The model of assimilation refers to a group of people integrating into a new culture assimilating its host's cultural elements such as language and customs, losing some or almost all of its original cultural elements. An example of this model is the case of Argentina which has open immigration policies and received a growing number of Chinese. These integrated in such a way that they have assimilated their hosting language, Spanish and the way of Argentinian living, doing business, and social life. The first generation of immigrants continues speaking their language. However, they left behind many of their cultural elements such as the way of living due to large spaces available in Argentina, communist policies of large families, the way they do business, and more (Council on Hemispheric Affairs, 2011).
Argentina is still quite a homogeneous culture. They receive most of their immigrants from Latin America, with relatively similar cultural elements. That is why Chinese immigrants in a way have little choice; they must assimilate their new culture as there are no other possibilities. London, however, is a cosmopolitan city and receives people from all over the world bringing with them a variety of cultures. In London, there is a case of melting pot model. People arrive with their culture, and they do not necessarily need to assimilate the host's cultural elements. Instead, they all live together in harmony, each according to their particular culture. A good example is of Muslims, who have their Mosques, they can wear their now vestments, and continue living their religion which is a cultural element very specific and represents their culture. They are respected, and they all live in harmony respecting each other's values and culture (Ready, 2015)
It is important to distinguish from the melting pot model that all the different cultural groups blend in such a way that without losing their cultural elements they do accept and adhere to the leading hosting culture. They do not lose their culture but they also adhere to the main hosting one, and in that way, they all become one culture. It is the clear example of London. There is another model, similar but not the same, which is also based on diversity of cultures, which is called multiculturalism. This one, rather than adhering all the different cultures into one, they want to make clear distinctions of their differences. There is no integration nor assimilation. What the multicultural model proposes is to respect each culture and so keep it that way, distinctly from the hosting culture. The result is simply ghettos of minority groups, division and hostilities. An example of multiculturalism is the case of American hostilities with different ethnic groups such as with the aborigine. As they promote distinctiveness, they are also promoting hostility. The intention of respecting each culture ends up with the various groups claiming their rights, not in harmony living all together but creating divisions between each other.
As the world becomes more cosmopolitan, some authors including (Berkes, 2010) believe that it results in a cultural pluralism. In this one, minority groups are allowed to maintain those cultural elements that distinguish them while living in greater society, while living and respecting the legislations of the hosting society. At the first look it appears similar to the melting pot model, however in the melting pot model, as it is the case of England, more specifically London, minority groups merge with the hosting culture up to the point that they do feel as belonging to that society as well, becoming a new culture. This model is exemplified in how there are members of parliament from all cultures, and they still feel like citizens of the United Kingdom culture. On the contrary, the pluralistic model is less homogeneous and emphasizes the differences. Cultures do not melt with one another; they do not merge. They remain distinct. An example of a pluralistic society can be Israel or Lebanon. Both have various religions living there, and they are tolerant of each other's views. However, they remain diversified.
The accommodation model is considered when a minority group accommodates to the main group or society. In other words, the individual view adjusts to the universal view. It is the model that intends to avoid extremist views. This accommodation model happens both ways. Both universal society and minority groups accommodate with each other to prevent extremist views, conflicts, etc. They seek a balance. An example of this model is how the American public tries very hard to accommodate to the different views. This model builds bridges of communication (Kim, 2007).
Finally, the Separatism model divides or separates groups according to religion, ethnicity and racial differences. There are many examples of this model. In South Africa between the Zulus and Xhosa, or even in the Soviet Union when it was dissolute into groups according to ethnic groups and that is how each group became a nation. Today, we have in the Middle East many refugee camps that are divided into religious camps due to the religious conflict inflicted by extremist Islamic groups who are persecuting Christians as well as other minority groups.
In the area where I live, I believe there is an accommodation model in place which led to a clear melting pot as most cultural groups live in harmony while they also live as citizens of the global culture. In my workplace, I can see the same models as in my local area. Everyone lives in private their culture while they also live as citizens of the primary culture. More specifically, in my workplace, people are respected in their differences, but each accommodates as well to the workplace culture. Ultimately we have a homogeneous group while keeping our personal differences.
References
Berkes, L. (2010). The Development and Meaning of the Concept of Multiculturalism. International Relations Quarterly.
Council on Hemispheric Affairs. July 26, 2011. Chinese Argentines and the Pace of Cultural Integration. Retrieved from http://www.coha.org/chinese-argentines-and-the-pace-of-cultural-integration/.
Kim, Young Yun. (2007). Ideology, Identity, and Intercultural Communication: An Analysis of Differing Academic Conceptions of Cultural Identity. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 36: 3, 237 — 253. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17475750701737181
Ready, D. (2015). London is a Melting Pot of Cultures, we should keep it this way. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/david-ready/london-multiculturalism_b_6533866.html
