Examining 'postmulticultural' and civic turns in the Netherlands, Britain, Germany, and Denmark

There is a widely shared view that the appeal of multiculturalism as a public policy has suffered considerable political damage. In many European states the turn to “civic” measures and discourses has been deemed more suitable for the objectives of minority integration and the promotion of preferred modes of social and political unity. It is therefore said that the first decade of the new century has been characterized by a reorientation in immigrant integration policies—from liberal culturalist to the “return of assimilation” (Brubaker, 2001), on route to a broader “retreat from multiculturalism” (Joppke, 2004). In this article, we argue that such portrayals mask a tendency that is more complicated in some cases and much less evident in others. To elaborate this, we offer a detailed account of the inception and then alleged movement away from positions in favor of multiculturalism in two countries that have adopted different versions of it, namely the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, and two countries that have historically rejected multiculturalism, namely Denmark and Germany. We argue that while there is undoubtedly a rhetorical separation between multiculturalism and civic integration, the latter is in some cases building on the former, and broadly needs to be understood as more than a retreat of multiculturalism. Taking seriously Banting and Kymlicka’s argument that understanding the evolution of integration requires the “the mind-set of an archaeologist,” we offer a policy genealogy that allows us to set the backlash against multiculturalism in context, in manner that explicates its provenance, permutations, and implications

Atomic layer deposition of TiO₂ on surface modified nanoporous low-k films

This paper explores the effects of different plasma treatments on low dielectric constant (low-k) materials and the consequences for the growth behavior of atomic layer deposition (ALD) on these modified substrates. An O2 and a He/H2 plasma treatment were performed on SiCOH low-k films to modify their chemical surface groups. Transmission FTIR and water contact angle (WCA) analysis showed that the O2 plasma changed the hydrophobic surface completely into a hydrophilic surface, while the He/H2 plasma changed it only partially. In a next step, in situ X-ray fluorescence (XRF), ellipsometric porosimetry (EP), and Rutherford backscattering spectroscopy (RBS) were used to characterize ALD growth of TiO2 on these substrates. The initial growth of TiO2 was found to be inhibited in the original low-k film containing only Si-CH3 surface groups, while immediate growth was observed in the hydrophilic O2 plasma treated film. The latter film was uniformly filled with TiO2 after 8 ALD cycles, while pore filling was delayed to 17 ALD cycles in the hydrophobic film. For the He/H2 plasma treated film, containing both Si-OH and Si-CH3 groups, the in situ XRF data showed that TiO2 could no longer be deposited in the He/H2 plasma treated film after 8 ALD cycles, while EP measurements revealed a remaining porosity. This can be explained by the faster deposition of TiO2 in the hydrophilic top part of the film than in the hydrophobic bulk which leaves the bulk porous, as confirmed by RBS depth profiling. The outcome of this research is not only of interest for the development of advanced interconnects in ULSI technology, but also demonstrates that ALD combined with RBS analysis is a handy approach to analyze the modifications induced by a plasma treatment on a nanoporous thin film

Rejoinder: multiculturalism and interculturalism: alongside but separate

This rejoinder reacts to the comments I have received of my defence of interculturalism (key-article of this Special Issue). Basically it defends the need to take seriously the distinctiveness between MC and IC, as friends rather than foes. It is also argued that the emergence of IC must be placed in the context of legitimacy crisis of MC and the process of policy paradigm change and formation. Then, it is briefly stated that IC tries to fill the epistemological limits of MC and must be considered as a mainstreaming policy within the “local turn” in migration and diversity studies. Moreover, it is contended that IC is a new public mindset and announces a new public culture in a society of multipleidentities. Finally that IC makes diversity workwith a view of diversity as an advantage (which means that it is policy resource for cultivating community cohesion, creativity, economic development, solidarity promotion, xenophobia reduction). Finally, I reckon that IC probably requires a multidimensional theory of contact and a more deep normative reflection in terms of public benefits