Suchergebnisse

Will Kymlicka's new book makes important conceptual, methodological, and substantive contributions to contemporary discussions of multiculturalism. Nevertheless, Kymlicka's attempt to construct a defense of special rights for minority cultural groups on the basis of his conception of "societal culture" entails implications that are both too radical and too restrictive with regard to the kinds of minority claims they support. In particular, Kymlicka's account undermines the claims of immigrant minorities to the sorts of special rights that Kymlicka thinks they are entitled to demand.

Part of a review symposium (see abstracts of related articles) on a book by Will Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford, England: Clarendon Press, 1995). Kymlicka's book develops several key points about the nature of group rights, notes the advantages of developing normative democratic theory from the actual behavior of democratic states, & raises questions as to whether the state can remain culturally neutral. In the process, several distinctions are drawn: (1) between polyethnicity & multinationalism as forms of cultural pluralism; (2) among group-differentiated rights, including self-government, polyethnic, & special representation rights; & (3) in the relationships between individual & collective rights. Questions are raised about the effectiveness of Kymlicka's defense of group-differentiated rights, in which he attempts to illustrate how concern for cultural minorities can mesh with the liberal commitment to individual freedom & equal respect for people of multicultural backgrounds. Kymlicka's stance is based in an ideal of equality that allows individual experience to result from choice rather than circumstance. Many of the book's problems stem from Kymlicka's determination to draw sharp lines between ethnic groups & national minorities, which, despite his attempt to defend them, fatally undermines the case he builds for the group-differentiated rights of immigrants. It is concluded, nonetheless, that Kymlicka's work helps justify efforts by liberals to develop institutional mechanisms to respect cultural differences. B. Wolfe

There are two approaches to morality. The realistic approach wants to avoid too large a gap between the ought and the is and focuses on what it is possible given existing realities. This approach, however, inhibits us from challenging fundamentally unjust institutions and policies. The idealistic approach, in contrast, requires us to assess current reality in light of our highest ideals. Its weakness is that it may not help us answer the question of how to act in this non-ideal world. Discussions about the ethics of migration require a full range of perspectives using both approaches.