Assimilation versus Identity Politics

Assimilation in the context of this topic is all about minimizing cultural differences between people within a society.  It is most often used in reference to immigrants. 

Identity politics is all about advocacy on behalf of a subset of society perceived to be treated unfairly or oppressed.  The defining characteristics of such social groups are often not cultural or optional (for many or most), but tend to be more immutable traits such as; gender, physical appearance, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, age, criminal record, citizenship status, and region of residence.  Identify politics is the political equivalent of a class action law suit.  Of course this says nothing about the desirability or effectiveness of identity politics, or how it can be used magnanimously or exploited cynically.

But in the case of immigrants, it is indeed cultural differences that often cause subsets of immigrants to be treated unfairly and therefore in need of political advocacy.  In the U.S. a white, Christian, native English speaking woman is not treated the same as a white, Muslim, non-English speaking woman from the same country.  The latter is often considered to be more problematic for our society purely because of her religion and/or native language.  Most such immigrants will try to learn English as soon as possible for their own convenience, they don't have to give up their native language in order to speak English, and their young children will grow up as native English speakers.  But they will be much less likely to change their religion and their children are likely to adopt their religion.  Their religion is an obstacle or inconvenience to them only to the extent that they suffer discrimination based thereon.  And any such discrimination is in conflict with a foundational tenet of U.S. society - that of religious freedom.  

But apart from in-group bias, why would we want everyone to be culturally the same?  As explained above, it does not significantly eliminate the need for, or use of, identify politics (if that is viewed negatively), most of which has nothing to do with cultural differences.  It could be argued that many civil wars, including the American Civil War, result from cultural differences between the warring parties.  If only either group conformed to the culture of the other, the conflict would have been avoided.  A society's rules (laws) will support and reflect its dominant culture, and real strife can result from two mutually exclusive cultures being equally represented or politically powerful.  But as long as subcultures are willing to abide by society's rules, does their existence in a society have to lead to bad outcomes?  Is there anything about cultural differences that preclude a person from being a good citizen?  

There are numerous examples of cultural differences enriching a society.  Consider the plethora of choices we in the U.S. have in food, music, literature, religion, words, etc., much of which comes from the influence of cultures other than the dominant Anglo-Saxon one.  Furthermore, interaction with people of different cultures enhances our knowledge of other cultures and can be stimulating and interesting in the same way as variety in any aspect of our lives. 

It seems that calls for more assimilation of people who do not fully conform to the culture of the dominant social group are based more on aversion to those that are different, rather than on monoculture having any real benefit to our society.  If cultural differences are a problem, it is primarily in the unease it causes members of the dominant cultural group.  Perhaps those people are the ones who need to change a particular aspect of their culture - that of how they view and react to cultural diversity.  The easiest way to do that is to mix more with people who are culturally different.  And this is the best antidote to fear or resentment stemming from anti-immigrant political rhetoric or propaganda.  [It is also effective in overcoming bias based on differences that are not cultural, including race.] 

But if we want to reduce cultural differences within our society, how might we achieve that?  People, and especially children, learn from and imitate those around them.  The more common our life experiences, the more common our cultural expression.  If the dominant social group discriminates against a smaller social group, it will be more difficult for the latter to live, work, play, and worship with the dominant group.  They are then more likely to associate only with others of their "kind".  This acts against assimilation, and causes cultural differences to persist.  This is as true of subsets of people born in the U.S. as it is of subsets born outside the U.S.  If we want everyone to be culturally the same, we need everyone to be exposed to the same culture throughout their lives.  Hence if we want to reduce cultural differences (increase assimilation to some norm) those in the dominant cultural group should be particularly inviting to, enabling of, and social with, those who are culturally different. 

So mix with those who are different from you, but not too much or they will no longer be different.  Vive la difference!