By MARCIN KRÒL [Dziennik Gazeta Prawna] — We have witnessed two phenomena, which prove that multiculturalism – as long as it’s moderate – is better than what we are seeing now. The first is that multiculturalism has been replaced by a largely uncritical acceptance of all cultural phenomena, no matter where they come from or their political, social, spiritual, or religious context. In other words, Scandinavian novels, Iranian movies, Indian music, and Oriental medicine are all equally good. “Equally good” means also that we have no rating scale tied to our (European) culture, but everything that is good is good, even if we do not know why.

The second threat multiculturalism has faced is the monoculturalism bound up with the intellectually clumsy – but nonetheless increasingly popular – nationalist ideas. To some extent, multiculturalism was a reaction to it. But not only nationalism is opposed to multiculturalism. Whether in analyses of immigrant communities in various European countries or in the statements – even official ones – of political leaders in Islamic countries, we have seen more and more hostility towards other cultures or civilisations.

We are much more likely to reach consensus with others when we know well enough who we are.

Multiculturalism’s great virtue – underappreciated during its heyday – was the awareness that, as its very name suggested, there existed many different cultures. However, those who believed that they were not only different but also equal, that is, equally valuable, went clearly too far. I am not trying to extol the virtues of Eurocentrism here, but even when we accept the existence of many cultures, our own should be the one to which we feel closest…

If cultural differences are a fact and can turn into outright hostility, does multiculturalism, or any tolerance other than silence, make sense? Should we treat potential enemies as fellow citizens, if not as brothers? The best solution, then, would be to return to our roots, our myths, our symbols, our not necessarily European, but national, traditions. But then it turns out quickly that there isn’t much left to return to. Even if there appear works of culture from previously little-known parts of Europe, such as Scandinavian crime novels, the return to tradition turns out to mean investigating the Swedes’ collaboration with Nazi Germany. Truth is, the proud words about strong European roots are usually as proud as they are empty.

Day-to-day psychological observation shows that we are much more likely to reach consensus with others when we know well enough who we are, when we feel comfortably enough with ourselves. The phenomenon of postmulticulturalism is a result of the fact that we in Europe don’t feel comfortable with ourselves and we don’t know how to address the discomfort.

None of the available methods seem to work here: neither regarding the rest of the world as pagans or heathens, nor enthusing about them as wonders of nature or an entertainment for the ladies, nor the imperialistic “white man’s burden”. Multiculturalism was the last reasonable – if sometimes exaggerated – attempt to do something about the discomfort. Today things are much worse: either we decide that the others do not exist, which is untrue, or that we shouldn’t let them in (neither in body nor in spirit), which can only lead to disaster.

Continued at Dziennik Gazeta Prawna | English translation at Presseurop | More Chronicle & Notices.