It is a pleasure to talk to someone like Marco Micone. Its commitment to Quebec is well known, its analyzes are still relevant and its opinions deserve attention. In his text published in the edition of To have to on October 23 and 24, he raises a criticism of interculturalism that others have already made, but he does so in a particularly well articulated way.
Its main criticism is that Quebec interculturalism, as proposed, would lead to culturalism. It would therefore give a clear precedence to cultural (and ethnic) factors at the expense and even in ignorance of other factors, mainly anything that relates to the social. This is the first objection. According to the second, interculturalism would thus come to mask the concrete reality of men and women in their daily lives. According to a third objection, attention should be focused not on the differences, but on the “humanity” shared by these men and women – “we cannot speak of Italian, Algerian, Haitian or other culture in Quebec” .
Fourth, interculturalism is accused of proposing an abstract and static conception of cultures and of “ignoring the context which determines and nourishes them”. Finally, the proposals and explanations submitted by the model would not go beyond the cultural sphere.
Here is how I respond to these five objections, in light of the definition I have already given of interculturalism (especially in my 2012 book).
Regarding the first criticism, we know that for several decades, in Quebec as in several societies, racism has been nourished less by physical traits than by cultural characteristics (blacks are lazy, Muslims, fundamentalists, Mexicans, violent, etc.). This is recognized as a basis for various well-known discriminatory practices. Here is an example where the cultural is intimately linked to the social. Another example relates to the majority-minority relationship. Here again, cultural analysis reveals systems of perceptions favoring domination and exclusion. In this case, interculturalism invites us to examine a demographic configuration and the unequal power relationship associated with it.
Pre-established models
Regarding the second argument, it is of course the behavior of men and women that are ultimately decisive, those of members of the host society as well as those of immigrants. But the former will be encouraged to reproduce (often unconsciously) the preconceptions that I have just mentioned while the latter will have to confront them in order to defend themselves from them. Sociology has well established that individuals rarely invent their behavior. They most often obey or react to pre-established models, relatively stable models that the actors perpetuate through their behavior.
The third objection calls for an important qualification. Once again on the basis of numerous studies, it seems little questionable that, among immigrant populations, there remains for a long time enough elements of the culture of origin to speak of ethnocultural differences. It is precisely among these differences that we find the traits used as pretexts for racism. It is therefore important to pay attention to it. At the same time, of course, we must be careful not to freeze these traits in cultural shackles that immigrants can no longer get rid of – this is one of the main criticisms leveled at multiculturalism. Thus, according to the contacts, exchanges and choices of each in daily life, a common culture takes shape – a Quebec culture (this is also what Marco Micone thinks).
Fourth, to assert that interculturalism offers an abstract and static vision of cultures, out of their context, is to put it on a false trial. I would even say that this type of concern is at the heart of the model. On this point, I would have appreciated that the author produced some references.
Fifth, Marco Micone argues that interculturalism fails to account for economic disparities and class affinities. He is right, but these are not his own objectives. On the other hand, it is incorrect to say that he is not interested in it. Admittedly, it does not claim to explain them, but it certainly takes them into account, insofar as these realities weigh on the possibilities and methods of integration and its uncertainties.
Finally, it will be understood that, in my mind, interculturalism in no way claims to “explain the fate and behavior of individuals through culture, in defiance of social determinants”. I contend, however, that there is an inherent cultural component to academic performance, deviance and poverty (I am repeating the author’s text here), which has been well established by a long tradition of research. It goes without saying, moreover, that culture is only one component among others.
For all these reasons, I say that, if we want to understand the cultural, we cannot avoid paying attention to the social. And vice versa.
I thank Marco Micone for giving me the opportunity to provide these clarifications.