French Assimilation Policy Flashcards
What is the definition of integration?
Integration refers to the process of bringing together different racial, ethnic or cultural groups to form cohesive society, where each group maintains its unique identity and contributes to the whole. It thus presupposes the equality of all cultures within a society.
What is the definition of assimilation?
Assimilation implies a more one-way process, where minority groups adopt the dominant culture, often at the expense of their own identity. Assimilation presupposes the superiority of the dominant culture.
Why is integration and assimilation often misunderstood or confused? What are the consequences of this misunderstanding and this zero sum game?
Firstly, because of their seeming similarity, the definitions of the two are often swapped around and confuse, with many people believing that integration means erasing cultural differences whereas assimilation is a necessary step towards achieving a cohesive equal society. Furthermore, certain ideologues purposefully misconstrue both definitions so that you are confused and pick the one they are more favourable to, they thus turn the question of which is better into a zero sum game. One or the other, black or white. This zero sum game can have serious consequences. For instance, if we prioritise assimilation over integration, we risk losing the diversity that makes our societies richer. This can lead to the suppression of minority cultures and the erasure of their identities. On the other hand, if we focus too much on integration, we might end up creating parallel societies, where different groups coexist but don’t interact with each other. If we fail to understand the differences between these two concepts, we risk creating conflict, marginalisation and social unrest.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of assimilation?
Assimilation can lead to social cohesion and a sense of belonging but it can also result in cultural homogenisation. Assimilation well as this, only a kind of forced assimilation would every fully get rid of minority cultures, and the consequences this would have on human liberty even if you want to do it, would be devastating, so there is always and element of integration within a system that favours assimilation.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of integration?
Integration can preserve cultural diversity but it requires effort and commitment from all parties involved. Any good example of integration also requires an immigrant to assimilate certain things e.g. the language of a country or their understanding of laws and social moeurs.
Which of the following best describes assimilation in a multicultural society?
(A) people from different cultural backgrounds maintain their original customs and values while contributing to the broader society.
(B) people from different cultural backgrounds fully adopt their dominant culture’s customs and values, losing their original identity.
(C) people integrate their customs into the dominant culture’s, which adapts to accommodate them.
(D) people of the same cultural backgrounds fully live in separate communities but do not interact with others.
Answers: B C is wrong because it is a common misunderstanding that assimilation involves mutual adaption, when in fact it typically involves one-sided change.
Which of the following is an example of integration?
(A) a group of immigrants completely adopts the language, traditions,and values of the host country.
(B) a community retains its unique language and customs while participating in the larger society.
(C) immigrants are forced to abandon their cultural practices in order to be accepted by the dominant group.
(D) different cultural groups are segregated and do not interact with each other.
B
What are the core principles of France’s assimilation policy?
Secularism, freedom, equality and fraternity
What is secularism? In which country s secularism adopted?
Secularism refers to the belief of setting a clear separation of religious affair from governance and not favouring one religion over another. Secularism is adopted in France.
State the policies that France implemented and explain how the policies reflect France’s core principles.
Education
Fraternity and Equality: all children regardless of citizenship are required to attend school until 16 years old. Adapation classes are introduced to children of immigrants e.g. Learning the French language.
Secularism: in the classroom: no dicussion of religion in the classroom except in History, Literature, Philosophy and Art classes. Moral and civic education to promote national motto, justice, mutual respect and non-discrimination. These policies that are implemented in education ensures that the children of immigrants would be able to blend in well to the community of France since they are able to communicate well and effectively to others.
Employment
Equality: Diversity Charter issued in 2004 to support assimilation and encourage companies to be inclusive and carry out tangible actions to promote diversity at the workplace.
This policy implemented in employment suggests that the France government believes in the motto of equality.
Naturalisation
Fraternity: Programmes for immigrants to develop basic knowledge of life in France, 4 day civi training course in French principles and values, practical aspects of life in French society. 600 hours of free language course. This is to faciliate the adoption of French attitudes and beliefs to strengthen French national identiy and ensure national unity.
What were the different responses to the ban on wearing religious attire?
The controversial law that bans all conspicuous religious symbols sparked criticisms especially from the Muslims as they think it is too extreme for them and there should be more flexibility. Some critics also mentioned that since France values multiculturalism, France should be more lenient in this laws, for example to religious clothing. Most of the locals in France are in favour of secularism as they believe that it protects their harmony and enables people to be united while defending against religious extremism.
What are some positive impacts of France’s assimilation policy?
Cohesion in Society:
Unified National Identity: Assimilation encourages individuals from different cultural backgrounds to adopt a common set of values, beliefs, and behaviours, fostering a unified national identity.
Social Integration: It may help to reduce cultural differences that could potentially create social divisions, encouraging a sense of belonging among all members of society.
Economic Opportunities:
Easier Economic Integration: When people adopt the dominant culture’s language, customs, and work norms, they may find it easier to enter the workforce, as they are less likely to face cultural barriers.
Improved Social Mobility: By adopting mainstream cultural practices, immigrants may have better access to education and employment opportunities, facilitating upward social mobility.
Political Stability:
Fewer Cultural Conflicts: Assimilation might reduce tensions between cultural groups, contributing to greater political stability. The dominance of one culture can diminish the likelihood of cultural separatism.
Easier Governance: A population that largely shares common values and norms might make governance easier, as there would be fewer conflicting social agendas.
Cultural Homogeneity:
Simplification of Cultural Diversity: The reduction in cultural differences might make it easier to form a cohesive society with shared values, which could contribute to a more predictable social environment.
National Unity:
Strengthened Nationalism: A sense of shared identity and allegiance to the state could be enhanced when people from different backgrounds assimilate into the dominant culture, fostering a stronger sense of patriotism and unity.
What are some cons of France’s assimilation policy?
Loss of Cultural Identity:
Erasure of Traditions: Assimilation often requires minority groups to abandon their own cultural traditions, language, and customs, leading to a loss of cultural heritage and identity.
Cultural Homogenization: The focus on one dominant culture may lead to the suppression of diverse cultural practices and diversity, erasing what makes individual groups unique.
Psychological Impact:
Identity Crisis: Individuals who are forced to assimilate may face psychological distress or confusion, as they are caught between their original culture and the dominant one, leading to feelings of alienation.
Alienation: Minority groups might feel disconnected from both their heritage and the dominant culture, leading to potential isolation or a sense of not fully belonging anywhere.
Increased Discrimination:
Unrealistic Expectations: Minority groups may be held to unreasonable standards, with their cultural differences seen as “inferior” or undesirable, leading to discrimination and stigmatization.
Cultural Superiority: The dominant group may feel a sense of superiority, reinforcing power imbalances and fostering an environment of exclusion or prejudice.
Undermines Social Diversity:
Cultural Conflict and Resentment: Some individuals or groups may resist assimilation, viewing it as an attempt to erase their identity, leading to resentment or even social unrest.
Lack of Tolerance for Diversity: An assimilation policy could decrease tolerance and acceptance for cultural diversity, fostering an atmosphere where cultural differences are seen as problematic rather than celebrated.
Resistance from Minority Groups:
Social Division: Some minority groups may resist assimilation policies, leading to social tension, division, and possible resentment towards the dominant culture. This can create a fragmented society where integration does not occur peacefully.
Formation of Subcultures: Minority groups may form subcultures that are resistant to mainstream society, potentially leading to parallel societies within the same nation, undermining the idea of a cohesive national identity.
Moral and Ethical Concerns:
Forced Assimilation: Policies that impose assimilation on minority groups can be seen as ethically questionable, as they may infringe upon the rights of individuals to preserve their cultural heritage.
Cultural Imperialism: There is a danger that assimilation policies may be a form of cultural imperialism, where the dominant group imposes its values and norms on others, disregarding their autonomy and cultural rights.
