The concept of multiculturalism is difficult to make fit with a

"The concept of multiculturalism is difficult to make fit with a democratic society." These words by Helmut Schmidt cut to the heart of a dilemma that is as old as civilization itself. The tension between multiculturalism—the existence of many diverse cultures within a single society—and the ideals of a democratic society—a society based on equality, freedom, and shared values—is a complex one, often difficult to navigate. In Schmidt's view, multiculturalism challenges the very unity that democratic societies need to function effectively. The democratic ideal, which relies on a shared sense of purpose, identity, and values, can struggle when these values are not universally held or when different cultural traditions conflict with one another.

In the ancient world, this tension was present in the flourishing civilizations of Athens and Rome, two of the most influential societies in history. Athens, the birthplace of democracy, held the belief that all citizens, regardless of their background, should participate in public life. Yet, this democracy was not as inclusive as it first seemed. It excluded slaves, women, and those who were foreign-born, emphasizing that citizenship—and thus participation in the democratic process—was tied to a shared identity. Similarly, Rome, while expanding its empire to include a vast array of peoples and cultures, often struggled with the integration of its conquered territories into the Roman system. The Roman ideal of universal citizenship clashed with the reality of integrating diverse traditions and languages into a cohesive political and social structure. This ancient tension between unity and diversity reflects the same struggles that Schmidt highlights today.

The Roman Empire offers a poignant example of this tension. As the empire expanded, it absorbed a vast array of cultures, religions, and customs, creating a complex society where unity was often hard to maintain. While Rome did promote citizenship to a degree, it also imposed its own laws and values on the diverse peoples it ruled, often eroding or undermining local traditions in the process. This paradox—of unity under a singular empire, yet the struggle to accommodate the vast differences among its peoples—mirrors the challenges of multiculturalism in the modern democratic state. The more a society tries to bring together diverse cultures under a common framework, the more it risks losing the unity that holds it together.

In the modern world, Schmidt’s concerns about multiculturalism in democracy resonate deeply, especially in the context of globalization and the increasing movement of people across borders. Democratic societies have long been founded on shared values, such as freedom, equality, and rule of law, which help create a sense of common purpose. However, the immigration of people from different cultural backgrounds often leads to tension between the desire to maintain shared values and the reality of integrating diverse traditions. Countries like Germany, where Schmidt served as Chancellor, have seen this play out, with debates over how to integrate immigrants while maintaining the core principles of the state.

Take, for example, the story of France, a country that has long prided itself on its republican ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity. Yet, the integration of immigrants from former colonies has proven difficult, as their cultural practices often conflict with the secular and unified ideals of the French Republic. The burqa ban in France, for instance, sparked a national debate about how far a society should go in accommodating cultural practices that do not align with its own values. Multiculturalism, in this case, was seen by many as a threat to the cohesion of French society, raising the question of whether diversity can truly coexist with the shared principles of a democratic state.

In contrast, Canada has often been held up as an example of a country that has embraced multiculturalism within a democratic framework. Through its official policy of multiculturalism, Canada has sought to recognize and celebrate diverse cultures while also encouraging a shared sense of Canadian identity. Yet even in Canada, the tension between unity and diversity remains. As different cultural communities strive to preserve their traditions, questions arise about how to balance the needs of minority groups with the values that are held as central to Canadian democracy, such as equality and individual rights. This ongoing challenge highlights the difficulty of reconciling the ideal of multiculturalism with the realities of a functioning democracy.

The lesson from Schmidt’s words is not that multiculturalism should be rejected, but that societies must be mindful of the balance between diversity and unity. The question is not whether diversity enriches a society—it does—but how to preserve the shared values that allow a democratic society to thrive in the face of growing diversity. A society must have a sense of common purpose, one that transcends cultural differences, while also respecting and celebrating the unique identities of its people. Multiculturalism, when integrated thoughtfully, can strengthen democracy by encouraging people to engage with each other’s differences, fostering mutual respect and understanding.

For us, in our time, the lesson is clear: we must remain open to the idea that diversity can coexist with unity, but it requires work. It demands that we continue to examine and redefine the values that bind us together as citizens. We must find ways to protect the core principles of our societies—freedom, equality, and justice—while ensuring that all voices, all cultures, and all backgrounds are respected and valued. By doing so, we can build a democracy that not only survives but thrives in the face of diversity, creating a world where differences are celebrated, yet unity remains the foundation of our shared future.