The Perceptions of Multiculturalism and Policymaking in Denmark - By Maria Imonitie Supervisor: Sune Haugbølle Global Studies Department of Social ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The Perceptions of Multiculturalism and Policymaking in Denmark
© Picture
By Maria Imonitie
Supervisor: Sune Haugbølle
Global Studies
Department of Social Science at Roskilde University
Master Thesis, Fall Term 2019
Project Title
The Perceptions of Multiculturalism and Policymaking in Denmark
Project Seminar
Global Studies
Prepared by (Name/Studentno.)
Maria Imonitie / 58319
Name of Supervisor
Sune Haugbølle
Submission Date
02.01.2020
Number of keystrokes incl. spaces
162.317
Permitted keystrokes incl. spaces
115.200-163.200
2
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1. ............................................................................................................................................ 6
THE UNDERSTANDING OF MULTICULTURALISM IN CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY. ........................................ 6
1.1 PROBLEM AREA AND RESEARCH QUESTION. .......................................................................................... 6
1.2 MOTIVATION: WHY MULTICULTURALISM AND PERSONAL STATUS LAW? WHY DENMARK? ............................... 7
1.3 DELIMITATIONS. ............................................................................................................................ 8
1.4 OUTLINE OF THIS THESIS PAPER. ......................................................................................................... 9
CHAPTER 2. .......................................................................................................................................... 10
CONTEXT REVOLVING AROUND MULTICULTURALISM AND THE DEBATE TODAY. ................................... 10
2.1 MULTICULTURALISM IN THE INTERDISCIPLINARY FIELD . .......................................................................... 11
2.2 THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORY. ........................................................................................................ 13
2.3 MULTICULTURALISM AND LIBERAL DEMOCRACIES. ............................................................................... 14
2.4 THE DEBATE TODAY....................................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER 3. .......................................................................................................................................... 20
THEORETICAL APPROACHES. ................................................................................................................ 20
3.1. BHUKHI PAREKH’S PERCEPTION OF MULTICULTURALISM AND CRITICAL DISCURSIVE APPROACH . ............................. 21
3.2 ALTERNATIVE PRINCIPLES TO EXPLAIN AND UNDERSTAND MULTICULTURALISM . ........................................... 22
3.3 THE TRADE-OFF IN CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND THE WELFARE STATE............................................................ 22
CHAPTER 4. .......................................................................................................................................... 25
METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH STRATEGY. ......................................................................................... 25
4.1 MIXED METHODS APPROACH. ............................................................................................................... 25
4.2 DATA COLLECTION. ....................................................................................................................... 26
4.3 ROLE AS A RESEARCHER. ................................................................................................................ 27
CHAPTER 5. .......................................................................................................................................... 28
CULTURAL CHALLENGES FOR THE DANISH STATE. ................................................................................. 28
5.1 THE LUTHERAN CHURCH AND BEING “DANISH”. .................................................................................. 29
5.2 THE NEW WAY OF VIEWING IDENTITY AND CITIZENSHIP. ......................................................................... 33
5.3 INTEGRATION IN DENMARK. ........................................................................................................... 36
3CHAPTER 6. .......................................................................................................................................... 40
STATE-LEVEL AND MUNICIPALITY-LEVEL GOVERNANCE. ........................................................................ 40
6.1 THE PERSONAL STATUS LAWS IN DENMARK. ....................................................................................... 41
6.2 THE MUNICIPALITIES’ WORK IN CULTURALLY DIVERSE SOCIETIES IN DENMARK. ............................................ 47
CHAPTER 7. .......................................................................................................................................... 51
A DISCUSSION OF MEDIA’S IMPACT ON THE LOCAL AND GLOBAL DEBATE OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY. ...... 51
7.1 A DISCUSSION OF THE LOGIC BEHIND THE VOTER AND THE SUCCEED OF ANTI -MIGRATION PARTIES..................... 51
7.2 A DISCUSSION OF CITIZENSHIP. ........................................................................................................ 55
CHAPTER 8. .......................................................................................................................................... 58
CONCLUSION AND THE INFLUENCE OF THE PROJECT. ............................................................................ 58
8.1 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................... 58
8.2 THE INFLUENCE OF THE PROJECT AND PERSPECTIVES. ............................................................................. 59
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................................... 60
4Abstract
Today we view the concept of culture as a universal understanding, but research indicates that in
different settings, frameworks, and fields of study, the concept is complex. Even more, when some
of the politicians throughout Europe argue that multiculturalism is harmful, one must be critical of
such claims. This thesis investigates how political rhetoric and public debates about
multiculturalism impacts policymaking regarding personal status law. This dissertation takes its
departure with a Danish case study that explores Danish law changes from 2014 to 2019 concerning
personal status laws. The debate highlighted in the thesis includes both past, and current debate in
Denmark and other European countries.
Moreover, two different theoretical approaches assisted in answering the research question and in
providing a profound answer. The thesis illustrates that if the public debate is negative regarding
migration, it ultimately affects laws that can limit or prevent further future migration from
occurring. Furthermore, the nature and provisions in the laws can be interpreted to indicate that only
certain types of people are welcome in the country. Conclusively, the discourse plays a significant
role in influencing how, and when politicians legislate and also influence people’s voting patterns at
national elections.
5Part I. Introduction and setting the context
Chapter 1.
The understanding of multiculturalism in contemporary society.
1.1 Problem area and Research question.
Through the recent decades, the world has become more and more interconnected through
globalisation, and this is viewed within both the possibility of human movement and also the
movement of technology, finances and cultures (Parekh, 2006; Appadurai, 1996). When the world
seems to be smaller because of the movements, a result is that different cultures meet and live side-
by-side, and this leads to a world with multiple cultures in societies (ibid.). This means that one place
has several cultures, and Eriksen (2014) states that this leads to local cultures becoming glocal (a
fusion of local and global cultures mixed). This change suggests a threat to the national identity and
leads to increase in political parties that attempt to separate certain cultures from each other, more
specifically the western culture from the other cultures (Liang, 2007; Polakow-Suransky, 2017).
Politics related to culture introduce the political agenda to be a discussion of identity and, that one
must have an identity that is either assimilated or differentiated from the general population (Modood,
2013). This type of politics is seen often in Europe, and in the West; in the past, it was right-wing
parties aiming to draw up the borders to prevent migration, but now left-wing parties are joining the
hostile attitude towards migration.
Furthermore, both ends of the political spectrum attempt to make laws that prevent other cultures
from mixing with the ‘Europeanised’ culture (Liang, 2007). In the global sphere, the debate on culture
and multiculturalism often comes from the perception of a global south movement towards a global
north that leads to communities with mixed cultures. Multiculturalism can be understood as a
phenomenon at the civil society level, where multinationalism is a governmental collaboration
(Bauböck, 2001), and therefore, it seems that multiculturalism is unavoidable in policymaking
because all types of policymaking impact the civil society. Nevertheless, the public discourse of
multiculturalism influences the civil society to engage in politically-specific ways in terms of which
parties that win at elections. Moreover, the discourse can dominate a specific narrative without any
6data to support the claims, and this can be problematic for the logic behind political decisions. In
contemporary societies, media influences humans in a higher degree than before, and one personal
daily encounter do not necessarily dictate human behaviour. Therefore, it is necessary to study the
impact of personal, political perception of multiculturalism and how it impacts policymaking.
Henceforth, this master thesis investigates the relationship between the perception of
multiculturalism, on one side, and policymaking regarding personal status law on the other. This
dissertation attempts to fill a gap in the existing research by trying to answer the following working
questions:
1) What and who has impacted the perception of multiculturalism in Denmark?
2) How does personal status law law-making impact cultural diversity?
3) How are changes of personal status laws impacting the individual, and the EU, when the
perception of multiculturalism is either negative or positive?
The overall research is structured and guided by the following research question:
How is the local and global debate of multiculturalism impacting policymaking
regarding personal status law?
1.2 Motivation: Why multiculturalism and personal status law? Why Denmark?
In Denmark, there appears to be a blurred line between the different parties' perceptions in the
political sphere regarding migration and the policymaking. It is interesting to note that a small country
such as Denmark that highly depends on the international collaboration, from both an economical
and security aspect, still seems to be hostile towards other nationalities living within their borders.
Lars Løkke Rasmussen, in 2017, encourages all young educators to travel the world and explore the
international market, which is, and continually will be our most significant export and import partner,
namely the world. At the same time, Inger Støjberg functions as the Integration Minister, who is
globally and locally known for strict migration rhetoric. Knowledge of the juxtaposition above (a
State minister advising citizens to explore the world while working with an Integration minister that
is tough allowing other people to come in) contributes to my interest on how personal perceptions on
multiculturalism can impact actual law-making. A personal opinion suggests that law-making should
be made on a logical, evidential and rational ground, not on personal views and opinions.
7Interestingly, on a personal level, the consequences of the strict Danish immigration laws are felt in
my household. My non-European husband studied at Roskilde University, at a post-graduate level,
on a scholarship from the Danish state and worked full-time for two years after graduation;
nevertheless, he was not acknowledged as an asset for the Danish state due to the strict laws regarding
'personal status' and had to leave the country.
Being in a system like that encouraged a view into the contradiction of one minister encouraging the
youth to be international and at the same time, a minister closing the borders for the same international
community. Consequently, I witness a connection between personal perceptions of multiculturalism
and law-making relating to personal status laws. This thesis focuses mostly on negative perceptions
because we have witnessed more limiting tendencies in policymaking the recent years.
1.3 Delimitations.
This research includes different bodies of literature relating to multiculturalism from scholars like
Bhikhu Parekh (2006), Will Kymlicka (2003, 2006), Keith Banting (2006) to debaters and academics
like Sune Lægaard (2013), Garbi Smith (2013), Tariq Modood (2013) and Michala Bendixen (2018,
2019). The work of the scholars mentioned above has helped provide an overview of the debate on
multiculturalism, and also the complexity in understanding and defining the concept. Nonetheless,
this thesis limits its scope to specific laws when researching how different perception of
multiculturalism impacts law-making; this was mainly due to the realization that the Danish
legislation formulation includes many aspects of law-making and impacts the development of diverse
cultures in society. For example, when the Danish government makes, e.g. a financial law, then
smaller policies have significant impacts on minority groups in Denmark.
As the procedure of legislation is difficult to separate, this research, therefore, chose to focus on the
laws that are publicly known and more specifically directed to limit plurality of cultures.
When this research began, it became evident that migration plays a significant role in causing several
cultures to meet, but this has not been included in a full extent in the thesis. To elaborate, this work
touches upon the question of migration, but not what type of migration nor the exact data on it. It
does include the relevant data relating to migration, but only on the surface level, such as integration
agreements, refugee agreements, and laws of family reunification, study or work.
In addition to this, this research notes different historical remarks that impact the Danish attitude
towards migration and the meeting of several cultures, but it does not go in-depth with the importance
8of some historical facts like 9/11, the war in Syria, the collapse of Libya, the Balkan wars or other
surrounding circumstances that impacted the Danish legislation. Overall, this thesis relates to specific
legislations in the Danish system, and it focuses on the discourse on non-western migration. Even
though this research includes several works of literature, it is essential to acknowledge that this
analysis is not representative for all legislation in western societies, nor that personal and political
perception impact all legislation in Denmark. Instead, this study argues that the patterns we see in the
ruling government, and the media’s important role in law-making regarding personal status law in
Denmark.
1.4 Outline of this thesis paper.
This dissertation dissects into three parts. The first part presents the context around the relevance of
the research and offers an overview of the theoretical approaches, methodological choices and
research strategy. The second part of the paper is the analysis with two analytical chapters and one
discussing the results. This part focuses on the public debate mainly in Denmark, and also the position
of the Danish politicians compared to other European countries. Also, it illustrates the visible
connection between the public debate, Danish politician’s opinions and legislation. The study
proceeds to discuss some of the consequences that this development in anti-immigration tendencies
can have on the civil society in Denmark with a limited perspective section to Europe. It all cultivates
in the third part, which is a conclusion and a discussion on how this thesis relates to other components
in society today, and an introduction to further research.
9Chapter 2.
Context revolving around multiculturalism and the debate today.
Several focal points in history have drawn people to be optimistic and positive towards each other,
and the merge of different cultures was welcomed (Modood, 2013). This positive and optimistic vibe
changed when people, later on, saw the clear difference between cultures, e.g. blacks moving to
Britain and living in predominantly white communities (Modood, 2013). Tariq Modood, a scholar
who examines multiculturalism in the United Kingdom (UK) states that this ultimately led to a shift
in the view of culture in the UK and brought about the phenomenon of multiculturalism. Throughout
history, the term “multicultural/ism” has been adopted by many countries to illustrate their tolerance
towards marginalised groups, and at the same time been utilised by political parties to distance
themselves from culturally diverse societies. Jan Pakulski, a Polish professor in Sociology, argues
that there has been a confusion of what multiculturalism means. As a result, the critique of the
phenomenon does not solely stress out problems that are related to multiculturalism. He insists instead
that it is problems that connect with the failure of assimilation (Pakulski, 2014) and, this is critical in
the current debate revolving around multiculturalism. Some argue that multiculturalism is an ideology
and would promote for societies with diverse cultures and identities (ibid). Along these lines,
multiculturalism has unfolded itself as being one of the vital qualities of modern liberal ideology, and
simply put; is a socio-demographic and socio-cultural diversity (ibid., p. 25). The confusion related
to the concept stems from the different understandings of multiculturalism; if it is an ideology, it is a
descriptive concept or politics related to cultural diversity. This chapter sheds light on some of the
main arguments in the literature of multiculturalism and points to the context regarding the global
debate about multiculturalism. In respect of the vast amount of available literature on the topic, this
chapter has a very concise and selective presentation of the literature that is relevant for the thesis
and scholars mentioned several times in different aspects. Furthermore, this chapter consists of two
different settings: the first relates to the theoretical debate and the latter to the public debate. These
two branches are included to illustrate how multiculturalism as public debate and a theoretical
phenomenon exist.
102.1 Multiculturalism in the interdisciplinary field.
‘Multiculturalism’ originates from the concept of culture which has various definitions and
understandings depending on the scholar and context surrounding its utilisation among other factors.
The concept also appears in several fields of research including philosophy, anthropology, political
science, sociology and social science. Therefore, it is utilised differently, both theoretically,
methodologically, and the definitions vary.
In this research, three different fields (philosophy, anthropology and political science) are chosen to
shortly give an overview to understand how different the phenomenon can be understood and
utilised. The field of philosophy works and takes departure in the understanding of the basis of
human beings (Parekh, 2006; Vivas, 1940; Stevenson, 1938). The initial belief is that human beings
consist of two components that separates them from animals, and they are moral and rational
(Stevenson, 1938). The moral component is the vital segment in this regard because it describes
how humans behave in a social context and what is expected of them. Furthermore, culture has not
always had the meaning it has today, hence, the perception of multiculturalism. The concept of
culture was used concerning art and literature, and one mastering this would be “a cultured man”
(Stevenson, 1938, p. 331). The philosophical aspect focuses more on the individual’s character
rather than their surroundings and does not take into account other civilisations. Philosophers view
empiricism as vital because it is the knowledge that derives from personal experiences, but this can
also lead to inconsistency in understanding the moral aspect. The moral is often applicable in social
classes, but not concerning other civilisations (Vivas, 1940). Philosopher Charles Leslie Stevenson
states that “there are hundreds of words which, like “culture“, have both a vague conceptual
meaning and a rich, emotive meaning. The conceptual meaning of them all is subject to constant
redefinition. The words are prizes which each man seeks to bestow on the qualities of his own
choice” (Stevenson, 1938, p. 333). The field of philosophy seems to have a rather conservative
view of culture and multiculturalism and focuses on the individual and does not take different
circumstances into account.
The anthropological field includes much more of the social setting around the question proposed, it
focuses on the individual but for the purpose to generalise and gather information about the
surroundings as well (Winter, 2004, p. 117). The cultural anthropology is similar to psychology and
11sociology but is instead interdisciplinary research of social science and humanities combined
(Rasmussen, 2012). Furthermore, that “… cultural anthropology … focuses most intently on
contemporary (living) human cultural and social beliefs, knowledge, and practices through in-depth
study of a single cultural setting, as well as comparative cross-cultural studies” (ibid., p. 97). The
research of a cultural anthropologist is conducted through ethnographic fieldwork, but also with
high cultural realism, which means that the researcher is aware of the bias that exists from the
researcher’s cultural values (ibid.). Even though cultural anthropology analyses cultural beliefs or
behaviour in society, it is, more recently, also utilised to analyse the political issues that illustrate
cultural differences in society, e.g. minorities’ rights, such as indigenous people’s rights (ibid.). An
issue that occurs in the research of cultural anthropology is the understanding of human beings’
differences and similarities on a universal level. It often results in a distinction between the “…
“folk” at home and from so-called “primitive” peoples abroad, for purposes of classification”
(Rasmussen, 2012, p. 97). The way of separating different cultures from each other indicates that in
cultural anthropology, the interest of the researcher is the cultural differences in order to make
universal distinctions. However, the researcher also includes more than merely individual
behaviour, which differs from philosophy.
The field of political science suggests that there is less reflexivity of the researcher’s role compared
to, e.g. anthropology, but is more similar to, e.g. economics (Stade, 2005). Ronald Stade, a Swedish
anthropologist who works in the field of political science, states that many of the traditional schools
in political science do not view culture as an essential factor “behind the scene” (Stade, 2005, p.
281-282). He points to the importance of culture throughout history, which influences our
contemporary societies (ibid.). The theorist behind political science began their research with a
comparison of political systems in five different democracies and concluded that the United States
and Britain are the countries with the most developed and balanced political culture (ibid., p. 286).
The way they did research was more about different systems instead of processes and cases, which
is different from cultural anthropology or philosophy. The research of political science departs in
the work that is “… supposed to mediate between the macro-level of nationality defined culture and
the micro-level of individual action” (Stade, 2005, p. 286). Political cultural scientists focus on both
the social trust one witness in the social behaviour in a country as well as the civil communities’
participation (ibid., p. 288)
12The three fields I have highlighted indicates differences in the concept of culture. In philosophy, it
is more conservative and bounded as a way to describe human beings, later changed to merely
describing different civilisations. In cultural anthropology, the surroundings and environment play
an essential role on the general culture, and lastly that in political science culture determines the
level of political engagement, so it is both surroundings combine with the civil society.
While some scholars agree that multiculturalism in politics supports the minority groups in societies,
these same scholars seem to have a hard time defining a minority when they refer to it (Pakulski,
2014; Colombo, 2015; Kymlicka, 2003). It is unsure if they refer to the minority of the native
population that has come to be a minority due to colonialization (indigenous people), or if it is the
minority group of peculiar sexual preferences, or more popularly, the minority of different ethnicity
groups. Investigating multiculturalism reveals that is it more than just about cultural diversity. This
difficulty of specifying the minority group indicates that it is about identity and a sense of belonging
of the individual. Thus, through globalisation (Eriksen, 2014), one can have a feeling of belonging in
one place and be geographically located elsewhere. Space and time do not seem to be of the same
importance as it once was. Instead, it is a world shrinking that leaves room for the debate of identity
in a globalised world (Eriksen, 2014; Harvey 1990). This also means that it is possible to be a part of
a culture that is not located around oneself. However, it can be reached through media that, today,
have a significant influence on spreading different cultures around the world. This is a change that is
visible today, and in the following section, the importance of history to understand the theoretical
aspect of culture is outlined.
2.2 The importance of history.
As illustrated in the section above, culture as singular varies in the understanding and definition,
which makes multiculturalism as a concept difficult to fully grasp. Culture is, generally, said to be a
portrayal of the everyday life of a given civilisation, one can find its root in norms, values, traditions,
language, geographical location and can be expressed through various elements, such as art, music,
behaviour and food (Hall, Slack, and Grossberg, 1983; Lionnet, Françoise and Shu-mei Shih, 2011;
Said, 1979). In this matter, culture is defined as something one can visualise and as a result, be aware
of the differences between ‘yours’ and ‘mine’. Also, at the same time is argued to be liquid which
means that it will change depending on circumstantial influences like the geographical location and
whom one might be around (Lionnet, Françoise and Shu-mei Shih, 2011; Latour, 1993).
13Along with this argument is that culture can travel, it is not set in stone, and one’s culture can change
through movement and change of environment (Horkheimer & Adorno, 1944; Eriksen, 2014;
Thomassen, 2012). Furthermore, the belief that culture is something that can change depending on
the physical location, roots and the environment also indicates that it is a concept that is difficult to
claim what it is. Thus, throughout history, the perception of culture has been built on stereotypes and
is discursively constructed (Said, 1979). As a result, today’s dispute about culture often arises from
biased opinions orbiting around the different cultures.
In the literature, different scholars investigate multiculturalism within one society or country, and this
impacts the results of their findings, as each country has different historical backgrounds for their
population today. It can, therefore, be challenging to apply the same idea of cultural diversity in the
US, on Europe, in Australia, in India, and so forth. Tariq Modood and Bhuki Parekh are two essential
scholars in the topic of multiculturalism, although their focal points are in the UK (Modood, 2013).
History is a crucial factor when attempting to understand cultural diversity and how that exists in
societies around the world today. Modood (2013) works on multiculturalism in the UK and considers
their history of being a colonial empire. In this regard, it seems inevitable that the country consists of
more than one culture. In the western societies, the challenges of history can either be to change the
legacy of colonialism or to find a way to change the view of the guest worker to become a citizen of
that specific country (Modood, 2013, p. 3). The former seems to be a development that the
governments did not see coming because they thought that once the so-called guest workers (mostly)
from Turkey were done with working on the, e.g. factories or oil platforms, they would return
(Modood, 2013; Polakow-Suransky, 2017; Danmarks Radio, 2018).
2.3 Multiculturalism and liberal democracies.
In the research of multiculturalism, several scholars indicate that societies with multiple cultures are
unavoidable in liberal democracies because liberalism endorses individuality and encourages all
agents in societies to embrace their individuality as motivation to be active in the general population
(Modood, 2013; Parekh, 2006; Kymlicka, 2003). Furthermore, diversity in societies stems from
additional elements other than individuality, as globalisation has made mobility more accessible and
therefore resulting in a mix of cultures (Modood, 2013; Parekh, 2006; Pakulski, 2014). In Europe,
multiculturalism as a phenomenon is political due to immigration and is often negatively referring to
a specific group in society (Modood, 2013). This negative narrative is mostly a result of the radical
right parties that perceive high immigration, ultimately leading to a global clash between different
14cultures (Liang, 2007). Besides, most of the non-whites living in Europe are Muslims, and since
September 11 2001, this group has been under high surveillance in the public sphere and politically
(Modood, 2013; Pakulski, 2014; Goodin, 2006). Also, they have become subject of the representation
of multiculturalism by right-wing politicians’ narrative.
Multiculturalism primarily originates from liberal democracy according to several authors on the
topic. Therefore, the debate of having a multicultural society is often viewed as being about the
western world. Will Kymlicka argues in his book, “Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of
Minorities”, that along with more migration, there is added focus on the national-state and
nationalism. This leads politicians to focus on the “… ‘politics of difference’” and this difference is
“… a threat to liberal democracy” (Kymlicka, 2003, p. 5). Also, he agrees that multiculturalism is a
concept that arises from the principle of liberal democracies which leaves room for individuality. It
is this same individuality that is at stake when attempting to make policies to minimise
multiculturalism (Kymlicka, 2003).
In line with this, Modood (2013) agrees that multiculturalism (different cultures living side-by-side)
is possible and rises from liberal democracies. However, at the same time, it challenges the same
liberal democracy. He asserts that it exists as “the matrix of principles, institutions and political norms
that are central to contemporary liberal democracies; but multiculturalism is… also a challenge to
some of these norms, institutions and principles” (Modood, 2013, p. 7). This argument is supported
by Kymlicka, that even goes as far as stating that if liberal democracy is to survive, it is necessary to
include and focus on minority rights in multicultural societies. Robert E. Goodin, a professor of
government, philosophy and social and political theory, concurs, and further desires to have liberal
multiculturalism separated into two; the protective multiculturalism, and polyglot multiculturalism,
which in a sense represents two more significant agents of multiculturalism in a liberal democracy.
The protective multiculturalism represents the protection of the minority against domination and
suppression by the majority in society, while the polyglot multiculturalism views the individual as
the key actor in the discussion of liberal multiculturalism. He further argues that these two different
views on multiculturalism have an enormous impact on the liberal multicultural policies, one might
end up with when practising one or the other (Goodin, 2006).
Goodin (2006) argues that culture is necessary for liberal democracies to help the agents in civil
society to be active and is central for liberal values. In line with this, Kymlicka (2003) argues that the
diversity which comes from having different cultures and finding answers to satisfy all agents in civil
15society politically is one of the most significant challenges that democracies are facing today. It is the
same diversity that Parekh argues that results in culturally diverse societies, which leads to questions
of identity within societies. Modood (2013) states that multiculturalism is a form of integration, as it
leaves room for equal citizenship, and he believes that multiculturalism will “exists as a policy idea
qualifying citizenship and informing actual policies as well as relations in civil society” (Modood,
2013, p. 15). In the literature on multiculturalism, the debates about how to examine the phenomenon
depend on if it is a political doctrine, a philosophy, a theory or something else. The scholars that have
been mentioned in this review, all agree that multiculturalism as a concept has arrived to stay, that it
is nearly impossible to find a society today that is not multicultural. Although they have different
opinions on how to investigate multiculturalism, they all agree that it is more complicated than solely
being about nationality and ethnicity, but it is, according to Parekh and Kymlicka, all minority groups
in society that impact a country to be multicultural (Parekh, 2006; Kymlicka, 2003). One can also
observe how populist parties utilise the concept to make political statements about the ‘otherness’,
especially in Europe (Liang, 2007; Lesińska, 2014). Conclusively, the scholars accept
multiculturalism; they all interpret how states are reacting differently to the concept and how this will
influence the perception of multiculturalism. Kymlicka (2003) argues that multiculturalism will arise
in terms of how the liberal democracy allows it to, where Modood (2013) argues that it is a
fundamental feature of the same liberal democracy and Parekh (2006) argues that it is impossible to
avoid in today’s societies with liberal democracies that embraces the individuality.
In respect of the different literature viewpoints on multiculturalism, this section highlights some of
the most relevant current discussions orbiting multiculturalism with a focus on their relevance for this
research. The focus on this section is the theoretical aspect along with different literature on the
understanding of multiculturalism. In the following section, the research includes how the public
debate appears globally and in Denmark.
2.4 The debate today.
In 2014 Europe experienced an influx of refugees primarily due to the war in Syria, this seemed
overwhelming for the nation-states, and not long after some mainstream politicians began to utilise
multiculturalism as a portrayal of the ‘foreigners’ negatively (Lesińska, 2014). Even more, many
politicians would make a connection between the refugees and migrants with so-called ‘welfare
parasites’ and would then demand changes in their domestic policies especially targeting these groups
16and becoming less open-minded (ibid.). The argument is that there should not be a total acceptance
of different cultures, but rather the focus should be on ‘integrating’ (assimilation) the migrants and
refugees living in these nations with their new society (ibid.; Lentin and Titley, 2012). In Poland a
hostile attitude towards migrants is visible, and the politicians argue that they “do not want terrorists
in their country”, and they are following the wish of the population (Leszczyński, 2015). They have
a hostile attitude even though Poland received a small amount of the new refugees in 2015.
Concerning this, the council of the EU requested Poland to accept more refugees as a gesture and
sign of solidarity to the other member-states (ibid.). The discourse Polish politicians utilise is not
unique in the debate regarding migration in Europe. In Hungary, an ally to Poland, the Prime Minister,
Viktor Orbán announced that Europe’s migrations policy is an attempt to destroy Europe (Cienski,
2016).
In the Netherlands, Geert Wilders, from the ‘Freedom Party’ claims that Moroccans are scum and
that the Netherland should be for the native population, and that a vote for his party, is a vote to make
the Netherlands great again (McKie, 2017). In Denmark, Rasmus Paludan Chairman of the party,
Stram Kurs, states that, if elected, he suggests deporting all Muslims (Ertmann, 2019). Christina
Liang, professor in International Security, research and work on European political discourse, and
finds that the mainstream parties and especially the radical right-wing parties are utilising the cultural
differences from the influx as a showcase to make more stringent policies related to migration (Liang,
2014). They are consequently contributing to the political discourse about migrants and other cultures
in a negative light.
Before 2014, the political discourse of pro or anti-migration could be separated in two, the right and
the left. However, the debate about the ‘crisis’ that Europe is facing due to cultural diversity, has
become a political attraction, and the bureaucrats use it as a central argument with lack of evidence
to support this view (Lentin and Titley, 2012; Bach, 2019). Lesińska (2014) argues that Europe has
always been culturally diverse and embraced the diversity of ethnicities in the societies, but current
events (the high influx of migrants) have changed this openness and now scepticism is dominating
the mainstream political parties. This is evident when the Social Democrats in Denmark take a stand
that is more anti-migration than it has previously been (Larsen, 2017). Moreover, in Germany, the
Christian Democratic Party, formerly led by Angela Merkel who has legislated pro-migration, have
changed character following the ascension of their new leader, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbaur who
takes over officially in 2021 (Connor, 2019). The mundane of culturally diverse societies in Europe
is a test through the new political strategies of being less tolerant of migration and the liberal labour
17market that requires free mobility between the countries (Lesińska, 2014). The debate also tests the
countries’ ability to provide full equality for minority groups and to give full access to liberal
democracy (Colombo, 2015), which leads to the question of assimilation; if the inclusion demands
full assimilation to the society one lives in or if it leaves room for cultural diversity to exist. Thus, the
development in Europe is towards a more anti-migrant tendency, an initiative by the Australian
government diminishes the inequality of all minority groups (Pakulski, 2014), and it indicates that
cultural diversity is utilised politically, both positively and negatively.
In the public debate, other non-political actors appear to influence the discourse regarding migration
and cultural diversity. An example is Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, a Nigerian author and debater who
often debates the cultural differences and the prejudices she experiences (Adichie, 2009). In a TED
talk she addresses the issue of a single story, which often is the case with politicians (ibid.). She
argues that people are capable of understanding the reality they are presented with and that people
tend only to understand that (ibid.) She further argues that the single story is the reproduction of the
hostile attitude towards migrations and that in America, migrants quickly became synonymous with
Mexicans because of the media coverage (ibid.). Another public figure is Taiye Selasi, another author
who argues that one should not ask where she is from, but instead where she is local (Selasi, 2014).
She further points to the issue of nationality, in the matter that nationalism is a concept, and humans
cannot be a concept (ibid.). She argues that since people are capable of travelling, we will all
eventually be mixed and therefore, it makes no sense to ask questions of geographical locations, but
instead of the personal belongings and connections to a place (ibid.). In Denmark, a public activist of
cultural diversity, is comedian, Mazen, who on his Facebook page comments on political discourse
and often with a hint of humour to it (Facebook.com, n.d.). He, as a civil citizen and activist, brings
some humour and nuance to the political debate (ibid.).
In this sense, it appears that the public debate has political parties on one side, and the civil debaters
on the other. Thus, this research illustrates more political stands in the Danish debate in chapter six.
To sum up, this context chapter sheds light on the theoretical discussion of multiculturalism and the
public debate. The former illustrates that the scholars agree that multiculturalism as a concept exists
in all societies today and entail cultural diversity. Nonetheless, the concept is difficult to specify due
to the interdisciplinary field in which it appears. Therefore, this thesis makes several distinctions on
how to use the term. First, when it refers to multiculturalism, is it the concept of cultural diversity.
18Inspiration is taken from Parekh, who argues that multiculturalism can exist with smaller
communities of a different ethnicity than the local (Parekh, 2006).
In the public debate, on the other hand, it is evident that the majority of political parties appear to
equate cultural diversity with migration. Therefore, in the analysis of the public debate in Denmark,
this study includes this stand as the narrative. It is because the political initiatives to minimise
multiculturalism in the sense of cultural plurality emerges and develops through lawmaking against
migration. To this end, multiculturalism in public today distinguish between ‘us’ and ‘them’ through
ethnicity and religious differences, with no consideration that another culture can exist as a sub-
culture to the national one. For example, it can be feministic minority groups as well as ethnic groups.
Finally, this chapter provides a foundation for further research in terms of theoretical approaches,
which includes two different components. Due to the complexity and interdisciplinary nature
concerning the understanding of multiculturalism, the analysis begins by using Parekh’s view of
multiculturalism in combination with a critical discourse approach. In the second part, this study
focuses on the legislation in Denmark while including Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka’s idea of an
exchange between cultural diversity and the existence of the welfare state. Lastly, the dissertation
discusses the development of anti-migrant parties through the findings from chapter five and six.
These three components are all relevant and necessary to answer how the perception of
multiculturalism affects policymaking in Denmark.
19Chapter 3.
Theoretical Approaches.
The previous chapter highlights the context and relevance of this thesis. Even after reviewing several
scholars and debaters the understanding of multiculturalism as a definition for diverse cultures still
varies. In this matter, it is necessary to highlight different aspects of the debate to give a profound
answer to the research question at hand, which is "How is the local and global debate of
multiculturalism impacting policymaking regarding personal status law?".
Overall, theories exist for the researcher to view and investigate phenomena through a specific lens
(Egholm, 2014), which supports the researcher with tools to propose new questions to the
phenomenon investigated. Theories assist in providing broader meanings of the subject investigated,
and they will be utilised in order to explain something and in many cases to generalise (ibid.). The
levels of theories are categorised into three, the meta-theories, general-theories and specific-theories,
which all are useful in different contexts, but generally "a theory should help us to answer empirical,
conceptual and/or practical problems" (Egholm, 2014, p. 13). Concerning this, this research employs
a deductive reasoning approach in the matter by first asking the question, and afterwards using a
theory to help answer it. The deductive approach sees that the research first focuses on a general
phenomenon, in this case, multiculturalism, to then state something more specific (the case study of
Denmark). Thus, this work is not an attempt to create a new theory nor question the theories; instead,
it utilises the theories to explain how the perception of multiculturalism locally and globally impacts
the law-making in Denmark. On the other hand, the data collection has an inductive approach being
that the relevant data was collected at the time of analysis formation. The analysis is therefore data-
driven, and afterwards, the data is interpreted through the lens of the theoretical considerations in
order to answer the research question.
The chapter above illustrates how multiculturalism is complex and interdisciplinary; therefore, it is
challenging to utilise solely one, universal theory to explain the concept and its appearance in society.
The following chapter utilises Bhukhi Parekh's perception of multiculturalism to analyse the global
and local debate and discourse revolving around multiculturalism. The second theory utilised is
developed by Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka, and it focuses on policymaking and whether or not
a country can make laws to either embrace or reject multiculturalism.
203.1. Bhukhi Parekh’s perception of multiculturalism and critical discursive approach.
Bhukhi Parekh focuses on rethinking multiculturalism. He categorises the concept into three
components, 1) cultural community with people that share, e.g. the same sexual preferences, 2) sub-
cultures that want to change the current situation and 3) cultures that are located outside their
normative territory and now are living as smaller communities (Parekh, 2006). This research takes
inspiration from these categories but mainly focuses on the last one, as this is most relevant for the
thesis and in order to answer the research question. Moreover, this thesis uses the understanding of
culture as presented by Parekh, who argues that cultures are inevitable, as they exist in any country
and society (ibid.). He does not see culture as a philosophical theory nor a political strategy tool, but
rather as "a perspective on human life" (Parekh, 2006 p. 336). His view is adopted in this thesis to
understand the global and local debate regarding multiculturalism. Parekh's point of view arises from
two schools of thought: monism and pluralism, where the former view humans very conservatively
while the latter acknowledges other cultures, but not for them to mix (Parekh, 2006). Parekh seeks
inspiration from these two schools to understand the perspective of culture and multiculturalism in
societies today (ibid.). Parekh points to monism and pluralism as two schools that attempt to give a
coherent answer to theorise multiculturalism, but without recognising one another (Parekh, 2006).
Monists believe that humans stem from the same biological nature, and therefore, everyone will be
the same (ibid., p. 17-18). The perspective of culture only occurs in the sense of hierarchy, and it is
developed through inspiration from the Ancient Greek (Parekh, 2006). Also adding that the human
desire is to reach the ultimate level of divinity. Within monism, there are also Christian and Liberal
thoughts, which place themselves in a dominant position compared to other civilisations (Parekh,
2006, p. 23; 46). This view is especially interesting in this thesis due to the case study of Denmark,
and its position as a liberal and Christian country.
The pluralist, on the other hand, acknowledges other cultures but has difficulties in explaining and
understanding the differences between the various civilisations. As a result of this difficulty the
cultures are divided based on religion or geographical location, hence that European cultures is the
same but differ from, e.g. African cultures (Parekh, 2006, p. 59-63). The pluralist recognises that
cultures differ, but is based on norms, values, traditions, language and art (Parekh, 2006).
Furthermore, that humans are a result of their surroundings, so they behave in the manner that is
expected and being outside their comfort zone their behaviour can change (Parekh, 2006, p. 68). An
interesting point of pluralism is that the dominant culture is expected to lead and guide other
21civilisations even if this means to assimilate other cultures (Parekh, 2006, p. 72). This view is
appealing for this research because the debate about multiculturalism touches upon integration and
assimilation which is illustrated in the first part of the analysis.
3.2 Alternative principles to explain and understand multiculturalism.
Parekh believes that monism and pluralism provide points of departure to understand and examine
culture, and especially multiculturalism. However, he finds the two domains separated to be
inadequate to provide a fulfilling answer to the existence of multiculturalism in contemporary
societies (Parekh, 2006).
Parekh breaks down the dichotomy of these two schools in order to bring a fulfilling idea of how to
view multiculturalism in societies and within politics (ibid.). He states that political theory often
mentions multiculturalism but fails to bring a profound answer and theory to investigate such societies
(Parekh, 2006, p. 9-11). Parekh provides a perspective that is utilised to question and contest the view
of multiculturalism in Denmark. With this, the empirical issue of this thesis is the relationship
between the perception of diverse cultures and policymaking. Parekh states that culture exists for
humans to seek and understand the meaning in the world they are in and states that "… a moral life
is necessarily embedded in and cannot be isolated from the wider culture. A way of life cannot,
therefore, be judged good or bad" (Parekh, 2006, p. 47). Therefore, it is interesting to investigate
what the consequences might be when politicians aspire to vanish multiculturalism in societies. In
the literature on multiculturalism, the dominating scholars all agreed upon the fact that the concept
cannot be explained through one universal theory. Hence, it is necessary to implement several
theoretical approaches to answer the research questions. As a result of this, this essay includes
Parekh's conceptualising of multiculturalism for the first part of the analysis and Keith Banting and
Will Kymlicka's theory of trade-offs in the second part, and it cultivates into a discussion of the
findings.
3.3 The trade-off in cultural diversity and the Welfare state.
Keith Banting and Will Kymlicka attempt to contest the critiques of multiculturalism (Banting &
Kymlicka, 2006). The general arguments are based on how multiculturalism (as cultural diversity)
might erode the welfare state and if a country has a high amount of cultural diversity it is difficult to
gain national solidarity and trust (ibid., p. 3-4).
22Banting and Kymlicka (2006) state two hypotheses to test the arguments mentioned above and to
measure if a state is multicultural through the policymaking. These two are:
'heterogeneity/redistribution trade-off' and 'recognition/redistribution trade-off', where the former
refers to the argument that too much cultural diversity impact the national solidarity, and the latter
refers to the recognition of the different ethnic groups resulting in the welfare state to erosion due to
the difficulties in sustaining the economic redistribution (ibid., p. 4-5).
Their work revolves around the question of whether a multicultural welfare state can exist or if the
hypotheses mentioned above are correct (ibid.). This thesis utilises these two different trade-offs to
analyse the policies and laws that the Danish government has implemented, especially since 2014 to
either be for or against cultural diversity. This study works from the hypothesis that a country can
either implement multicultural or anti-multicultural laws and from Banting and Kymlicka's trade-offs
I can analyse why Denmark might have the urge to implement some of the personal status laws it has
since 2014. Banting and Kymlicka point out that a change of hostility occurs. In the past, it often was
the right-wing, but today the left-wing has joined due to the concern of the distribution and
maintenance of the welfare state (Banting & Kymlicka, 2006, p. 5). Their theory of trade-offs is based
on the idea that when multicultural policies are made it is on the cost of the welfare state (ibid.), this
view is highly relevant for the second part of the analysis, as this is one of the many arguments why
politicians in Denmark make strict personal status laws.
The trade-offs theory by Banting and Kymlicka is in this thesis implemented solely regarding
policymaking in Denmark related to personal status laws. The thesis focuses on the personal status
laws because it is an intriguing aspect of the debate on cultural diversity. Also, the trade-off
hypotheses involve the idea of exchange if a state acknowledges multicultural tendencies (Banting &
Kymlicka, 2006, p. 11). The theory of trade-offs contests the arguments for implementing laws that
focus on eliminating cultural diversity, and that is why they are relevant for this thesis.
After the analysis of policymaking and the specific laws, this study discusses the results and
consequences of this attitude towards multiculturalism and discuss if it 'is worth it'. This part is more
of a discussion to view how Denmark, and its' attitude towards migration through personal status
laws, have consequences for other European countries. It also discusses how anti-migrant parties can
develop and succeed in different countries.
23To sum up, two theoretical approaches are utilised throughout the analysis. In order to reach a more
profound answer to the research question, those two theoretical approaches are utilised. Also, since
there is not a single general theory on the subject. This mainly prevails in the subject that the analysis
includes three different aspects revolving around the concept of multiculturalism. The different aspect
comes across of analysing the debate, the perspective of policymaking and lastly, a discussion of the
consequences of the former two.
24Chapter 4.
Methodology and research strategy.
The philosophy of science indicates the importance of the methodological point of departure in
research mainly because the answers one reaches during research is determined by the researcher’s
standpoint (Egholm, 2014). Dilthey divided science into two, natural and human, where the human
science focuses on the understanding instead of explaining, and therefore the epistemology and
ontology differs (ibid., p. 20). In line with this, Jürgen Habermas added social science to this division,
and characterise it “by its interest in human collectives and institutional conditions” (ibid., p. 23).
This thesis attempts to understand the causal relationship between the perception of cultural diversity
in society and policymaking regarding personal status law in Denmark. It applies Habermas’
interpretation of social science’s epistemology as being more critical instead of generalising (ibid.).
In line with this, Dilthey points out that when investigating human science, it is not possible to bring
complete and universal research; instead, it should be tailored to the specific area of interest (ibid.).
Throughout this research on the topic, this study acknowledges this point, because the history, social
status, governmental impacts, democracy/non-democracy and other circumstances influence the
perception of cultural diversity in societies. Consequently, this thesis does not attempt to make a
general conclusion from the research; instead, it highlights how and what impacts public views and
opinions can have on policymaking within Denmark, the case study.
4.1 Mixed Methods approach .
In this thesis, I attempt to explain the relationship between the perception of multiculturalism and
policymaking, which makes the research explanatory (Olsen & Pedersen, 2008). This type of research
requires specific data, such as document analysis, statistics and surveys, to achieve a detailed answer
to the research question at hand (ibid.). This dissertation employs both qualitative and quantitative
data and utilises it to shed light on discursive knowledge and to compare the discoveries to the
phenomenon examined (ibid.). The first part of the analysis goes in detail with the public debate about
multiculturalism and migration, and here this research critically views the discourse and rhetoric
utilised. The reason to be critical towards the discourse is that chapter seven discusses the impact
rhetoric and information have on people and their rationale. Moreover, this work highlights some of
25You can also read
