As always, very interesting David! This might not be an angle you’re interested in, but at the end of the piece I was wondering about why multiculturalism has had a backlash. From a US perspective, is it just that it was done poorly? I think about land acknowledgements and how they can feel very accusatory (“we’re on the unceded grounds of … “) versus celebratory (“ we recognize the original stewards of this land and honor their legacy…”). Or is multiculturalism always going to come with some amount of feelings of exclusion? (Which is my hypothesis for the backlash)
It’s an angle I’m very interested. I’ve been wondering the same. I recall similar backlash vibes in the early 90s with California passing Prop 187 to deter immigration, and the three strikes law to crackdown on gangs violence, and a general fear that Japan was going to take over the global economy. But then around 2000, the increase in immigration leveled off, Japan’s economy never recovered from its housing bubble, the US economy was doing great, gangs violence subsided, and 9/11 united the country.
My impression is that multiculturalism benefits from a sense of economic growth and security. When the economy is up and crime is down, people are more willing to engage with multiculturalism and DEI. (Maybe the 2008 economic crisis and the Tea Party are counterpoints to the argument, but the Obama years still felt optimistic compared to the despair of the early 90s and today.)
I think we’re in a similar backlash period now. Immigration went up significantly during a 5-year period that saw an increase in crime, drug overdoses, suicides, car fatalities, alcoholism, and general unruly behavior. Plus inflation and increased negativity in the news and social media.
The irony is that now all of those things are now starting to improve. Plus, China is experiencing the same economic pains as 1990s Japan. And I’m sure Trump will take credit for it all.
As always, very interesting David! This might not be an angle you’re interested in, but at the end of the piece I was wondering about why multiculturalism has had a backlash. From a US perspective, is it just that it was done poorly? I think about land acknowledgements and how they can feel very accusatory (“we’re on the unceded grounds of … “) versus celebratory (“ we recognize the original stewards of this land and honor their legacy…”). Or is multiculturalism always going to come with some amount of feelings of exclusion? (Which is my hypothesis for the backlash)
It’s an angle I’m very interested. I’ve been wondering the same. I recall similar backlash vibes in the early 90s with California passing Prop 187 to deter immigration, and the three strikes law to crackdown on gangs violence, and a general fear that Japan was going to take over the global economy. But then around 2000, the increase in immigration leveled off, Japan’s economy never recovered from its housing bubble, the US economy was doing great, gangs violence subsided, and 9/11 united the country.
My impression is that multiculturalism benefits from a sense of economic growth and security. When the economy is up and crime is down, people are more willing to engage with multiculturalism and DEI. (Maybe the 2008 economic crisis and the Tea Party are counterpoints to the argument, but the Obama years still felt optimistic compared to the despair of the early 90s and today.)
I think we’re in a similar backlash period now. Immigration went up significantly during a 5-year period that saw an increase in crime, drug overdoses, suicides, car fatalities, alcoholism, and general unruly behavior. Plus inflation and increased negativity in the news and social media.
The irony is that now all of those things are now starting to improve. Plus, China is experiencing the same economic pains as 1990s Japan. And I’m sure Trump will take credit for it all.