‘Race’, Difference and the Inclusive Society

1. ‘Race’, Difference and the Inclusive Society INCLUSION, INTEGRATION AND COHESION I: The Inclusive Society Peter Ratcliffe

2. Lecture outline In this lecture we begin to reflect on the core themes of the module………… • The nature and significance of the ‘inclusion – exclusion’ debate • The meaning of ‘social exclusion’ and the notion of an ‘inclusive society’ • What a truly inclusive society might look like, and the processes underpinning its creation

3. The Inclusive Society: Ruth Levitas • RED - Redistributionist Discourse • Marshallian notion of citizenship • ‘Old Labour’ thinking? • MUD -Moral Underclass Discourse • causes of exclusion located in ‘excluded’ themselves • Echoes of ‘culture of poverty’ thesis [Murray?] • SID - Social Integrationist Discourse • Dominant paradigm? Work seen as central

4. The ‘social exclusion’ paradigm Principal focus of module has been on exclusionary processes, but what are problems with ‘social exclusion’ paradigm? Dimensions? • DICHOTOMISES • ESSENTIALISES • PATHOLOGISES • OVERLY NARROW

5. DICHOTOMISES Either excluded or not? Problems: Fails to deal with ‘complexity’ – degrees and dimensions of marginalisation

6. ESSENTIALISES Universalises social position Exclusion associated with ‘groups’ rather than individuals and/or segments thereof: • In this sense essentialises experience – question of ‘difference within difference’ • Need a particularistic focus, both with respect to the subject of ‘exclusion’ i.e. who, and the social good from which the person is being ‘excluded’, i.e. work, housing, etc.

7. PATHOLOGISES Disempowers citizens • Another form of ‘blaming the victim’, i.e. a form of social pathologisation? • ‘Socially excluded’ equated with urban ‘underclass’ (cf. US literature - especially Charles Murray)

8. TOO NARROW/SIMPLISTIC Society better characterised by ‘structural pluralism’? • Groups subjected to ‘differential political incorporation’? (M. G. Smith) • Need more sophisticated theorisation? Leo Kuper’s development of Smith’s theory - dimensions/degrees related to ‘sites of exclusion’ (cf. last term)…..

9. Immigration control and the treatment of asylum seekers • Discriminatory policies and practices (use of detention centres, dispersal regime) • Treatment of women and children • Scapegoating of refugees and asylum seekers

10. Housing • Discriminatory policies and practices, e.g. ‘racial steering’ • Refusal of loan finance • Racist violence and harassment (activities of extreme right-wing groups, e.g. BNP)

11. Education • Racist harassment and bullying • Inappropriate syllabus/ethos of school • Stereotyping – e.g. Asian girls, Black males, GRT groups • ‘Rationing’ of education • School suspensions/exclusions • Unequal access to HE

12. Labour Market • Denial of work • Institutional failures of careers service, job centres (and trade unions?) • Placement in inappropriate jobs • Discrimination at work – training, promotion, discipline, etc. • Bullying, abuse, harassment • Racist stereotyping – Asian women and manual dexterity, Black males and sport [important research field in itself]

13. Policing and the Criminal Justice System • Discriminatory policies ‘on the street’ (e.g. ‘sus’) • Insensitive policing strategies in ‘Black’ areas • Poor performance in investigating offences committed against Blacks – Lawrence, Deptford fire, etc. • Differential sentencing policies • Abuse by officers & deaths in custody • Racist stereotyping/‘racial’ profiling

14. Redressing ‘exclusion’: strategies • NON-EXCLUSIONARY – works to remove obstacles – ‘liberal’ variant of equal opportunities policies • ANTI-EXCLUSIONARY – one which explicitly challenges exclusionary processes, e.g. anti-racist strategies, ‘affirmative action’

15. Change processes DIALECTICAL RELATIONSHIP: • SOCIAL AGENCY – civil rights, pressure group activity [single issue and generic, local/(inter)national), political mobilisation, community empowerment • STRUCTURAL APPROACH – legislation as mediated by institutions

16. What is an ‘inclusive society’? • A MULTI-CULTURAL SOCIETY? • A PLURAL SOCIETY? – if so, what sort? Arguably have an unacceptable form of plural society – with de facto (or even de iure) differential political incorporation, i.e. differential citizenship rights • AN EGALITARIAN SOCIETY? – this is not the Coalition vision! (N.B. current debates/policy pronouncements surrounding the Equality Act, Human Rights Act…)

17. Prerequisites of an Inclusive Society • (Ultimately) Elimination of exclusionary forces – racist groups, discrimination at an individual and institutional level • Acceptance of diversity – reduction in the social significance of difference. Diversity with equality therefore. • Establishment of an ‘equal playing field’ – starts with education? • Move to a more egalitarian social structure

18. Threats to this agenda • Radical policy shift since 9/11 and 7/7 • More repressive measures against ‘the enemy within’, with a demonisation of Muslims (and Islam) [cf. ‘PREVENT’….] • Cameron’s ‘muscular liberalism’ • Plus – twin attacks on equality and human rights agendas

19. New policy paradigm Inclusion-exclusion dualism gave way to twin approach (mutually conflictual): • ‘Dealing with the terrorist threat’ • A focus on ‘integration’ and ‘cohesion’

20. Integration ‘Cohesion’ or, more specifically, ‘community/social cohesion’ is next week’s topic, but • What does ‘integration’ mean and how does it differ from inclusion?

21. Integration: theoretical issues • What form might integration take? • Who would be integrated, and into what? • Most prominent approach: Culture Model of Robert Park (Chicago School - 1920s) Competition/conflict – Accommodationism – Integration/assimilation – Acculturation • Example: Sheila Patterson (Dark Strangers)

22. Critiques of Park’s view • Deterministic Theory • Ignores the lessons of history – British in India, Caribbean, Australia, etc. • Overly concerned with social control • Ignores the desires/aims/aspirations of migrant groups. • [Latter point] applies, in particular, to ‘acculturation’. Why should migrant groups give up their culture and adopt normative values? What about ‘assimilation’, e.g. spatial – in education, in housing, at work, during leisure time?

23. Re-emergence of Integration Integration has re-emerged as a policy paradigm. Why? • Collective amnesia of government? • Actually, stems from wider European debates and EU legislation • Also related to evolving citizenship agenda • New Labour idea - ‘inclusion’ of migrants best achieved by social contract based on ‘Britishness’(?)

24. Next week’s agenda….. • ‘Cohesion’, ‘Community Cohesion’ and ‘Social Cohesion’: theoretical concerns and policy paradigms? • The relationship between ‘integration’ and ‘community cohesion’ agendas • Implications of the new approach for the equalities agenda