Oldal 29 [29]
MULTICULTURALISM AS A DISCOURSE OF DISGUISE: A POSSIBLE CANADIAN SOLUTION
place in the official transcript of the public sphere. To those oppressed by racism it
says, in effect, ‘your difference is now acknowledged; you are part of the colourful
tapestry of the nation’; and, implicitly, ‘stop whining about racism’.”
Mooers continues:
Thus, on the one hand, multiculturalism represents a kind of ‘spectacular’
consciousness in the thrall of some reified forms of ethnicity, culture and
representations of the self which arise from its fetishistic form; yet it also contains
intimations of its opposite, a different kind of social understanding on the part of
the oppressed, which signals that everything is not quite right with the world.*®
These are extreme conclusions to suggest that the policy has been co-opted
by capitalism and that the differences between cultures are fetishized because
they are visual and able to become marketing flags of social acceptability.
However, not every culture is differentiated visually. The Doukhobors and the
Mennonites are defined by creeds and lifestyle habits. The former group has,
in the past, marched naked to make protests; the latter has often insisted on
slowing traffic by driving horses and buggies on main roads. Both have been
subject to oppression and profiling. The market does not seem to have found
commodity potential to disguise this oppression. Its purported indifference
to the particularities of cultures may disguise bigotry.
There is one other obvious omission amongst the multi-cultures that generate
fetishisms about ‘difference’. For all the efforts made to accommodate race,
religions, visual rituals and costumes, no recognition of atheists has inspired
market commodification. In fact, atheists receive little attention from anyone.
Children who do not have a particular religion in their family are expected to
learn about many religions, their festivals and customs. Yet, who pays attention
to their concerns? Can one worry about plants and animals, family and friends
and not believe in a god? To assume that every child arriving in a classroom
comes from a particular culture with a religion neglects and undermines
acceptance of those children who may come from atheist homes.
Mooers’ capitalist transfigurations of multicultural differences into
commodified disguises of oppression seem too focused on racial differences.
He does alert us to the complexity of meanings now being generated.
The danger of the market is that it will determine what a culture appears
to be, leaving little room for members of a culture to seek alternate cultural
connections or to be a developing individual and move away from their culture
towards change. Market control assumes you want to remain who you are.
The slogans about multiculturalism now have resulted in it being perfectly
15 Ibid., 48.
16 Ibid., 49.
+ 27e