Comune > Olimpiadi 2006 > Meeting Peace > Young Words > Initiative
The choice between cultural identity and integration is one of the most significant questions facing our society today: citizenship requires continuous effort in cultural integration. Society becomes multicultural and in this context cultural conflict becomes a daily occurrence. The most visible case recently is the French law prohibiting the display of religious symbols (such as the Islamic veil) in schools and in public, which has sparked great debate contrasting the separation of church and state and the idea that cultural change should not be imposed through legislation.
Entire generations of immigrants have been marginalized notwithstanding never having provoked such conflict except in symbolic fashion. Discrimination often causes people to fall back on identity and pride in diversity (religious, linguistic, gender, etc.), accentuating differences.
The annual report of Rome’s diocesan Caritas, which could be distributed to the participants as a discussion guide the topic Identity/Integration, opens with the slogan “An open society is a dynamic and safe one”. Is cultural integration an empty axiom? That is: is extending citizenship to immigrants, expanding their right to participate—especially providing the necessary material conditions—really possible? And is it also the key to our own security?
There is no lack of models for the resolution of the contrast between citizenship and identity, especially with regard to the topic of religion. One is the French model of assimilation, which asks all people, including Muslims, to accept the civic religion of laicité. At the opposite end of the spectrum is the multicultural model which recognizes each ethnic or religious identity as such, and allows each to represent its interests in the public sphere, even in competition with others. The Italian model of individual agreements or ‘Understandings with the State’ – which has resolved the problems of other religious minorities – is difficult to apply to the Muslim community due to the lack of a unifying representative.
This mechanism functions even at the global level where entire populations are discriminated against for economic, social, political or other conditions: it is not a coincidence that international terrorism based on religious precepts recruits from poor urban youth as well as Islamic extremists.
The clash between faith and legislation (the law banning the veil, for
example). Is secularity a necessary condition for integration?
Does an acceptable model exist that unites integration and respect for cultural
identity?
The new generations of immigrants to Italy and elsewhere: a lost generation
or a resource for the “welcoming” countries?
Is granting parliamentary voting rights a practicable strategy?
Global integration: does the exportation of “democracy” and
western culture have any chance of pacifying the world and resolving the
conflict of “citizenship”?
Is “global integration” desirable?
Available in .PDF format.