Identity, Multiculturalism and Intercultural Competence

Identity is a weighty and charged concept with many, partly contradictory, ideas about what it entails. A common denominator is that identity is about 'being oneself over time,' meaning that something is stable and recognizable. This can apply to an individual or a group.

Essentialist or dynamic perception of identity?

The perceptions that identity is linked to something stable over time can be interpreted differently. A static or essentialist perception of identity presupposes an unchanged core, regardless of external influences. A dynamic perception of identity assumes that an individual develops and is shaped by external influences.

There are many intermediate positions. However, when the concept of identity is applied to groups, this difference has significant consequences. Group or collective identity assumes that several people have some fundamental commonalities that bind them together, creating a sense of belonging and cohesion. The question then arises whether this is anchored in inherent characteristics (e.g., ethnicity), characteristics assumed to be very stable over time (e.g., common tradition), or more open categories such as common interests and practices (e.g., professional groups).

In other words, notions of group identity can be linked to an essentialist or dynamic cultural understanding (Kymlicka 1995; Mishler and Pollack 2003). This has significant implications for ideas of belonging and cohesion. If the condition for being part of a 'we' group is rooted in characteristics related to biology or assumed unchanging traditions, it becomes very difficult for new individuals to become part of this group.

Cora Alexa Døving (2014) describes how the notion of 'thin culture' and 'thick culture' has different implications for ideas about collective identity and belonging. 'Thin culture' is based on something that people with very different backgrounds can have in common or unite around, and can be more inclusive than 'thick culture,' which assumes unity around things that are innate or inherited, and thus very exclusive.

Static

• Existence of stable and distinct cultural traditions and groups (community)
• Belonging to a particular cultural group dominates identity regardless of circumstances
• Different cultural groups should have special rights in society to maintain their identity

Dynamic

• Existence of cultural meaning systems and expressions that overlap and change
• Different aspects of identity may come into focus in varying contexts
• Universal rights should enable each individual to actively participate in society regardless of cultural affiliation

Identity = identical?

The focus in identity thinking is on similarity (to be identical = to be exactly the same). What is different then quickly becomes what deviates, does not fit in, or disturbs. In a context of group perceptions and group identity, it is often the case that a perception of 'similarity within' and 'difference between groups' dominates. Intercultural learning questions these premises.

Recognition of diversity must involve recognition of the one who is different. But what does it actually mean to be 'different,' and who is 'different'?

We tend to equate the terms 'diversity' and 'multiculturalism': Those who are different are the foreigners, those with a different ethnic/cultural background." We tend to equate the terms 'diversity' and 'multiculturalism': Those who are different are the foreigners, those with a different ethnic/cultural background. But in this perspective lies a trap: Those defined as different become more foreign than they necessarily are or would define themselves because the focus is precisely on what is foreign.

And what about the 'we-group'? If diversity is perceived as differences between groups, it may result in the differences within the group either not being acknowledged or recognized. Ideas about homogeneous, stable, and closed group identities can be an obstacle to an atmosphere of generosity and openness because different perceptions, ways of life, and being are considered deviations or even 'betrayals.'

In other words, ideas about fixed group identities and unambiguous group affiliations are in tension with a pluralistic and democratic culture with diversity also within a social group or society.

Static group identity hinders individual development

Growing up in an environment of static group perceptions where 'we' is in conflict with 'they' deprives both those who belong to or are placed in the inside group and those who belong to or are placed in the outside group of the opportunity to unfold their individuality and their ability to participate in a community as they are. If the 'self' is constituted as opposition to the hostile, dangerous, and ugly other, maintaining this perception of the other becomes necessary to sustain one's self-image.

This is reflected in research on group-focused hostility as presented in the report 'Intolerance, Prejudice and Discrimination: A European Report' (2011). The need for an enemy image goes hand in hand with the need for self-elevation and the need for the unambiguous and 'pure' concerning identity and belonging. Of course, perceptions and feelings of group belonging can be legitimate, functional, and necessary when individuals have to find their way in a complex world. But at the same time, it is precisely this complex world that requires the competence to reflect on and adjust these perceptions.

Preventive efforts against racism, anti-Semitism, and other forms of group-based hostility must challenge closed and static notions of identity and belonging. However, it is not just about uncovering how erroneous prejudices are. It is essential to refer to and create space for experiences with a positive alternative: diversity is neither a threat nor something to be celebrated; it is a fact that one constantly deals with to a greater or lesser extent. Diversity entails both challenges, uncertainty, and perhaps frustration. But to an even greater extent, it represents an opportunity to develop without being confined by fixed notions of oneself and 'the others'.

Literature

Døving, Alexa (2014) Kampen om «en mislykket integrering». Samtiden03 / 2014 (Volum 122) s. 40-49

Huber, Joseph (red.) (2012). «Intercultural competence for all. Preparation for living in a heterogeneous world.» Pestalozzi series No. 2. Council of Europe Publishing.

Kristeva, Julia. (1991). Stangers to Ourselves. New York: Columbia University Press.

Kymlicka, W. (1995): Multicultural Citizenship, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Mishler, W., Pollack, D. (2003). On culture, thick and thin: toward a neo-cultural synthesis. In: Pollack, D., Jacobs, J., Muller, O., Pickel, G. (eds.) Political Culture in Post-Communist Europe: Attitudes in New Democracies, pp. 237–256. Ashgate, Aldershot

Zick, A., Kupper, B., & Hovermann, A. (2011). Intolerance, prejudice and discrimination. Berlin: Forum Berlin. http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/do/07908-20110311.pdf