Good discussion of the perils of too much emphasis on intra-group dimensions compared to inter-cultural dimensions and Canada has also neglected inter-cultural dimensions and the civic integration focus of multiculturalism:

Australian multiculturalism is being shaken to its core by deepening community tensions and rising levels of hate speech and intimidation, triggered by the humanitarian catastrophes associated with the conflict in Gaza. The response to these traumas in this country, to date, has been characterised by a misplaced focus on the part of some political leaders on protests, a reluctance to build inter-cultural community relations, and the long-held but shallow emphasis on celebratory harmony, rather than meaningful collaboration and genuine community engagement.

It is worth reflecting, then, on the way sociological concepts and scholarly collaboration might help facilitate such engagement, as well as deepen mutual understanding and calm some of the trigger-point anger that government admonishment has yet to ameliorate. Perhaps more urgently, we wonder whether and under what conditions the universalist ethos expressed in multiculturalism can safeguard us against destructive forms of tribalism that do not see the humanity of others.

There has already been a great deal of public commentary about the way support for both “sides” of the Gaza conflict is threatening social cohesion and destabilising existing political allegiances. The decision of Senator Fatima Payman to defy her own party and vote instead with the Greens in their demand for immediate recognition of Palestinian statehood — a decision which led, ultimately, to Senator Payman’s defection from the Labor Party — is a particularly vivid example of this phenomenon.

We believe that social divisions such as these are, in part, a consequence of the emphasis being placed on the intra-groupdimensions of multicultural policy, however poorly enacted. This comes at the expense of cultivating and enhancing the inter-culturalpriorities and skills that are necessary for social cohesion. Too often governments have seen emotional engagement on ethno-religious issues as detrimental to building a common purpose, condemning such perspectives and haranguing their exponents.

Solidarity under threat

Against this background, we write as Australian scholars with Arab/Muslim and Jewish heritages, respectively, who have dedicated our academic careers to the study of multiculturalism, diversity governance, interfaith dialogue, and inter-cultural relations. We have pursued these academic studies from a principled commitment to universal human rights, social justice, and deep equality. We have been following with great moral concern the catastrophic war unfolding in Gaza and its serious implications for community relations and social cohesion in Australia.

As perceived representatives of the main sides in this conflict — particularly in the context of diaspora communities — Jewish and Arab Australians have faced undeniable bigotries in the form of antisemitism and Islamophobia, and have often responded to such bigotries by publicly calling out these and other forms of systemic racism. Although there is an understandable sensitivity on both sides to hate speech, it is all the more disappointing that advocacy can degenerate into their own punitive strategies and inflammatory language.

It is bitterly ironic, then, to watch certain members of these two Australian communities engage in forms of “cancel culture” through the intimidation and public shaming of those deemed adversaries in the daily commentary on the Gaza war. As some have put it, the war in Gaza may be “tearing us apart” and threatening transcultural social solidarity and the viability of respectful pluralism.

One of the more worrying effects of the local mobilisation of communities on the critical social infrastructure of our multicultural society — which has been forged with such difficulty over the past fifty years — has been the rapid decay in engagement between Jewish and Muslim/Arab community organisations. We have also witnessed a widening divide among some Australian scholars of Arab/Muslim heritage and Jewish backgrounds. Pre-existing apprehensions have been exacerbated and long-held certitudes undermined, undermining public declarations of respect for Australia’s multicultural achievement.

Principles of multiculturalism

In light of the way these tragic events overseas have revealed key weaknesses in Australia’s approach to multiculturalism over the past two decades, it is important to remind ourselves of some of the key principles of multiculturalism as a nation-building and inclusive strategy — one which respects diversity and difference, but which seeks to encourage inter-cultural collaboration and creativity.

Multiculturalism represents far more than the demographic recognition of the origins and persistence of transported diasporic cultural mores. From the very beginning, multiculturalism in Australia was understood to be a political ideal that can harness principles of equality and social justice strategies during times of upheaval, heightened social tensions, and severe emotional distress.

Importantly, the liberal ideal of the person as a free subject able to pursue their values and beliefs — upon which the normative ideal of multiculturalism is based — has also been shaped by the social justice concerns for rights and well-being. For according to this ideal, in order for anyone to have these opportunities and rights, everyone has to have them. This points to the existence of constraints on those opportunities that might impinge upon the well-being of others. Hence, when competing truths vie for dominance in a shared society, pathways to engagement must remain open and be socially facilitated.

Social scientists understand society to be constituted by overlapping realms of social capital strengthened by trust. In multicultural societies, during conflicts with outer others the social capital built within communities may be hardened, while that between groups is diluted if not almost totally dissolved. Moreover, the settlement and social integration experiences of diverse diaspora communities are likely to be affected by an absence of multigenerational social networks that would otherwise facilitate social integration, national attachment, and political affiliation — which may then lead to a sense of social marginalisation and disempowerment, in many cases breeding resentment and outright hostility. These are significant signals of a fragile trust.

In institutions like universities, it is therefore vital that we rebuild and model trust among colleagues of different intellectual persuasions and ethno-religious affiliations, using the space afforded by scholarly interaction to explore in what ways and to what end such a dialogue can be extended.

Diversity comes with obligations

Australia has not always had a great record of trying to resolve inter-ethnic conflicts and build a rights-based social sphere. But since multiculturalism was first launched fifty years ago, the recognition of diversity and opposition to racism have been widely accepted as core multicultural values — albeit not always without resistance, contestation, and even scepticism, particularly in relation to First Nations people.

Furthermore, a key concept in multiculturalism and other pro-diversity approaches relates to inter-cultural engagement. By committing to, rather than withdrawing from, dialogue premised on mutual respect and support for justice and human rights, we are committing to recognise cultural and religious differences and uphold shared values within the multicultural ethos. Only then can we hope to minimise the risk of reaching a tipping point for multiculturalism that will significantly deepen community tensions and further weaken social cohesion.

There needs now to be serious engagement between people who are committed to keeping Australia’s multicultural project on track. To this end, the federal government must no longer procrastinate over two important initiatives — the Multicultural Framework Reviewand the Anti-Racism Framework. After all, one of the keys to Labor’s victory at the last federal election was the number of culturally diverse candidates the ALP placed on the ballot in order to reflect the diverse reality of contemporary Australian society.

Yet, as Senator Payman pointed out in the wake of her resignation from the Labor Party, embracing diversity comes with obligations. Indeed, the superdiversity of our multicultural society should be reflected in the way our key institutions — including political parties and universities — operate. Senator Payman is one of those new faces who reflect the aspiration of many communities to have an equal place at the national table.

There must be space for a diversity of perspectives and positions that reflect the multilayered identities of modern Australians. This is how we ensure that multiculturalism works for everyone.

Distinguished Professor Fethi Mansouri is the founding Director of the Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation at Deakin University.

Andrew Jakubowicz is Emeritus Professor of Sociology at the University of Technology Sydney.