Rejoinder: multiculturalism and interculturalism: alongside but separate

12Citations
Citations of this article
40Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

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 multiple-identities. 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zapata-Barrero, R. (2018, December 1). Rejoinder: multiculturalism and interculturalism: alongside but separate. Comparative Migration Studies. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-018-0090-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free