a reluctance to claim that some value systems are superior to others, from which it follows that it would be wrong to insist on immigrants changing their values. But there was another more muscular argument for multiculturalism, namely that the values underpinning liberal democracies are very appealing to all people from whatever background so that immigrants from different cultures will come to adhere of their own volition to the values that matter for the smooth functioning of society while perhaps choosing to keep those cultural practices relevant only to the private sphere. From this perspective, forcing immigrants to change their behaviour risks being counter-productive – better a society of volunteers than conscripts. One interpretation of what has happened in Britain and other countries is that there has been a failure of confidence in the universal appeal of liberal democratic values.
This confidence has been replaced by the feeling that some immigrant groups (and their British-born descendants) either have no intention to integrate or that the process is happening too slowly. It is inevitable that events like the London bombings attract attention but are these extremists representative of the population as a whole? In spite of the fact that many commentators have very strong views on the subject, we have remarkably little large-scale quantitative evidence on the factors associated with feeling a part of society. My research with Andreas Georgiadis at the Centre for Economic Performance at the London School of Economics uses data from the England and Wales’ 2007 Citizenship Survey to shed more light on the identity and values of different communities in the UK.
Identity and Ethnicity
A lot of concern about multiculturalism is related to the belief that some ethnic and religious minorities do not think of themselves as British, subscribing to some other identity. But much of this seems to be exaggerated.
The first column of Table 1 shows the fraction of different ethnic groups who report that their national identity is British. Essentially, all the “white British” do, but the percentages are lower for those from ethnic minorities. However, most of this difference has a simple explanation: the foreign-born are much less likely than the UK-born to report a British national identity and ethnic minorities are more likely to be foreign-born. The second column of Table 1 shows very modest differences between whites and non-whites for the UK-born. And it is also worth noting that the pattern of variation across the minority communities is perhaps not what one might expect. For example, Muslim Pakistanis and Bangladeshis do no stand out as having much lower levels of British national identity.
Responses to questions about national identity may be very legalistic with many respondents saying they are British simply because they have a British passport. But the Citizenship Survey also asks more subjective questions about whether one feels that one belongs to Britain. Table 2 contains responses to some of these questions.
Perhaps the most striking feature of the first two columns is that ethnic minorities show very similar levels of belonging, both to Britain and their local area, as the white British. One could interpret this as saying that Britain has been relatively successful in making ethnic minorities feel a part of society, or that Britain has failed to sustain a high sense of belonging among the majority white community. There could also be elements of truth in both of these statements.
For the ethnic minorities it is fairly clear that one reason they feel they belong to Britain is that they feel no conflict between their cultural and religious identity and being a full part of British society – the third column shows that 80-90% of ethnic minorities perceive no such conflict. Again, there is no evidence that the Muslim communities perceive more of a conflict than others. But the third column also shows that one-third of the white British do not accept one can belong to Britain while having a minority religious or cultural identity.
Although Table 2 shows a generally high sense of belonging, there are clearly some people who do not feel they belong and our research investigated the factors which seem to be associated with a sense of belonging.
Belonging and Segregation
Concern is often expressed about residential segregation, about communities becoming isolated when living apart from others. Table 3 shows the sense of belonging for those who live in areas where more or less than half are of the same ethnicity as the respondent.
The first two columns of Table 3 show that the ethnic composition of the local area seems to make little difference to the sense of belonging to Britain. The last two columns shows that residential segregation seems to have more effect on the sense of belonging to the local area although only for some ethnic groups, notably the white British. Overall residential segregation seems to play little role in affecting the sense of belonging.
Belonging and Respect
One factor that is very important is being treated fairly and with respect. People of all ethnicities are much more likely to report feeling that they belong if they are feel treated fairly and with respect. The Citizenship Survey asks respondents whether they feel they would be treated better or worse than people of other races by 15 public services, covering health, education, criminal justice, local government and housing. Table 4 shows that those who think they would be treated worse by at least one of these services are much less likely to feel they belong either to Britain or to their local area.
Conclusion
I interpret these findings as lending support to the key ideas behind multiculturalism – that making immigrants and their cultures feel welcome and respected and fighting discrimination, without worrying too much about where minorities choose to live will result in those minorities coming to feel part of Britain. Our other research also shows that these same factors are associated with having more pro-social values. The fear that the separation between communities might be creating alienation does not appear well-founded.
But there is one important aspect in which multiculturalism has failed. While the multicultural project may be the right way to make minorities feel a part of the wider society, it pays little or no attention to white natives, taking their identity and values for granted. Our findings indicate that segments of the white population have come to feel that they are neglected and discriminated against and do not feel a part of British society. It is not too much of a leap to imagine that this is the segment of the population from which the BNP draws its support.
So, the biggest failure of multiculturalism is not that it has failed to create a sense of belonging among minorities but that it has paid too little attention to how to sustain support among parts of the white population who are skeptical about the ability to retain a minority ethnic or religious identity while being British and who perceive conflict over resources (especially access to social housing) with immigrants and ethnic minorities.
What Should Be Done?
I have argued that fears about the failure of multiculturalism are greatly exaggerated. But that does not mean we should be complacent about British society. It is important that people should feel free to live the life they want (subject to not harming others). And people can only make that choice if they have knowledge of what is available. So it is appropriate to insist that immigrants learn English, and that they have some awareness of the principles on which our society is run. And it is important to provide support for those who, for whatever reason (e.g. they are gay, in a forced or abusive marriage), feel the need to escape from their immediate community. Those escape routes should be there for everyone not just religious or ethnic minorities as, to give one example, there are many white British families (especially Christian ones) who retain as hostile a view of homosexuality as the average British Muslim.
What to do about the attitudes of the white British? I think it is wrong to simply label all those who are hostile to ethnic and religious minorities as racist, in need of ‘re-education’. To be sure there remain racists in our society who exploit the feelings of this part of our society. But the underlying basis of their hostility is a perception of unfairness and abandonment, that nobody in power is interested in them any more. This is not surprising – the demographic groups that are most hostile to minorities tend to be the group for whom the labour market has deteriorated the most and for whom access to social housing (an important source of income when rents are considerably below market levels) has become more difficult. Improving the economic and social lives in the poorer white communities is something that needs to be done.
But while one should acknowledge the real problems in these societies, there is also a problem of perception. Views of the white British about ethnic and religious minorities are way out of line with views of those minorities about themselves. For example, a Gallup poll some years ago asked whether people thought Muslims in Britain were loyal to Britain. 58% of the non-Muslims who expressed a view thought they were not, but only 9% of Muslims thought this was the case. This difference in perception and lack of mutual understanding is very dangerous and runs through all parts of our society. In January 2011 Baroness Warsi gave a speech in which she argued that Islamophobia had passed the dinner party test. This was controversial but I think she was right – casual disrespect of Islam and Muslims has become pervasive. Given these problems of perception, one cannot simply accept the views of those who are hostile to religious and ethnic minorities: one has to lead as well as follow. It is treading that fine line between taking seriously the concerns of all parts of our society but robustly challenging misinformation that is the challenge for Britain.
Alan Manning is professor of Economics at the London School of Economics and Political Science.