Multiculturalism and Group Rights

Abstract

In the focus of discussion about multiculturalism is the importance of identity, especially importance of religion and culture for the establishing, shaping, and preservation of this identity. Obliteration or loss of religious and cultural beliefs means the loss of the identity; exactly this fact is the reason to introduce in the discussion special rights for minority groups. Those forms of egalitarianism which are opposed to multiculturalism ground this opposition on the more universal principles – for them poverty, unemployment, bad education etc. are otherwise bad things but independent of cultural or religious conditions and affiliations. If we consider two opposing poles then the one (B. Parekh) resists homogenisation and assimilation of society; he believes that there is not only one correct and true way how to understand the domains of life while Barry believes that we cannot live the life which is worth living without, for example, educational opportunities which will give us the arms for successful competition in the employment market. The care for such opportunities can come in opposition to cultural and religious identity – in such case it is the cultural identity which, according to B. Barry, draws a blank. My position in this discussion is near the point of view of S. Mendus which says that the real issue is not whether religious and cultural beliefs are given or chosen. The real issue is whether religious and cultural identity can run against one's ability to lead a fulfilling life, or whether what counts as a fulfilling life is partly a function of religious and cultural identity. Egalitarians who believe that the truly terrible things are independent of culture cannot advocate their egalitarianism by placing religious belief on the choice side of the choice-chance distinction.