The illusion of utopian multiculturalism
Thank you Michelle for everything you wrote down.
It’s good that you distinguish between two forms of multiculturalism: a naïve celebration of
differences and a less naïve form, which you recommend.
Still I think that your model is too optimistic and in contraction with reality, which is less
beautiful and not so easy and harmonious.
You say that we have to start with realizing that at the core we are fundamentally the same, all
humans. I don’t agree with this. At the basis of my own model, coming from Emmanuel
Levinas, is the recognition that we are fundamentally different. This is something we have to
accept, we should not try to reduce the other which is completely different to the same, there
should remain a separateness. This part of Levinas’ philosophy is very difficult to explain.
You say that we are all the same because we laugh and cry, love and hate etc. But we have
different fundamental values and a different cultural background. You can see that a stranger
laughs, but do you really know how he feels? You can’t stand in his shoes, you cannot know
if you are really the same as a stranger, because you don’t know him. And this doesn’t count
only for complete strangers, but for any other person, also for your partner, family and
friends. You cannot stand in somebody else’s shoes and you shouldn’t pretend that you can by
saying about somebody else what he thinks, wants and feels. In fact the book of Rudi Visker
isn’t called