Interview: Tariq Modood – on being a public intellectual, a Muslim and a multiculturalist

In an interview for Renewal with Simon Thompson, Tariq Modood, one of Britain’s foremost Muslim public intellectuals, discusses the role of the public intellectual, Islam and British public life, and a critically evolving multiculturalism. You can read the full interview for free, online here. In this extract Modood discusses the impact of the Salman Rushdie affair of 1989 on his politics

Post-immigration cultural diversity and integration

Ethno-religious diversity is a fact of Western European cities and will grow and spread. Living in these locations today requires a respect for ‘difference’ as well as a sense of commonalities; these are required at the level of the local and the city but also at the level of the national. A framework of anti-discrimination and processes of uncoercive cultural encounters are also necessary but are not sufficient. We also need to have the possibility of sharing a macro-symbolic sense of belonging. With this in mind I consider a number of modes of integration. I argue that multiculturalism is a mode of integration, which can be contrasted with other modes such as assimilation, individualist-integration and cosmopolitanism, and like the others it is based on the core democratic values of liberty, equality and fraternity/unity. My contention is that even though multiculturalism is unpopular with some European publics today, integration is not possible without including it within an integration strategy. I go on to consider what kinds of ‘difference’ mark the real divisions today and into the future. I conclude that one of the most profound questions Europeans are being forced to consider is about the place of religion in the public space

Intercultural Public Intellectual Engagement

The article firstly examines the different conceptions of dialogue and reason within political theory, especially in the work of Rawls. Secondly we explore multicultural political theorists who have been motivated less by abstract reasoning by a sole reasoner or identical identity-less individuals and more by dialogue. For such multiculturalists, the principles of social justice are not known in advance or simply by reason, but are arrived at by conflict and learning, by dialogue and negotiation in circumstances of inequality and minority-claims making. In response to the multiculturalists, interculturalists allege that multiculturalism is too focused on the macro and the conflictual, and dialogue should be redirected to the micro and the cooperative. Although I welcome the interculturalists’ focus on micro-relations, this does not require abandoning the idea of dialogue at the level of political controversies and public discourses. It is not an either–or choice because groups and intergroup problems exist in society and cannot be simply handled at a micro level of contact, interaction and sociability. The kind of macro-level dialogue that I am speaking of can also be understood as a form of public intellectual engagement that can contribute to societal dialogues.1 1This article is a reprint of Tariq Modood (2017) ‘Intercultural public intellectual engagement’ in Fethi Mansouri (ed) Interculturalism at the Crossroads: Comparative perspectives on concepts, policies and practice, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, France, 83-102

In remembering the Charlie Hebdo attack we must not forget the responsibility that goes with free speech

On 11 January, unity marches were held across France following terrorist attacks which killed 17 people in Paris, including an attack on the headquarters of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. One of the key debates to have taken place since the attacks has focused on the issue of free speech, given the controversial nature of some of the material published by the magazine. Tariq Modood argues that while there is clearly no possible justification for the violence that took place, there is nevertheless an important responsibility which accompanies free speech and we should stop short of celebrating images that reinforce social divisions

Multiculturalism can foster a new kind of post-Brexit Englishness

One of the questions raised by the UK’s decision to leave the EU is the extent to which national identity is becoming a stronger factor in British politics. Tariq Modood writes that the rise of Scottish and English nationalism poses a potential threat to British identity, but that a new conception of multiculturalism could revive feelings of Britishness among UK citizens

Migration and cultural diversity challenges in the 21st century

In this discussion we will consider some of the literature that seeks to take stock of the challenges and opportunities for liberal citizenship regimes that follow processes of migration; a body of thought that has variously centred on ways to reconcile political unity with ethnic, cultural and religious difference (e.g., Young, 1990; Taylor, 1992; Kymlicka, 1995; Parekh, 2000; Modood, 2007). In addition to this prevailing ‘canon’ there is a sustained and interdisciplinary body of theory and research exploring configurations of national membership, within and across a number of European polities, especially in terms of citizenship and national identity (e.g., Brubaker, 2001; Joppke, 2004; Koopmans et al, 2005; Banting and Kymlicka, 2006; Jacobs and Rea, 2007; Uberoi; 2008; Joppke, 2009; Meer, 2010; Faas, 2010; Triandafyllidou et al, 2011; Modood, 2013). We begin by noting the perpetual role that migration plays in unsettl ing existing configurations, before elaborating a rationale for remaking forms of collective memb ership in a manner that includes new groups too. Multiculturalism, we argue, is the foremost example of this even though its political fate remains uncertain. To support our reading we positively contrast it with categories such as interculturalism and superdiversity

Migration and cultural diversity challenges in the twenty-first century

This chapter considers some of the challenges of theorising the new cultural – ethnocultural, ethnoreligious, and ethnoracial – diversities. These are both of how to use the resources of liberalism as well as noting that liberal understanding of equality and social identity are unable to do justice to the phenomenon of people having and valuing group identities. There is a sociological argument that the challenge of diversity, namely, the accommodation of a limited number of new, relatively stable groups has been superseded by ‘superdiversity’. We examine the claim that there are too many groups, constantly being added to by newer and ongoing flows of migration or the fragmentation of more stable groups such as Black or Asian, and that their groupness is along different cross-cutting dimensions – race, religion, language, national origins and further intersected by socio-economic factors, gender, sexuality – to be caught in a single policy framework. We discuss how multiculturalism some time ago ceased to have vitality or public support. The thread running through the chapter is that the presence and capacity of multiculturalism as a political perspective seeking to locate itself in contemporary liberal democracies is not negligible; while new rhetorics – integration, interculturalism, human rights – may have displaced it somewhat, it still seems to be growing as a policy tendency