Multicultural

This article needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2008)

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2008)

Monument to Multiculturalism by Francesco Pirelli in Toronto, Canada. Four identical sculptures are located in Buffalo City, South Africa; Changchun, China; Sarajevo, Bosnia; and Sydney, Australia.

The term multiculturalism generally refers to a state of racial, cultural and ethnic diversity within the demographics of a specified place, usually at the scale of an organization such as a school, business, neighbourhood, city or nation.

Some countries have official, or de jure policies of multiculturalism aimed at recognizing, celebrating and maintaining the different cultures or cultural identities within that society to promote social cohesion. In this context, multiculturalism advocates a society that extends equitable status to distinct cultural and religious groups, with no one culture predominating.

1 Multiculturalism in contemporary Eastern societies
2 Contemporary history in Western societies
3 Adoption of multiculturalism as national policy
4 Multiculturalism as introductory to monoculturalism
5 Opposition to multiculturalism
6 Current trends in Europe
- 6.1 Polarization
7 See also
8 References
9 Further reading

Multiculturalism in contemporary Eastern societies

India

According to many scholars, India is the most culturally, linguistically and genetically diverse geographical entity after the African continent^[1]. India's democratic republic is premised on a national belief in pluralism, not the standard nationalist invocation of a shared history, a single language and an assimilationist culture.^[2] State boundaries in India are mostly drawn on linguistic lines.^[3] In addition India is also one of the most religiously diverse countries in the world, with significant Hindu (80.5%) , Muslim (13.4%), Christian (2.3%), Sikh (2.1%), Buddhist, Bahai, Ahmadi, Jain and Parsi populations.^[4] Cities like Mumbai in Maharashtra display high levels of multilingualism and multiculturalism, spurred by political integration after independence and migration from rural areas.^{citation needed}

Indonesia

There are more than 700 living languages spoken in Indonesia^[5] and although predominantly Muslim the country also has large Christian and Hindu populations. Indonesia's national motto, "Bhinneka tunggal ika" ("Unity in Diversity" lit. "many, yet one"), articulates the diversity that shapes the country. Due to migration within Indonesia (as part of government transmigration programs or otherwise), there are significant populations of ethic groups who reside outside of their traditional regions. Soon after Abdurrahman Wahid came into power in 1999, he quickly abolished some of the discriminatory laws in efforts to improve race relationships. Chinese Indonesians are now in the era of rediscovery. Many younger generations, who cannot speak Mandarin due to the ban decades earlier, choose to learn Mandarin, as many learning centers open throughout the country. The Ambon, Maluku was the site of some of the worst violence between Christian and Muslim groups that gripped the Maluku Islands between 1999 and 2002.^[6]

Russia

More than 150 different ethnic groups and indigenous peoples live in the Russian Federation.^[7]

Singapore

Singapore recognizes three other languages, namely, Mandarin Chinese, Tamil and English as its official languages, with Malay being the national language. Apart from languages, Singapore also celebrates festivals celebrated by these three ethnic communities.

Malaysia

Malaysia is a multiethnic country, with Malays making up the majority, close to 52% of the population. About 30% of the population are Malaysians of Chinese descent. Malaysians of Indian descent comprise about 8% of the population. The Malaysian New Economic Policy or NEP serves as a form of affirmative action (see Bumiputra).^[8] It promotes structural changes in various aspects of life from education to economic to social integration. Born after the race riots of 1969, it sought to address the significant imbalance in the economic sphere where the minority Chinese population had substantial control over commercial activity in the country. 99% of Petronas directors are Malays, only 3% of Petronas employees are Chinese, only 5% of all new intakes for government army, nurses, polices, are non-Malays, just 7% of government servants in the whole government are ethnic Chinese (2004), drop from 30% in 1960, and 95% of all government contracts are given to Malays.^[9]

Japan

Japanese society, with its ideology of homogenity, has traditionally been intolerant of ethnic and other differences.^[10] People identified as different might be considered "polluted" — the category applied historically to the outcasts of Japan, particularly the hisabetsu buraku, "discriminated communities," often called burakumin, a term some find offensive — and thus not suitable as marriage partners or employees.^[11] Men or women of mixed ancestry, those with family histories of certain diseases, and foreigners, and members of minority groups faced discrimination in a variety of forms. In 2005, a United Nations report expressed concerns about racism in Japan and that government recognition of the depth of the problem was not total.^[12]^[13] The author of the report, Doudou Diène (Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights), concluded after a nine-day investigation that racial discrimination and xenophobia in Japan primarily affects three groups: national minorities, Latin Americans of Japanese descent, mainly Japanese Brazilians, and foreigners from other Asian countries.^[14]

Japan accepted just 16 refugees in 1999, while the United States took in 85,010 for resettlement, according to the UNHCR. New Zealand, which is smaller than Japan, accepted 1,140 refugees in 1999. Just 305 persons were recognized as refugees by Japan from 1981, when Japan ratified the U.N. Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, to 2002.^[15]^[16] Japanese Minister Taro Aso has called Japan a “one race” nation.^[17]

South Korea

South Korea is among the world's most ethnically homogeneous nations^[18] having been virtually isolated from the outside world until the 20th century. Historically, the country has tried hard to keep interaction between Koreans and non-Koreans as minimal as possible, forming a very distinct society. Koreans have traditionally valued an "unmixed blood" as the most important feature of Korean identity, often more important than their own lives. During periods of invasions, many Korean women killed themselves when they were made pregnant by a foreigner, as otherwise, it would dilute the "Korean blood". While not as extreme as in the past, to this date, most Koreans tend to equate nationality or citizenship with membership in a single, homogeneous ethnic group sharing the same "blood" and history. A common language and culture are also viewed as important elements in Korean identity.

Those who do not share such features are often rejected by the Korean society or face discrimination. This includes Koreans themselves who may not share one of the elements of Korean identity. For example, Koreans brought up overseas often face discrimination by Koreans living in South Korea upon their return who may not speak the language properly or have developed a different culture. North Koreans who immigrated to South Korea, despite sharing the same Korean blood and history, face discrimination as they do not share all of the elements of Korean identity, such as speaking the Korean language with an accent. Even South Koreans brought up In rural areas who speak with an accent, face some form of discrimination by those in the cities of South Korea. Racial discrimination is not uncommon in South Korea and is sometimes seen as socially acceptable among South Koreans which is an illegal act in Western countries.

The idea of multiracial or multiethnic nations, like Canada or the United States, is opposed in general and strikes many Koreans as odd or even contradictory. Relationships between a Korean and non-Korean is seen skeptical by some South Koreans and often rejected. In particular, marriage or even a friendship between a Korean and Japanese is seen as completely unacceptable in the Korean society due to strong Anti-Japanese sentiment in Korea. The term "Kosian", referring to someone who has a Korean father and a non-Korean mother, is considered offensive by some who prefer to identify themselves or their children as Korean.^[19]^[20] Moreover, the Korean office of Amnesty International has claimed that the word "Kosian" represents racial discrimination.^[21] According to Pearl S. Buck International, there are approximately 30,000 Kosians in South Korea.^[22] Kosian children, like those of other mixed-race backgrounds in Korea, often face discrimination.^[23]

Multiculturalism and Islam in the West

There is a developing distaste toward the idea and policies of multiculturalism in Europe, especially, as stated earlier, in the Netherlands, Denmark, United Kingdom and Germany.^{citation needed} The belief behind this backlash on multiculturalism is that it creates friction within society.

Incompatibility with secular society,^[24] has been influenced by a stance against multiculturalism advocated by recent philosophers, closely linked to the heritage of New Philosophers. Fiery polemic on the subject by proponents like Pascal Bruckner,^[25] and Paul Cliteur has kindled international debate.^[26] They hold multiculturalism to be an invention of an enlightened elite who deny the benefits of democratic rights to the rest of humanity by chaining people to their roots. They claim this allows Islam free rein to propagate abuses such as the mistreatment of women and homosexuals, and in some countries slavery. They also claim multiculturalism allows freedom of religion^[27] to exceed the realms of personal religious experience^[28] and to organize towards mundane ambitions seeking moral and political influence that opposes European secular or Christian values.

In Canada, the possible introduction of sharia family courts became a contentious issue, and received much media attention.^[29]^[30]

From the late 1990s multiculturalism came under sustained intellectual attack in Western Europe largely, but not exclusively, from the political right.^{citation needed} The reaction was more vehement than in North America, since it was associated with several other factors - the return of explicit nationalism as a political force, the revival of national identity, the rise of euroscepticism, and concerns about Islam in Europe. The period saw the rise of anti-immigrant populism in Europe, which was uniformly, sometimes fanatically, hostile to multiculturalism. The debate became increasingly polarised, and increasingly associated with Islam and terrorism.^{citation needed} The multiculturalism issue merged with the immigration policy issue. The most extreme rejection of multiculturalism comes from supporters of the Eurabia concept.

Contemporary history in Western societies

As a philosophy, multiculturalism began as part of the pragmatism movement at the end of the nineteenth century in Europe and the United States, then as political and cultural pluralism at the turn of the twentieth. It was partly in response to a new wave of European imperialism in sub-Saharan Africa and the massive immigration of Southern and Eastern Europeans to the United States and Latin America. Philosophers, psychologists and historians and early sociologists such as Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, George Santayana, Horace Kallen, John Dewey, W.E.B. Du Bois and Alain Locke developed concepts of cultural pluralism, from which emerged what we understand today as multiculturalism. In Pluralistic Universe (1909), William James espoused the idea of a "plural society." James saw pluralism as "crucial to the formation of philosophical and social humanism to help build a better, more egalitarian society.^[31]

In the Western English-speaking countries, multiculturalism as an official national policy started in Canada in 1971, followed by Australia in 1973.^[32] It was quickly adopted as official policy by most member-states of the European Union. Recently, right-of-center governments in several European states—notably the Netherlands and Denmark— have reversed the national policy and returned to an official monoculturalism.^[32] A similar reversal is the subject of debate in the United Kingdom, among others, due to evidence of incipient segregation and anxieties over 'home-grown' terrorism.^[33]

The monocultural nation-state (Europe)

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (October 2007)

Russian advertisers have begun to utilize imagery of diverse races

Especially in the 19th century, the ideology of nationalism transformed the way Europeans thought about the state.^{citation needed} Existing states were broken up and new ones created; the new nation-states were founded on the principle that each nation is entitled to its own sovereign state and to engender, protect, and preserve its own unique culture and history. Unity, under this ideology, is seen as an essential feature of the nation and the nation-state - unity of descent, unity of culture, unity of language, and often unity of religion. The nation-state constitutes a culturally homogeneous society, although some national movements recognized regional differences. None, however, accepted foreign elements in culture and society. Multilingual and multi-ethnic empires, such as the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire, were considered oppressive, and most Europeans did not accept that such a state could be legitimate.^{citation needed}

Where cultural unity was insufficient, it was encouraged and enforced by the state. The 19th-century nation-states developed an array of policies - the most important was compulsory primary education in the national language. The language itself was often standardized by a linguistic academy, and regional languages were ignored or suppressed. Some nation-states pursued violent policies of cultural assimilation and even ethnic cleansing.

It has been argued that the concept, if not the 19th century methodology, of monoculturalism has been gaining favour in recent years.^{citation needed} This is generally fueled by a desire to safeguard national cultures or identities that are perceived as being under threat - particularly by globalization and the promulgation of multiculturalism by Left Wing political parties - as opposed to the outright xenophobia of the 19th century.^{citation needed}

The 'Melting Pot' ideal (USA)

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (September 2007)

In the United States, continuous mass immigration had been a feature of economy and society since the first half of the 19th century.^{citation needed} The absorption of the stream of immigrants became, in itself, a prominent feature of America's national myth. The idea of the Melting pot is a metaphor that implies that all the immigrant cultures are mixed and amalgamated without state intervention.^{citation needed} The Melting Pot implied that each individual immigrant, and each group of immigrants, assimilated into American society at their own pace. An Americanized (and often stereotypical) version of the original nation's cuisine, and its holidays, survived. Note that the Melting Pot tradition co-exists with a belief in national unity, dating from the American founding fathers:

"Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people — a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs... This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties." -- John Jay, First American Supreme Court Chief Justice, Federalist Paper No. 2

Ethnic selection (Australia)

Prior to settlement by Europeans, the Australian continent was not a single nation, but hosted several Aboriginal cultures and between 200 and 400 active languages at any one time.^{citation needed} The present nation of Australia resulted from a deliberate process of immigration intended to fill the "empty" continent (also excluding potential rivals to the British Empire). Settlers from the United Kingdom, after 1800 including Ireland, were the earliest people that were not native to the continent to live in Australia. Dutch colonization (see New Holland) and possible visits to Australia by explorers and/or traders from China, did not lead to permanent settlement. Until 1901, Australia existed as a group of independent British settler colonies.^{citation needed}

Proposals to limit immigration by nationality were intended to maintain the cultural and political identity of the colonies as part of the British Empire.^{citation needed} While there was never any specific official policy called the White Australia policy, this is the term used for a collection of historical legislation and policies which either intentionally or unintentionally restricted non-European immigration to Australia from 1901 to 1973. Such policies theoretically limited the ethnic and cultural diversity of the immigrant population, and in theory facilitated the cultural assimilation of the immigrants, since they would come from related ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Taken from a historical perspective, however, this was not a matter of cultural diversity or otherwise, but an attempt to preserve the British ethno-cultural identity of the Australian nation. It was official policy for much of the 20th century to promote European immigration and to keep out those who did not fit the European, predominately Anglo-Celtic, character of Australian society. As the Twentieth century progressed and the number of migrants from the United Kingdom became insufficient to meet planned quotas, immigrants came increasingly from other parts of Europe, such as Italy, Greece, Germany, the Netherlands, and Yugoslavia.^{citation needed}

Adoption of multiculturalism as national policy

Multiculturalism was adopted as official policy, in several western nations from the 1970s onward, for reasons that varied from country to country.^{citation needed}

Government multicultural policies may include:

recognition of multiple citizenship (the multiple citizenship itself usually results from the nationality laws of another country)
government support for newspapers, television, and radio in minority languages
support for minority festivals, holidays, and celebrations
acceptance of traditional and religious dress in schools, the military, and society in general
support for music and arts from minority cultures
programs to encourage minority representation in politics, SET (Science, Engineering and Technology), Mathematics, education, and the work force in general.
enforcement of different codes of law on members of each ethnic group (e.g. Malaysia enforces Shar'ia law, but only for a particular ethnic group)

Origins in Canada

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (October 2007)

See also: Demography of Canada, Cultural mosaic, and Immigration to Canada

German immigrants in Quebec City in 1911

Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world,^[34] driven by economic policy and family reunification. In 2001, 250,640 people immigrated to Canada. Newcomers settle mostly in the major urban areas of Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal^{citation needed}. By the 1990s and 2000s, the largest component of Canada’s immigrants came from Asia, including the Middle East, South Asia, South-East Asia and East Asia.^[35] Canadian society is often depicted as being a very progressive, diverse, and multicultural. Accusing a person of racism in Canada is usually considered a serious slur.^[36] All political parties are now cautious about criticizing of the high level of immigration, because, as noted by the Globe and Mail, "in the early 1990s, the old Reform Party was branded 'racist' for suggesting that immigration levels be lowered from 250,000 to 150,000."^[37]

Multiculturalism in Canada was first articulated by Progressive Conservative Senator Paul Yuzyk in his maiden Senate speech in 1964. It was officially adopted in 1971, following the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, a government body set up in response to the grievances of Canada's French-speaking minority (concentrated in the Province of Quebec). The report of the Commission advocated that the Canadian government should recognize Canada as a bilingual and bicultural society and adopt policies to preserve this character.

Biculturalism was attacked from many directions. Progressive Conservative Party leader John Diefenbaker saw multiculturalism as an attack on his vision of unhyphenated Canadianism. It did not satisfy the growing number of young Francophones who gravitated towards Quebec nationalism. While many Canadians disliked the new policies of biculturalism and official bilingualism, the strongest opposition came from Canadians of neither English nor French descent, the so-called "Third Force" Canadians. Biculturalism did not accord with local realities in the western provinces, where the French population was tiny compared to other cultural minorities. To accommodate them, the formula was changed from "bilingualism and biculturalism" to "bilingualism and multiculturalism."

New Canadians in Toronto's Kensington Market in 1922

The Liberal Party government of Pierre Trudeau promulgated the "Announcement of Implementation of Policy of Multiculturalism within Bilingual Framework" in the House of Commons on 8 October 1971, the precursor of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act of the Brian Mulroney Progressive Conservative government which received Royal Assent on 21 July 1988. On a more practical level, federal funds began to be distributed to ethnic groups to help them preserve their cultures. Projects typically funded included folk dancing competitions and the construction of ethnic-oriented community centres. This led to criticisms that the policy was actually motivated by electoral considerations rather than Trudeau's vision of a Just Society. After its election in 1984, the government of Brian Mulroney did not reverse these policies, although they had earlier been criticized by Tories as inconsistent with unhyphenated Canadianism. The Trinidad and Tobago born Canadian writer Neil Bissoondath has been a particular critic of the concept as an official policy.^[32]

Far from pleading multiculturalism's neutrality in matters of national unity, successive Canadian governments have argued that the policy promotes the national interest by breaking down social and cultural barriers. Many believe that rather than weakening the national character, or presenting a slippery slope whereby all groups may appeal for separate treatment based on every imaginable difference, the policy is viewed as strengthening national identity by binding citizens to a single moral community. However, there are critics of the policy, and according to a 2007 University of Toronto study, many recent non-white citizens do not identify themselves as being "Canadian".^[38]

The policy was added to the Constitution of Canada, in section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Diane Ravitch describes both the melting pot and Canada's cultural mosaic as being multicultural and distinguishes them as pluralistic and particularist multiculturalism.^{citation needed} Pluralistic multiculturalism views each culture or subculture in a society as contributing unique and valuable cultural aspects to the whole culture. Particularist multiculturalism is more concerned with preserving the distinctions between cultures.

Canadian multiculturalism is looked upon with admiration by many world leaders^{citation needed} - particularly His Highness the Aga Khan. In a 2002 interview with the Globe and Mail, the 49th Imam of the Ismaili Muslims described Canada as "the most successful pluralist society on the face of our globe",^[39] citing it as "a model for the world."^[39] He explained that the experience of Canadian governance - its commitment to pluralism and its support for the rich multicultural diversity of its peoples - is something that must be shared and would be of benefit societies in other parts of the world.^[40]^[41] With this in mind, he went on in 2006 to establish the Global Centre for Pluralism in partnership with the Government of Canada. The Centre seeks to export the Canadian experience by promoting pluralist values and practices in culturally diverse societies worldwide, with the aim of ensuring that every individual has the opportunity to realize his or her full potential as a citizen, irrespective of cultural, ethnic or religious differences.^[41]

The Diversity at Work Glossary, recognizes multiculturalism as part of “a policy introduced by the federal government in 1971, which acknowledges that many ethnic Canadians experience unequal access to resources and opportunities. It urges more recognition of the contributions of such Canadians, the preservation of certain expressions of their ethnicity, and more equity in the treatment of all Canadians. Since 1971, there has been increasing recognition of the limitation of this concept; first, it does not explicitly acknowledge the critical role which racism plays in preventing this vision from materialising; second, it promotes a static and limited notion of culture as fragmented and confined to ethnicity; and third, it pays insufficient attention to institutional forms of racial discrimination, focusing instead on individual expressions and experiences”.(Source: Diversity at Work, Diversity Glossary))

Argentina

Main article: Demographics of Argentina

Though not called as a Multiculturalism state policy, since the Argentina's constitution act and preamble set up the immigration promote like central issue to development. And nowadays its high levels of multiculturalism reflects that social assortment of the Argentine's culture^[42]. As others multicultural countries the Argentine constitution, grounded to encourage immigration, widely recognizes the individual's multiple citizenship from others countries acts, allows foreign festivals and holidays (e.g. Saint Patricks' days). Moreover the act supports all kind of art or cultural expression from minorities as well as their diffusion through an important multiculturalism presence in the media, for instance it is not rarely find newspapers^[43] or radios program in English, Italian or Guarani language running on the tune.

Australia

The other country to have most fully adopted Canadian-style multiculturalism is Australia, with many similar policies, for example the formation of the Special Broadcasting Service. While the White Australia Policy was quietly dismantled after World War II by various changes to immigration policy, the full political introduction of official policies of multiculturalism was 1973.

The overall level of immigration to Australia has grown substantially during the last decades. Net overseas migration increased from 30,000 in 1993^[44] to 118,000 in 2003-04.^[45] During the 2004-05, total 123,424 people immigrated to Australia. Of them, 17,736 were from Africa, 54,804 from Asia, 21,131 from Oceania, 18,220 from United Kingdom, 1,506 from South America, and 2,369 from Eastern Europe.^[35] 131,000 people migrated to Australia in 2005-06^[46] and migration target for 2006-07 was 144,000.^[47] Australia opens its doors to about 300,000 new migrants in 2008-09 - it's highest level since the Immigration Department was created after World War II.^[48]

This section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (March 2008)

The meaning of multiculturalism has changed enormously since its formal introduction to Australia. Originally it was understood by the mainstream population as a need for acceptance that many members of the Australian community originally came from different cultures and still had ties to it. However, it came to mean the rights of migrants within mainstream Australia to express their cultural identity. It is now often used to refer to the fact that very many people in Australia have, and recognize, multiple cultural or ethnic backgrounds. The Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs in Australia estimated that, in 2005, 25% of the Australian workforce was born outside of Australia and 40% had at least one parent born outside of Australia.

Following the initial moves of the Whitlam Labor government in 1973, further official national multicultural policies were implemented by Malcom Fraser's Liberal Government in 1978. The Labor Government of Bob Hawke continued with these policies during the 1980s and early 1990s, and were further supported by Paul Keating up to his electoral defeat 1996.

The election of John Howard's Liberal-National Coalition government in 1996 was a major watershed for Australian multiculturalism. Howard had long been a critic of multiculturalism, releasing his One Australia policy in the late 1980s which called for a reduction in Asian immigration. Shortly after the new government took office, the new independent member Pauline Hanson made her maiden speech in which she was highly critical of multiculturalism, saying that a multicultural society could never be strong. Notably, despite many calls for Howard to censure Hanson, his response was to state that her speech indicated a new freedom of expression in Australia on such issues. Rather than official multiculturalism, Howard advocated instead the idea of a "shared national identity", albeit one strongly grounded in certain recognizably Anglo-Celtic Australian themes, such as 'mateship' and a 'fair go'. While Howard changed the name of the Department of Immigration, Multiculturalism and Indigenous Affairs to the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, the policy of multiculturalism has remained largely intact in practice. Newspaper columnists such as Andrew Bolt have called for a National policy of Assimilation.

United States

In the United States, multiculturalism is not clearly established in policy at the federal level. At the state level, it is sometimes associated with English-Spanish bilingualism.^{citation needed} Other examples include California allowing drivers to take their exams in a number of languages.^[49]

The Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965 (the Hart-Cellar Act), passed by a Democratic controlled Congress, abolished the system of national-origin quotas. Over 28,000,000 have legally immigrated since 1965 under its provisions. Prior to 1965, the US was taking around 178,000 legal immigrants annually.

In 2006, a total of 1,266,264 immigrants became legal permanent residents of the United States, up from 601,516 in 1987, 849,807 in 2000, and 1,122,373 in 2005. The top twelve sending countries in 2006, by country of birth, were Mexico (173,753), People's Republic of China (87,345), Philippines (74,607), India (61,369), Cuba (45,614), Colombia (43,151), Dominican Republic (38,069), El Salvador (31,783), Vietnam (30,695), Jamaica (24,976), South Korea (24,386), Guatemala (24,146), Other countries - 606,370.^[35] Muslim immigration to the U.S. is rising and in 2005 more people from Muslim countries became legal permanent U.S. residents — nearly 96,000 — than in any year in the previous two decades.^[50]^[51]

United Kingdom

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (October 2007)

Under the Conservatives (1979-1997), multicultural rhetoric and policies were confined to left-leaning councils^{citation needed}. Since the election of the Labour government in 1997, multiculturalism has influenced government policies and statements^{citation needed}. Precursors of present policy include the Race Relations Act, and the British Nationality Act of 1948. The policy's recent harsh critics have included the Ugandan-born Archbishop of York John Sentamu and the Pakistani-born bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali.

In 2005, an estimated 565,000 migrants^[52] arrived to live in the UK for at least a year, while 380,000 people emigrated from the UK for a year or more, with Australia, Spain and France most popular destinations.^[53]^[54]