Hidden Dangers in Multiculturalism: Identity, Culture and Education in the Liberal State

This post is by no means as interesting as its title makes it sound. It is a post about a course that I have decided to take in place of the previously mentioned sociology course which was held at an inconvenient time. The Multiculturalism course is part of the curriculum for the MA in Jewish Education, and the students are all future and current educators of various ages. The professor immigrated from Argentina many years ago - he has a wide smile, very severe sarcasm, and he carries a pocket watch that must be somewhat imprecise, as he constantly has to ask the students to tell him the time, even after he's already looked at his timepiece.
Although I hadn't done the reading for the class as I was showing up at its second session, I found the conversation deeply interesting and am looking forward to spending my Sunday afternoons talking about what I think is one of the most real and important issues of our and all time: identity, and how we can acknowledge our own and others' identities respectfully and truthfully. Our teacher defines multiculturalism as "the call to overcome the way we think about each other that is so natural to us that we don't even think about it."

We talked about the historical transformation in the Western World from defining oneself solely according to a fixed social position to a recognition of citizen dignity as social heirarchies collapsed during the time of the French Revolution and thereafter. Suddenly (or perhaps more accurately, over the course of a long time) sense of self depended on one's personal definition and less on birth - people were able to chose more about themselves, and Dignity was grante to all, rather than the notion of "honor" being granted to some. St. Augustine declared that G-d is in everything you see, and therefore G-d is in everyone - this upgrades humans - all humans - to partially divine.
We discussed how the nation-state requires a different kind of organization and sets of loyalty and identity. Rather than kings identifying with kings, members of a particular nation-state identify as citizens of that nation-state and have obligations to that nation-state. In Feudalism, the idea was that the nobility had a respobsibility to the lives of the peasants, and poverty was a personal problem of the nobility that they could chose to act on, or not. In a more modern society, there is the notion of human rights, which changes things, if not entirely, then at least substantially, because citizenship is not about depending on someone else's honor or goodness, but about being granted certain rights by law (and having legal recourse if you aren't receiving them). Of course, this was, and is, not always the case, even in a nation-state (think women, slaves, etc.)
We talked about how the principle of universal identity (that is to say that everyone has an identity that is valuable) can be interpreted in two very divergent ways: everyone is equal because everyone has a valuable identity, and therefore everyone should be treated the same OR because everyone has a valuable and different identity, everyone is different and should be treated differently. Both interpretations can be used for good (as in universal education or recognizing the special needs of different individuals) or for bad (as in not recognizing special needs or talents, or treating people unfairly and attributing it to their difference). It can be argued that if schools in particular treat everyone the same, there isn't space to create a unique identity. But at the same time, if schools treat students differently, they may not all have access to the same opportunities.
We spent a long time on the difference between the public and the private sphere - the idea that one should or is permitted to act differently at home than elsewhere (like Jews of the Emancipation who were 'Jews in the home, but not in the street') We imagine that there is a clear separation between the public and the private, and that no one cares what you do in your private life, but in the public sphere you need to behave with the rules of the public. However, the lines are not nearly so clear (for instance, what I do on my computer, in the home, is actually rather public). And there is a big question about when it is appropriate for the government to interfere in the private. For instance: take the case of domestic or child abuse. In some cultures, it is frowned upon for the government to step in to what is seen as such a private issue, while in others it is seen as immoral for the government NOT to step in. And one student in the class noted that the public sphere intrudes into the private sphere much more often with regards to lower class or minority people - the government might more quickly intervene in the home of an immigrant family than an Anglo family because they are quicker to assume that abuse is happening (whether or not it actually is). In other words, the government might participate in racial or socio-economic profiling and assume that they need to step in more often in lower-income areas or areas with cultures that are different than the mainstream, and as a result those sectors of the population have much less separation between private and public than groups of people that are considered less threatening or suspicious.
We talked about the notion of "social cohesion" - if difference is allowed or encouraged in the public sphere, what is the glue that holds a society together? It is this question that leads some to argue that there needs to be a "core curriculum" in schools so that children are all taught the same "cannon" and form the same values and cultural referents, which makes them all a part of the community. On the other hand - what gets to be the cannon, and which community are the students being socialized to join? And is that fair?
Our teacher encouraged us to recognize that whatever seems natural to us is cultural, including the values of democracy, separation of state, etc. and to know that "liberalism is also a fighting creed" - when liberals wish to create a space that is accepting of everyone, they are forcing (or socializing, or encouraging) their values of respect for all cultures onto people who perhaps don't have those values. And who gets to say that their values are the right ones? On the other hand, if you reject all that seems to be natural to you, then you have no basis on which to base your opinions, or even your life. So you have to stick to what you believe in, but be aware that others might not share your values.
Some more interesting quotes from today's class include:

"Minority has nothing to do with numbers - it has to do with marginalization."
"The problem with immigration is that bodies move faster than minds"
"Our language gives us tools for racism that we have stopped noticing because of our need to communicate."


Anyway, it seems like it is going to be a great class, and I'm sure you'll be hearing more about it in the future.

First Day of School

So the government pulled through and the strike did not have to happen, hence, I began my "autumn semester" today. Although I only had one class today - Hebrew - it was sooo good to have a reason to leave the apartment again, to speak in Hebrew, and to see all of my friends from summer ulpan. I have a lot of classes tomorrow and will write more once I've been to them, but suffice it to say that I am excited about the new semester.
To celebrate, Daniel took me out to a nice restaurant - it's in a back alley and hard to find, but is a real treasure. The restaurant doubles as a bookstore, and the walls are lined in books in Hebrew and English. Apparently, they often host poetry readings, and we hope to go back there for cultural events, and also for the excellent food! We had a giant salad (we brought some of it home for lunch tomorrow) and shakshouka (eggs in tomato sauce) with spinach. Shakshouka, by the way, is pretty excellent, and if you are ever in Israel, it is worth trying.
That's all for now - you'll hear more about my new semester tomorrow, after my marathon day of classes.

Interesting E-mails

A translation of an e-mail I received yesterday:

Dear Students,

We are a number of days before the opening of the new academic school year - but to our great dismay the year once again won't begin.

Not only won't the school year begin, also because of the situation, in the upcoming days there will be no choice but to close the entire university: there won't be administrative workers, there won't be researchers, the classes will have disappeared!

The school year won't begin because the government of Israel scorns the system of higher education, and because of this nothing is standing, for the best six years the government has cut the amount of money requested by hundreds of millions of shekels.

The system of higher education today stands on the side of one leg to attack! (clearly I had trouble translating this sentence...maybe it is idiomatic...)

We, representatives of the student body, heads of the student associations, call together wit the heads of the research universities to the Israeli prime minister, to minister Livni and to the minister of finance and ? the labor party, to the minister of education, the government and the Kinesset to save higher education, to restore to research universities the budged that was cut and to allow the academic year to begin once more.

It is up to us to stress that we are against the school year's not opening. The student body has suffered from the disruption of the school year for each of the past three years. Given this, it is clear that if they don't flow in a speedy fashion to restore the system of higher education, universities won't be able to continue their shared activities and to supply higher education at the level that existed in Israel in the past.

In this letter we have compiled a collection of e-mail addresses of the prime minister, the minister of finance, minister of education, and members of the committee of finance and committee of education in the Kinesset. We ask each of you to forward personal mail ? the struggle and call upon them to act to save higher education and open the academic year at the university in an orderly manner.

Signed,

The head of the student association
The president of Hebrew University
the head of the national student organization??


And another:

As a result of the decision and (something?) that they won't begin the upcoming school year, tens of students obstructed the rode together with the president of the university. The demonstrators called with one voice to guard to turn the struggles over the budget for higher education and to end the crisis in order that the academic year can begin in an orderly manner.

As a result, the demonstration of the students will begin the negotiations and they don't intend to stop demonstrating

Tomorrow, Wednesday 10/29/08 the demonstration will begin
For the sake of higher education and to save the academic year
5:00 pm in front of the ministry of finance



I don't know if this effects the Rothberg School (though my Yiddish classes are outside Rothberg so one way or another it will affect me). As you can tell from these e-mails, higher education in Israel has been in turmoil for the past few years. If you're interested, I'll send you some newspaper articles about it - just leave a note.