Gloomy reality of multiculturalism

In September 2018, Renison University College affiliated with the University of Waterloo in Canada held an international symposium themed "Cultural Identity and Confidence in the Era of Post-Multiculturalism."

According to the organizers, the symposium originated from the following cultural event: In May 2017, when Hal Niedzviecki was editor of Write, the magazine of the Writers Union of Canada, he wrote in an article, "In my opinion, anyone, anywhere, should be encouraged to imagine other peoples, other cultures, other identities," thereby suggesting that writers step out of their cultural confines to write stories about other peoples and other cultures.

Although the magazine was an internal publication intended solely for union members, the article immediately stirred up a great uproar, reigniting the conflict between the indigenous peoples in Canada and mainstream Canadian culture. Amid accusations of stealing the voices of indigenous peoples, Niedzviecki promptly resigned.

Canada officially announced the adoption of a multiculturalism policy as early as 1971, which was later incorporated into its Constitution in 1982 after several revisions. Although countries such as Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, Malaysia and South Africa have not proposed explicit policies in this regard, they tend to favor multiculturalism in areas such as law and education. To be honest, the realities of these countries are not optimistic—political correctness and excessive multicultural sensitivity have restricted open-mindedness and free expression, leading to a series of controversies, and are even becoming a form of monism cloaked in the guise of pluralism. When multiculturalism slides into negative relativism, it strays far from its original intention of promoting cultural diversity and cultural equality.

If we look at the conservative realities spawned by global geopolitical and capitalist forces, we can see that we have indeed entered an era of post-multiculturalism. In such a shifting conceptual landscape, how should we view and understand the ways in which different cultures interact? How can various ethnic groups uphold their cultural identity and maintain their cultural confidence amid the rich tapestry of pluralistic realities?

At the time, I gave a speech titled "On the Diversity and Universality of China's Ethnic Minority Literature" at the above symposium, mainly introducing the historical origins of this literature and its reference value for Chinese literature and even world literature, as well as for cultural comparison and exchange. However, still some points were left unaddressed then.

For more than two decades, multiculturalism has increasingly become a topic of discussion in China. In this regard, the academic research, the subject offerings and the ecosystem of literary creation related to ethnic minority literature are particularly worthy of attention. It compels us to rethink the differences between China's ethnic minority literature and minority literature abroad (including the literature of indigenous people, people of color and immigrants etc.), the interactive effects between policies and measures on political equality domestically and abroad, and how to face multiculturalism in the era of globalization. These are not merely detached reflections within academia, but are issues that affect cultural production and cultural security in reality.

Originating from the socialist concept of equality

The cultural diversity of Chinese society, which is derived from the socialist concept of equality, has gradually been supplanted by neoliberal multiculturalism since the 1980s, even becoming a common collective unconsciousness in discussions of ethnic minority literature, which deviates from the initiative and creativity of the culture, thereby creating risks of separatism and identity fragmentation.

As an important component of Chinese culture, the nation's ethnic minority literature was born and named with the socialist ideals upheld by People's Republic of China, which are fundamentally based on equality and the broadest sharing of power among the people. Ethnic minorities that were previously anonymous or stigmatized during the pre-modern period have undergone a transformation in identity after rising from the condition of being "insulted and harmed"—becoming the masters of their own country means becoming part of the people enjoying equality.

At the same time, under the guidance of the Chinese government, ethnic minorities have established their subjectivity through ethnic identification and naming. They have seen the establishment of autonomous regions and areas, and gained seats in the People's Congress to participate in state governance, with their rights and obligations written into the Constitution. This can be said to have drawn from and built on the flexibility and strategic wisdom of traditional Chinese political governance, which emphasizes "great unity" and the principle of "Respecting cultural practices in education; adapting policies to local contexts" from The Book of Rites. According to the principle, when implementing education or policies, the uniqueness of ethnic minorities should be considered and appropriate methods should be adopted to promote cultural heritage and social harmony; while the uniformity of national policies is essential, adjustments should be made in different areas to ensure the effectiveness of the policies and to prevent social instability. All in all, it is the dialectical harmony of unity and diversity.

As a concept of equality that embodies "unity in diversity" and "harmony without uniformity," and as measures for social justice, the Chinese government's various policies regarding ethnic minorities acknowledge and inherit the cultural diversity within the civilization that has its roots in pre-modern dynastic heritages, and aim to achieve the goal of common prosperity through secondary distribution and preferential policies. These measures that respect internal cultural diversity and promote pluralistic coexistence can be seen as an effort in the process of adapting Marxism to the Chinese context based on China's own historical experiences. This is distinct from the concept of ethnicity in Western societies and different from the Soviet policy of national self-determination. It has resulted from the gradual formation of the multi-ethnic policy with Chinese characteristics since the 1940s. It is a positive and open concept of cultural diversity that respects change.

The Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, established in May 1947, was the first provincial-level autonomous region created under the leadership of the Communist Party of China. Moreover, during the Long March of the Red Army, there were already pilot projects for regional ethnic autonomy in various ethnic areas, such as the Hui Autonomous Government established in Yuhai County, Ningxia, in October 1936. These political practices were certainly influenced by the Communist International's idea of establishing a united front. On the other hand, they were also attempts based on China's actual conditions, contributing to maintaining the integrity and unity of the national territory.

Minority literature abroad, NOT China's ethnic minority literature

Using languages and scripts of ethnic minorities in multilingual literary creation, as a form of cultural power, is naturally included within the realm of equal political power in China. Therefore, although the languages, literatures, aesthetic concepts, worldviews and values of the various ethnic groups already existed in pre-modern times, they have been inextricably linked to contemporary political concerns and agendas ever since their inception as ethnic minority literature.

In this sense, China's ethnic minority literature is a literary republic based on the foundation of the people's republic. The concept of people's art serves as the epistemological basis for the study and creation of such literature. Because the members of ethnic minorities are inherently equal citizens within the concept of the people, their literature has become an integral part of the contemporary socialist literature of the people—even if it initially focused more on the collection of ethnic minority folklore and the organization of their classic literature. This determines that such literature in China, as a form of multiculturalism, has a socialist background. Its basic characteristic lies in balancing the relationship between national ideological unity and the diversity of ethnic groups, languages, regions, religions and cultures.

Ultimately, China's cultural diversity has formed through historical accumulation. Chinese sociologist Fei Xiaotong described this in 1988 as unity in diversity: "The Chinese nation, as a conscious national entity, has emerged in the confrontation between China and Western powers over the past century, but as a self-sufficient national entity, it is the result of a historical process spanning thousands of years. … Its mainstream is unity in diversity formed by numerous dispersed and isolated ethnic units, which have, through contacts, convergence, connections and integration, coupled with divisions and extinctions, created a pluralistic unity where some ethnic units would come and go, others would live or die, while all would closely interact with each other, and each would retain its individuality."

Fei regarded the Chinese nation as a unity, with the diversity of more than fifty ethnic groups. In fact, this unity has a political significance of nation, while the diversity pertains to the civic meaning of ethnic identity. However, he also made clear that the modernization of ethnic minorities does not equate to "Han-ization," and this pattern thus resembles a garden of a hundred flowers in bloom, where the ecological relationship is characterized by equality, unity, mutual assistance and harmony. As such, to interpret modernization as Han-ization is erroneous.

The cultural diversity of the "garden of a hundred flowers in bloom" reveals the potential for growth and change, just as Article 4 of the Constitution of the People's Republic of China states: "All ethnic groups have the freedom to use and develop their own spoken and written languages and to preserve or reform their own folkways and customs." Therefore, adhering to tradition and embracing reform and change are both essential aspects of the subject under discussion.

From the explorations in the 1930s and '40s to the codified Constitution in 1954, the practice of multi-ethnic cultural diversity in China predates the emergence of multiculturalism policies in the West starting from the 1960s and '70s, which arose from civil rights movements and postmodern thought—whether it be the melting pot of the United States, the mosaic of Canada, or the Rainbow Nation of South Africa.

In Chinese tradition, the concept of cultural nationalism has always existed, although by no means is this identity politics based on blood ties, geographical location and physical characteristics. Chinese ethnic minorities are mostly long residing groups, with the proportion of immigrants almost negligible, thus postcolonial theory cannot be applied rigidly to describe the situation in China. The political concept of "the people being the masters of the country," starting from the very beginning, has already addressed the issues of politics of recognition and of dignity in multiculturalism at the theoretical level. It has also made it inappropriate to apply racial discourse to underlying psychological and cultural senses of difference. This series of differences between China and the West determines that the applicability of the theory of multiculturalism must undergo verification and filtering in China, and cannot serve as a universal standard for measuring different civilizational subjects.

A typical example is the mechanical replication of the concepts, theories, methods and even the problem consciousness of so-called minority literature abroad into China's ethnic minority literature. In fact, the two are conceptually distinct. The literature of China's ethnic minorities is a product of the macro liberation politics and people-centered revolutionary discourse, with the redefinition of the people and the empowerment of citizens of all ethnic groups. Minority literature, although also a result of the global spread of communism and left-wing revolutions, has been more marked by cultural politics and micro-political hues of post-structuralism as the tide of national independence and liberation movements receded, and as real-world struggles shifted to the cultural realm. The opposing stances and problem consciousness of the two are clearly quite different. The misapplication of theories of minority literature abroad in discussions of China's ethnic minority literature is not just a literary problem.

The author is Liu Daxian, a professor at the School of Chinese Language and Literature, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Liu Xian /Editor

Yang Xinhua /Chief Editor    Liu Xian /Coordination Editor

Liu Li /Reviewer

Zhang Weiwei /Copyeditor    Tan Yujie /Image Editor

The views don't necessarily reflect those of DeepChina.