Ethnopluralism orethno-pluralism, also known asethno-differentialism,[1][2] is a political model which attempts to preserve separate and bordered ethno-cultural regions.[3][4] According to its promoters, significant foreign cultural elements in a given region ought to beculturally assimilated to seekcultural homogenization in this territory, in order to let different cultures thrive in their respective geographical areas.[5][6][7] Advocates also emphasize a "right to difference" (French:droit à la difference) and claim support forcultural diversity at a worldwide rather than at a national level.
Proponents describe ethnopluralism as an alternative tomulticulturalism andglobalization. They claim that it strives to keep the world's different cultures alive by embracing their uniqueness and avoiding a one-world doctrine in which different regions can be increasingly seen as culturally similar or identical.[6] Critics have called the project a form of "globalapartheid" and "separate but equal" doctrine,[6][7] and many specialists have described the idea as a strategic attempt to legitimise racial supremacist views in public opinion by imitating egalitarian, anti-totalitarian, antiracist, or environmental discourses of theprogressive movement.[8][9][7] Scholars have also highlighted close ideological similarities with ideas promoted by Frenchneo-fascist activists in the 1950–1960s.[10][11][7]
The concept, formulated in its modern form by French political theorist andNouvelle Droite founding memberAlain de Benoist,[7] is closely associated with theEuropean New Right and theIdentitarian movement.[3][12]
According toethnographerBenjamin R. Teitelbaum, the term "ethnopluralism" (German:Ethnopluralismus) was first coined by German sociologistHenning Eichberg in a 1973 essay that was written in opposition to both Western and Europeaneurocentrism.[13]
The concept of ethno-differentialism (French:ethno-différencialisme) was promoted from the 1970s onward byGRECE, anethno-nationalist think tank led byNouvelle Droite thinkerAlain de Benoist, but it was foreshadowed by ideas expressed in the 1950s by Frenchneo-fascist activistRené Binet.[10][11][14] "Biological realism", a concept coined by Binet in 1950, advocated the establishment of individual and racial inequalities founded upon scientific observations.[11][7] He argued that "interbreeding capitalism" (capitalisme métisseur) aimed at creating a "uniform barbary" (barbarie uniforme), and that only "a true socialism" could "achieve race liberation" through the "absolute segregation at both global and national level."[15]
In the 1960s, theeuro-nationalist magazineEurope-Action, in which Alain de Benoist then worked as a journalist, drew influence from the so-called "Message of Uppsala",[11] a text likely written in 1958 by French far-right activists related to theNew European Order, a neo-fascist movement led by Binet. It carried out subtle semantic shifts between "differentialism" and "inequality" which are deemed influential on European far-right movements at large.[16]
The concept, which has been part of the ideological foundation ofEuropean New Right, emphasizes the separation of varying ethno-cultural groups, as opposed to culturalintegration and intra-statemulticulturalism.[12] Ethnopluralism tends to rely oncultural assimilation of foreign cultural norms in order to preserve the inherent forms and resemblances of a given ethno-culture, which has a right to claim cultural dominance over a defined territory.[6] It has been proposed byNouvelle Droite thinkers, and embraced by European New Right activists at large, as a mean to facilitate the continuity of distinct ethno-cultural societies as politically autonomous entities.[3][17] De Benoist claims that indigenous cultures in Europe are being threatened by the liberal worldview promoted by the United States, and thatpan-European nationalism founded on the idea of ethnopluralism would stop this process.[5] In 2002, he described the "progressive disappearance of diversity from the world", including biodiversity of animals, cultures and peoples, as the "greatest" world danger.[18]
These views on culture, ethnicity and race have become popular among Europeanfar-right groups from the 1970s onward and, more recently, inalt-right circles in North America.[9] It has also been covered in someNew Left sources likeTelos.[3][5]
The difficulty of defining clearly the concept lies in the fact that its proponents can oscillate between a genetic and a cultural definition of the notion of "difference".Alain de Benoist had for instance supported an ethno-biological perspective in the 1960s,[19][20] endorsingSouth African apartheid during the same decade.[21] He has however gradually adopted a more dual approach in his writings. Inspired byMartin Buber'sphilosophy of dialogue andIch und Du concept, de Benoist defined "identity" as a "dialogical" phenomenon inWe and the Others ("Nous et les autres", 2006). According to him, one's identity is made of two components: the "objective part" that comes from one's background (ethnicity, religion, family, nationality), and the "subjective part", freely chosen by the individual. Identity is therefore a process in constant evolution, rather than an immutable notion.[22] In 1992, he consequently dismissed theFront National use of ethnopluralism, on the grounds that it portrayed "difference as an absolute, whereas, by definition, it exists only relationally."[23] WhileGuillaume Faye argued in 1979 that immigration, rather than immigrants, should be combated in order to preserve cultural and biological "identities" on both sides of theMediterranean Sea,[24] he later preached "total ethnic war" between "original" Europeans and Muslims in his 2000 bookThe Colonization of Europe, which led to a criminal conviction for hate speech.[25]
If ethnopluralists use the concept of "cultural differentialism" to assert a "right to difference" and proposeregional policies of ethnic and racialseparatism, there is no agreement among them upon the definition of group membership, nor where these hypothetical borders would lie. Some of them advocate limiting Europe to "true Europeans" (that is people of European descent), while others propose much smaller divisions, similar to an ethnically-basedcommunitarianism.[5] For instance, de Benoist has proposed ethnic and social territories should be as small as possible, such that Muslims would be allowed some territories subordinated tosharia within the European continent.[6]
Ethnopluralism has been criticised by philosopherPierre-André Taguieff as a strategic attempt to disguise racial supremacist ideas behind an anti-totalitarian and egalitarian discourse.[8] Scholar Daniel Rueda locates the emergence of ethnopluralism as part of a "cultural turn in racism", that is, "the passage from biological andpseudoscientific racism to alterophobic discourses based on culture and ethnicity among European far-right intellectuals."[7] In the words of political scientist Blair Taylor, "many contemporary far-right groups have traded in the language of overt white supremacy for ethnopluralism, a vision wherein distinct groups live separately but allegedly equal, free to pursue their ethnic interests. Ethnopluralism is often embedded in the discourse of diversity, capitalizing on the progressive antiracist and environmental associations".[9]
Left-wing historianRasmus Fleischer has speculated that Jews and Roma are implicitly absent from the ethnopluralist world map because, in the vision of "multi-fascists", both minorities should be "eliminated in order to make room for a peaceful utopia."[6]
