Multiculturalism Policies: Sri Lanka vs. Australia

This assignment requires a comparative analysis of multicultural policies implemented in Sri Lanka and Australia. Students must examine the goals, strategies, and outcomes of these policies, highlighting key differences and similarities. The analysis should consider factors such as government interventions, cultural integration, and protection of minority rights. The ultimate aim is to assess the effectiveness of each country's approach to multiculturalism and its impact on societal cohesion.

Running head: MULITICULTURILISM
Multiculturalism and comparison
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note

1MULITICULTURILISM
Multiculturalism:
Multiculturalism is a sociological term that deals with the cosmopolitan nature of a
society. There are three terms that included in the term such as sociology, political
philosophy and colloquial use. The term is interchangeably known as the cultural pluralism.
When collaboration has been observed in between several ethnic groups and mixed up with
each other without sacrificing their own cultural identity (Kymlicka 2015). In other words, it
can be recognised as a place where different ethnic cultures existed without affecting each
other. Multiculturalism can be observed in different countries like India, Australia, Sri Lanka,
and South Africa and so on. The traditional cultures and foreigner cultural groups can be
observed very frequently in different parts of the world (John 2016). According to certain
cultural researchers, multiculturalism is a legally controlled immigration process. On the
other hand, if the term can be identified from the political philosophy, it will include certain
ideologies and policies regarding different cultural tradition and that can give birth of cultural
diversities. However, in multiculturalism, three types of cultural integration can be observed
such as social integration, cultural assimilation and racial segregation. Kenan Malik has
defined the term as “society transformed by mass immigration”. In case of the
multiculturalism, all the religions and ethnic groups are working with each other and
introduce the system of monoculture (Ng and Metz 2015). Literally, the term
multiculturalism promotes the idea of distinctiveness of various cultures that are mixed up to
each other by the mean of social integration and racial segmentation. The concept has certain
positive as well as negative impacts. In this system, a unity in between various kinds of
cultures can be observed. On the other hand, there is a sheer possibility of cultural conflict
present. According to the right-wingers, the term multiculturalism gives birth of cultural
suicide. However, multiculturalism takes place when the citizens of a country accept to adopt
the cultural immigration ideally (Wright et al. 2017). The concept can be practiced only after

2MULITICULTURILISM
getting permission from the government of that particular country. The nature of
multiculturalism is ancient. Cultural diversity was present in Greece, Ottoman Empire and in
Arabs. However, the objective of multiculturalism is not only diverse the cultural society but
to protect the cultural diversity as well. Cultural diversity can be possible through various
aspects such as religious diversity, linguistic diversity, territorial diversity and racial
diversity. The concept of effectiveness of multiculturalism on the society has been observed
for the first time in Europe and North America. The cultural concept has begun to spread over
the Western portion during twentieth century. An attempt was made to protect the neglected
customs and religious thought. A revision was made to bring a change in the Eurocentric
perspective that overemphasizes the charity of white European majestic powers and
underestimate the contributions made by indigenous people and avoid the discrimination
regarding the colour of the people. Additionally, along with the other cultural ethnic groups,
other related fields have been added to have a special outcome that has been ignored before.
One of such examples is the National Hispanic Heritage Month in the United States. Certain
leaning mentality of the minority community has been observed regarding the historical,
philosophical and arts with an intention to recognised their multicultural idea to the broader
world.
Multiculturalism in Australia
It is no doubt to state that Australia is a multicultural country. The multicultural
policy taken by Australia has embraced the shared values and enriching traditions (Noble and
Watkins 2014). The supporters of the multicultural thoughts were motivated by the relevant
atmosphere of Australia and it has been observed that the religious tradition of Australia is
practised within the purview of Australian legal parameter and the cultures are free from all
the related encumbrances like the discrimination.

3MULITICULTURILISM
It has been observed by the religious researcher that many Australians are using
other languages as their communication medium and therefore, a unity of diversity has been
observed regarding the languages. A similarity has been observed between the cultural
diversity and the landscape of the Australia. the policy of multiculturalism has not only
created impacts on the culture of the country, but on the food, lifestyle and experience of the
country.
In Australia, unity can be observed among the other diverse cultural and societal
backgrounds (Harris-Hogan, Barrelle and Zammit 2016). The most ancient residents of
Australia are the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who have settled for tens of
thousands of years. Australia was a colonial country and therefore, most of the citizens of
modern Australia are immigrants or the descendants of them who had come over the country
during or after the colonial period. In the lights of the above mentioned cultural
diversification, threat regarding the social harmony and protection of the previously practised
cultural has been emerged. The then government of Australia has taken certain policies to
curb all these threats and made an attempt to deal with the cultural and societal threats
amicably. According to the 2011 census, 26% of the population were born abroad and a
further 20% had one parent born overseas. It has been reported that the Aboriginal
Australians make up approximately 2.5% of the total population. All these things have been
given the birth of socio-cultural diversity. However, during the colonial period, the white
policy system taken by the colonial government had created discrimination in the society.
However, changes had been made after World War II with certain changes to immigration
policy. It is a fact that before the settlement of the European communities in Australia,
diversified cultural background were present among the aboriginals and the linguistic
parameters were extended to almost four hundred different cultures. According to the 2006
census, almost 150 languages are being practised practically at this time. The modern

4MULITICULTURILISM
Australia has been formed by various immigrants excluding the British. However, the
concept of double citizenship has been started by the British empire.
Multiculturalism in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka is a homogenous country and the diversification has been originated due
to race, ethnicity, religion, language and caste or a combination of any of them.
Consequently, state formations are made up of a multiplicity of cultural communities. The
inability to manage the demands and aspirations of cultural communities within states has
become the primary cause for conflicts in the world (Young 2016). This has led most
countries to explore strategies to ‘manage’ multiple cultural communities within their states
in order to develop inclusive and stable societies.
Stable democracies, particularly in the West had managed to evolve inclusive and
stable societal states until the arrival of immigrants from various parts of the world to meet
labour shortages in these countries following the conclusion of World War II. Newly
independent countries too that had been stable prior to and during colonization were affected
by issues of multiculturalism and its problems. Faced with the common problem of dealing
with cultural diversity, many countries began to label themselves as multicultural states,
going to the extent of calling themselves multiethnic, multilingual, multi-religious etc.
However, according to Kenan Malik, the appeal of multiculturalism is fast fading
today because its “…policies accept as a given that societies are diverse, yet they implicitly
assume that such diversity ends at the edges of minority communities. They seek to
institutionalize diversity by putting people into ethnic and cultural boxes – into singular,
homogeneous Muslim community, for example – and defining their needs and rights
accordingly. Such policies, in other words, have helped create the very divisions they were
meant to manage”.

5MULITICULTURILISM
In Sri Lanka’s case this has led to treatment of Sinhala, Tamil, and Muslim and
Plantation Tamil communities as homogeneous groups, not allowing for the unique
diversities within each of them. For instance, at the ethnic level members of the Sinhala,
Tamil and Muslim communities are majorities in some parts of the country and are minorities
in others. One could assume that such ethnic distinctions also mirror language distinctions as
well. In addition, a variety of other distinctions exist within each of these three communities;
a process that could be carried to an extreme. In such a setting, attempts to develop policies
and entitlements based on distinct group identities such as Sinhala, Tamil or Muslim would
marginalize large swaths within each community precipitating discontent and frustration.
Furthermore, competition among cultural communities would be inevitable, and outcomes
that lead to violence would be interpreted as racism (Guo and Wong 2015). Therefore, the
lesson for Sri Lanka from the failure of multiculturalism in the West is to not develop policies
based on discrete group identities. Sri Lankan parents should be free to decide the kind of
education they opt for their children as in Article 26 clause 3 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and not compel children to seek instruction based on mother tongue (i.e.,
Sinhala or Tamil), as currently practiced, because it institutionalizes separateness. Similarly,
land should be allocated on the basis of individual need and not in order to protect ethnic
concentrations in defined areas (Davis 2015). Attempts to institutionalize separateness by
seeking international support to organize a referendum for the Tamil community to exercise
the right of self-determination should fail constitutionally since per Article 4 (e) of the 1978
Constitution, franchise is “exercisable at every Referendum by every citizen” and not by a
select few”.

6MULITICULTURILISM
Comparison:
Based on the above mentioned facts, certain differences have been observed in
between the multiculturalism policies of Australia and Sri Lanka. The first differences are
that in Sri Lanka, racism is observed in between the majority and minority. In Australia, there
is a problem cropped up regarding the white and black citizens, but the government has taken
many policies to curb the same. Additionally, Cultural rivalry among the Sinhala and
Muslims are common in Sri Lanka. The policies taken by the Sri Lankan government are
underdeveloped in nature. Most of the policies were in vain to demolish the separateness
from the society, whereas in Australia, the main objective of multiculturalism is to protect the
minor communities and established unity among diversity. Further, the Australian
government has taken many steps to protect the land of the aboriginals and allocate proper
land to them. On the other hand, the land in Sri Lanka is allocated on the basis of individual
need and not for providing protection to the minor groups or to protect the ethnic culture.
These are the basic differences in between the multicultural policies of Sri Lanka and
Australia. Considering the objective of the principle of the multiculturalism, it can be stated
that Sri Lanka has failed to comply with that. It is a fact that different cultural groups are
present in Australia, but the intention of the theory has not been fulfilled properly (Young
2016). In case of Australia, the government has taken many policies to comply with the
objectives and get succeed to certain extent.

7MULITICULTURILISM
Reference
Davis, C.P., 2015. Speaking Conflict: Ideological Barriers to Bilingual Policy
Implementation in Civil War Sri Lanka. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 46(2), pp.95-
112.
Guo, S. and Wong, L. eds., 2015. Revisiting Multiculturalism in Canada: Theories, Policies
and Debates. Springer.
Harris-Hogan, S., Barrelle, K. and Zammit, A., 2016. What is countering violent extremism?
Exploring CVE policy and practice in Australia. Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and
Political Aggression, 8(1), pp.6-24.
John, B., 2016. Comparative analysis of Canadian multiculturalism policy and the
multiculturalism policies of other countries. Psychology in Russia: State of the art, 9(1).
Kymlicka, W., 2015. The three lives of multiculturalism. In Revisiting multiculturalism in
Canada (pp. 17-35). SensePublishers, Rotterdam.
Ng, E.S. and Metz, I., 2015. Multiculturalism as a strategy for national competitiveness: The
case for Canada and Australia. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2), pp.253-266.
Ng, E.S. and Metz, I., 2015. Multiculturalism as a strategy for national competitiveness: The
case for Canada and Australia. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2), pp.253-266.
Noble, G. and Watkins, M., 2014. The ‘schooled identities’ of Australian multiculturalism:
professional vision, reflexive civility and education for a culturally complex world.
In Advancing race and ethnicity in education (pp. 162-177). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Watkins, M., Lean, G. and Noble, G., 2016. Multicultural education: the state of play from an
Australian perspective. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19(1), pp.46-66.

8MULITICULTURILISM
Wright, M., Johnston, R., Citrin, J. and Soroka, S., 2017. Multiculturalism and Muslim
accommodation: Policy and predisposition across three political contexts. Comparative
Political Studies, 50(1), pp.102-132.
Young, C., 2016. Ethnic diversity and public policy: A comparative inquiry. Springer.