Multicultural versus monocultural societies and countries

[Rhyfelwyr]

Looks like its the same old story here - people talking at cross-purposes and attributing their own meaning to terms. Proponents of one view tend to view the other only in its most extreme sense, while keeping to a more sensible understanding of their own.

Another problem is that people here are focusing on highly specific historical examples, rather than considering the inherent merits of either of the forms of social organisation. No doubt throughout history there will be many instances where monoculturalism and multiculturalism have been sources of good, and many instances when they have been sources of evil. However, we should not forget that the mode through which they are implemented (eg whether by organic cultural spread, or more forcibly by oppression) is really a separate matter entirely, yet it has been conflated constantly throughout this thread.

Personally, I think the most important thing with culture is that it develops naturally, or organically - that is both reflects and binds the common experience of the people who give it its being. This is crucial for creating a society where there is mutual respect, where there is a sense of solidarity, and where there is something that can provide a bridge across more individual differences (gender, age, etc). I suppose such a culture would not be monocultural or multicultural, since there would neither be a single, dominant culture, nor would there be vastly different cultures living side by side. But for me, that would be the most healthy kind of culture.