multicultaralism in india

William: 2008:202). In this way, multiculturalism creates social and political bondingamong different groups, ‘finding a way to preserve discrete ethnic identities, while at thesame time, finding in citizenship a countervailing identity that unites the disparate groupswithin a polity’ (Kivisto, 2002). Bhargava described multiculturalism in this simplisticway, ``multiculturalism as fact and value challenges the fact and value of a single-culturesociety.´´( Bhargava,2002,77).

How does Indian government deal multicultural issues?

India has two major religious groups and hundreds of different linguistic and sub-culturalsects in its society. Hinduism and Islam play very influential role in Indian culture.Besides, there is a very distinct cultural difference between the Northern India andSouthern India. In terms of language, each state represents a different identity than theothers. Each state has its own official language, and English often use as a lingua francaamong the states’ correspondences. Most of the states have some dominant ethno-linguistic and ethno-religious groups and this has been achieved through major reorganization of territories in the 1950s and 1960s (Bhattacharyya, 2003:152).According to Bhargava, Indian multiculturalism developed, theoretically all the threelevels where multiculturalism suppose to emerge (Bhargava, 2002, 101). Considering thefact of India’s long tradition of cultural nationalism and secondly, the fought of Hindu-Muslim nationalism, Bhargava claims that Indian multiculturalism has reached its thirdlevel where individual group rights were recognized by its constitution (Bhargava, 2002,101).Indian multicultural policies have its deep roots in its Constitutions. It is said to be the basic multicultural document of the country. According to Indian constitution, Article 15,16 17 19, 21, 29, 30, 39, 46,243D, 243T, 332, 334 and 335 contain fundamental rights for the multicultural communities of India (Mathews, M. Mohan, 2001: 129). TheConstitution has been providing political and institutional recognition andaccommodation of India’s diversity. However, Bhattacharyya remarks multiculturalism asa ‘very recent vintage’ in Indian politics. He said … ´´multiculturalism as a term of scholarly discourse of society and politics in India is of very recent vintage, originating inthe 1990s when some scholars felt the need to respond with Indian experience to theglobal debate on the subject´´ (Bhattacharyya, 2003:153).The first Prime minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru played an important role inestablishing the right for plurality and recognized the fact that India is a diverse countryand the main spirit of future India would be the ‘ unity of diversity’ (Bhattacharyya,2003:157). He denied the tendency for creating a homogeneous state. Although, he didnot oppose assimilation process but his idea of assimilation was not a forced or externallyimposed one (Bhattacharyya, 2003:157).Many governments in the world combating social, economical and racial inequalities

 between different caste, class and groups by implying redistributive government policies.That means to provide facilities to the backward minorities. However, studies show thatthis policy could bring negative effect to the society and could promote ethnic conflict.So, this ‘dilemma of recognition’ affects more in creating government multicultural policies. After 1940 and early 1950, then Indian government faced very difficult situationin combating with this dilemma. Recognition of different caste and providing special privileges to them created several expectations and that promote a new dimensional of group inequality and social fragmentation. According to Frank De Zwart, there are three prominent multicultural policies options that most of the multicultural states follow tocombat with this dilemma. These are:

accommodation, denial, and replacement 

(Zwart,2005: 137).Most of the states pursue accommodation policy as the main tool for maintainsocial harmony. This action includes group recognition, special reservation for minoritygroups etc. The second policy action denies any kind of group rights and promotes therights of the individual, which is the main philosophy behind liberalism. This action believes that, despite group inequalities, redistribution policies do not benefit any particular group rather it promotes social fragmentation and hamper cultural instigation.Traditionally, state like France follows this type of policy. The third option,

replacement 

,is a compromise between denial and accommodation, which means government, does notrecognize social division and fragmentation, but it also provide redistribution benefits tothe most unprivileged group, but in a different way and different name (Zwart, 2005:140).According to Indian constitution, the state recognized the identity of many scheduledcaste and takes the responsibility of accommodating these caste in a very unequal society.Article 46 of the constitution says about the promotion of educational and economicinterests of Scheduled Caste and other articles such as 243 D, 243 T, 330, 332, 334, and335 ensure the reservation policy of the government in different spheres to the scheduledcastes and backward groups. It is estimated that today, over 40 % of India’s populationfalls in this affirmative action (Zwart, 2005: 140). The central government reserves 27 percent of government jobs and seats in higher education. Some states maintain evenhigher quotas. Scheduled castes and tribes also have their own quotas. Besides, the twoinfluential religious minor groups, Muslim and Shikhs have their own sorts of rights,which are recognized by the state. Shiks are holding most of the position in Indian armyand after 1984 anti-Sheikh riot, the state agreed to give them some respite, such as moregovernment jobs quotas, more economic freedom to the Shikh majority state of Panjubetc.(Tatla S, Darshan,2003:182)In comparison of Indian type of multiculturalism, Malaysia offers a completely differentmechanism. The composition of Malaysian society is racially and culturally divided inthree major groups. These are Malays, Chinese, and Indians (mostly South Indians). The policies that Malaysian governments pursued often criticized as a ‘pro-Malays’ policiesthough the constitution recognizes equal citizen rights for non Malays (Fenton,2003:137).

The New Economic Policy (NEP) induced lots of opportunity to the indigenous Malays,who often call themselves

 Bhumiputro

and became backward class against the economic power of the immigrant Chinese. This disparity coined as ‘the Malay economic dilemma’ by the former Malaysian premier Dr. Mahathir Bin Mohamad (Mohamad, Mahathir,1970:32). The aim of the NEP was to remove this dilemma from the Malayan economyand promote the opportunity to the backward Malays, by providing government fund indifferent schemes. Dr. Mahathir believes that this will creates racial unity in Malayan peninsula and racial unity is a prerequisite of racial harmony and national unity(Mohama, Mahathir, 1970:62).The education system of post-independent Malaysia was in fact fragile and cultureoriented. The British introduced two types of education institutes in Malaysia, one is theEnglish medium institutes and other is the vernacular institutes. This divergence promoted fragmentation in the society as each race learned more about their own culturemore than the Malay culture. After Independence Malayan, government introducednational schools with a common curriculum and language based integrated educationsystem. This action promoted the building of a unique generation, with values of Malayan culture but having different races. Malayan government also establishedDepartment of National Unity, which aims to minimize all the conflicts among the threeraces and foster the strength of national unity.

Conclusion

If we compare the two different types of multicultural policies that India and Malaysia promote so far for creating national unity and removing racial bitterness, we will find thatreservation policies often foster the demand of minorities and sometime failed to achieveits main goal. On the other hand, promotion of economic opportunities and uniqueeducation system can led different races to a common goal, and thus racial and culturaldifferences become minimize.