Madam, - Kevin Myers raises the spectre of an intolerant multiculturalism (An Irishman's Diary, September 16th). He is right to attack intolerance, whether of the Islamic or any other variety, but I think he and many others are misrepresenting the debate as a simplistic one between bad, woolly multiculturalism and stern but ultimately superior European values.
Ireland, along with other European countries, has not been particularly good at multiculturalism. Underlying all questions of culture in society are deeper issues of power. Models such as the Belfast Agreement, as well as other European multicultural policies, use the language of tolerance and acceptance of diversity. But all too often such language itself creates another layer of obfuscatory rhetoric beneath which the same old demons of supremacism and intolerance continue to lurk.
Unless we find ways of dealing with real difference at that deeper level, the rhetoric of tolerance of difference will be a sham. If people remain entrenched in their positions and attitudes and are unable and/or unwilling to share power and resources with those with whom they may be radically at odds, we are not going to make any progress. In that sense, the problem has not been too much "multiculturalism"; we have never really tried it.
Many of those Irish minorities whom Mr Myers has defended down the years know this to their cost as they have frequently been marginalised by an intolerant and supremacist official Ireland with a tunnel view of what it meant to be Irish.
Thus, the recent enlightened decision of the Minister for Justice to encourage immigrant recruitment to the Garda Síochána by changing the language entry requirement brought forth the usual condemnations from the bigots who have done so much over the years to destroy the Irish language; but such voices are now, thankfully, no longer dominant.
That said, none of this means that we should equate multiculturalism with an "anything goes" philosophy. The acceptance of fundamental difference is not easy and people who argue that we ought to support it because it enriches society, but who refuse to recognise that it is also difficult, are not being completely honest.
Apart from the moral arguments, we need to accept difference because there is no alternative; we cannot simply force people to assimilate to our mainstream identity. But it is also reasonable to argue that fundamental principles of justice, social cohesion and solidarity require that there should also be a joint agreed framework of shared core values.
The paradox, then, is that we cannot accept diversity except within this common framework. Countries which have adopted formal multiculturalist policies, such as Canada and Australia, know this well. Their legislation formally recognises that they are multicultural, but recognises as well that an ability to speak one of the official languages, or acceptance of gender equality, are core values.
The task we face is twofold. We need to agree on what our core values are.
But we cannot do this unless we find a process or mechanism whereby this debate can take place in a respectful and inclusive way. Necessarily, such a debate should embrace a wider process of dialogue and consultation than that which takes place within the conventional party political process. The New Ireland Forum of the 1980s provides one such model.
Finally, I don't think it helps very much to revive old arguments about the absence of a Zulu Tolstoy. One of the most tolerant and civilised European cultures in the last two millennia was that of Islamic Spain. Greek philosophy and scientific knowledge which would otherwise have been lost to us in Europe's so-called Dark Ages were preserved by a Muslim-led society which accepted intellectual dissent and appointed Jews and Christians to its most senior administrative and political posts.
The wonders of medieval Spain gave way to a savagely intolerant Christian society, violent, anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic, a long night of the soul from which Spain has awoken only in the relatively recent past. - Yours, etc,
PIARAS MAC ÉINRÍ,
Department of Geography,
University College, Cork.
Madam, - Congratulations to Kevin Myers for his honest and open criticism of Islamic cultural practices. He reminds even those who will not hear that nothing is critic-proof and that includes Islamic practices. I can already imagine the intellectual bullies queuing up to ignore the debate and attack the author.
What delighted me the most, however, was that this was the first time that anyone has finally stood up and said, "If you want to live in my country, you must live by my rules".
For too long now the Western world has been told that we must tolerate the ways of different cultures via the unsubstantiated statement that multiculturalism is somehow a "good thing". The reality was, however, that in many cases we were really being asked to be tolerant of intolerant people.
The rules must be simple, clear and equal for all before they even arrive in Ireland: if you want to live in my country, you must live by my rules. If you want to live by your rules, go back home. - Yours, etc,
ALAN DONEGAN,
St Albans,
England.