While multiculturalism aimed for unity, in truth we are still working towards tolerance – a fact made painfully clear in a post-9/11 landscape where fear is the dominant cultural marker and “the Other” is usually to blame. The result has been a backlash from those in the cultural majority and rivalry for resources amongst minorities. The price tag for multiculturalism has been the ascent of rigid identity politics, where cultural groups proclaim either their “specialness” or “victimhood”, continually setting themselves apart from others. My experience of running a Los Angeles museum, dedicated to cultural understanding led me to question the wisdom of multiculturalism. How do we create common ground while promoting differences? Multicultural societies inherently consist of diverse religious and moral views. While the aims of such policies might have been enlightened, the application has been muddled. Its policies promote “cultural democracy”, the right of all groups to be represented in the cultural landscape of a diverse society. The goal was to move from mere tolerance to understanding and ultimately to unity.

The philosophy of multiculturalism was born out of a desire to respond to growing cultural and religious diversity, a way to redress historical injustices and build a more equitable society. Is this a multicultural success story or a cautionary tale? According to county records, there are at least 247 languages spoken and approximately 62 ethnically themed festivals held every year in Los Angeles County. Such was the scene in Los Angeles’ Westwood, home to thousands of Iranian Americans. Dignitaries, community leaders and even the two leading Mayoral candidates greeted the crowd with well wishes for the New Year of 1392. On the main stage, traditional music and dance performances entertained the ebullient crowd. A “haft-sin” table, symbolising various elements of spring renewal was displayed, Iranian flags draped nearby buildings, and Persian sweets and tea were generously served. handshakes and handsigns ought not be among them.”Īs for President Donald Trump’s embrace of the OK sign, Pitcavage said the president was using it long before it became controversial, and that in many cases, his supporters use it as a form of trolling or a generic gesture of support for their leader, with no apparent white supremacist undertones.Last weekend, two days after the start of spring, thousands gathered joyfully on a closed-off city street to celebrate Nowruz, the Persian New Year. Pitcavage said on Twitter, “Out of all the things you should be legitimately concerned about regarding the Senate confirmation hearings. In 2018, Pitcavage came to the defense of Republican operative Zina Bash, who appeared to make the OK sign while sitting behind Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings. But in the absence of contextual evidence, you can’t assume.”

If the person making the sign has hate symbols on their clothes, or tattoos or jewelry, perhaps one can make an assumption. If the person making the sign is a known white supremacist, then one may assume. “You absolutely cannot assume what someone is doing when they make the OK sign unless there is contextual information.

Speaking in general, Pitcavage said it’s important to not leap to conclusions when someone makes the OK sign. Pitcavage said he didn’t know why the Cubs fan did what he did, and he likely wouldn’t have been banned if there hadn’t been an outcry. a racist way of interfering with everyone’s enjoyment” of the telecast. While it appeared that the Cubs had not questioned the fan directly, Kenney told WSCR-AM 670 sports radio that the fan’s gesture was “more likely than not.

Crane Kenney, Cubs president of business operations, said that after repeated attempts to reach the Cubs fan by phone, the team sent the fan a letter notifying him he was banned indefinitely from Wrigley Field.

Closed hands symbolising