Marginalizing multiculturalism.

• Author: Beber, Bernd
• Position: Book Review

Fighting Words: Language Policy and Ethnic Relations in Asia Edited by Michael E. Brownand and Sumit Ganguly Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003, 497 pages.

Civilizing the Margins: Southeast Asian Government Policies for the Development of Minorities Edited by Christopher R. Duncan Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2004, 296 pages.

This past September, a delegation of the Indonesian government shared its assessment of current politics in the archipelago at a panel discussion held at Columbia University. One of the speakers was Fu'ad Jabali, a university professor from Jakarta. He introduced himself by noting that when he was working on his doctorate in Canada, he was taken aback by the fact that his university did not consider Bahasa Indonesia to be an Islamic language, unlike Turkish and Urdu. Drawing nods from the other members of the panel, Jabali explained that he submitted a complaint, and the university corrected their "mistake." As Professor Jabali's comments indicate, the manner in which language and culture are treated is a fundamental and profound issue for young states such as Indonesia. But one wonders whether the way in which he wanted the relationship between Bahasa Indonesia and Islam to be understood in the world was also a good way for the government to treat it within the state. How should diverse languages and cultures be treated when trying to consolidate a state's functional coherence while protecting the rights of its citizens? What choices should a government make in accommodating or breaking down cultural boundaries?

Two recent books on ethnic relations in Asia address these questions. Fighting Words, edited by Michael E. Brown and Sumit Ganguly, offers a sophisticated and smart analysis of language policies in Asia. (1) Civilizing the Margins, edited by Christopher R. Duncan, is a thoughtfully researched w)lume on development policies vis-a-vis indigenous minorities in Southeast Asia. (2) Both collections contain more than a dozen essays propounding a range of opinions; one common theme is a bias for accommodationist policies over the promotion of crosscutting allegiances. The Duncan volume describes Southeast Asian governments' development projects, such as the propagation of a common language, as quasi-imperial regimens of control, resource extraction and an impulse to "civilize" and, in turn, destroy the cultural integrity of minorities. Fichting Words places greater emphasis on Asian governments facing the choice of implementing unaccommodating language policies with force, which makes ethnic violence more likely. Given the quality of these volumes in other respects, this bias is unfortunate, and deserves to be explored.

Both volumes have it right when they emphasize that scholars tend to overestimate the centrifugal effects of ethnic diversity, and they are also right in emphasizing that violent ethnic conflict is principally preventable and is not the inevitable result of structural forces. But in seeking solutions primarily in multiculturalist accommodation and autonomy arrangements, the volumes fail to provide an adequate defense of why such accommodation should be given priority over the promotion of crosscutting allegiances. It is not always enough to "let a thousand ethnolinguistic flowers bloom" in order to prevent ethnically organized unrest, nor is it necessarily desirable for providing fair opportunities. (3) Instead, governments must actively promote social, economic and political linkages that cut across ethnic...