THE JOURNAL OF POLITICAL STUDIES
VOL. 1
MARCH 2014
ABSTRACTS
ARTICLES
NO. 3
THE AMPLIFYING EFFECT OF TIME-BASED BOUNDS Nathan Bruns 142
ON MULTICULTURALISM'S CRITIQUES
VVVVVOffered as a response to the individualistic liberalism advanced by Locke and Rawls, multiculturalism presumes the importance, benevolence, and continuity of religious groups. In practice, it empowers religious leaders to regulate particular aspects of their followers’ lives. The theory influences both government design and policy: multiculturalist notions are enshrined in section 27 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and religious leaders regulate marriage in India.1 However, multiculturalism is not without its critics. Liberal scholars extensively question the importance of multiculturalist theory and its application. Okin, among others, takes issue with bestowing upon religious leaders the power to regulate their followers’ lives, arguing that such a policy enshrines the subjugation and harm of particular groups within the traditional, patriarchal religious social structures and hierarchies.2 This paper will consider multiculturalism’s fundamental presumption of continuity of religious groups and their leaders’ relevance to those they claim to lead. In particular, the essay will analyze Scotland’s shift away from sectarianism and toward secularism with regard to multiculturalist education policies, finding that the empowered, increasingly isolated Christian religious leaders who no longer represent the views of much of the populace. Such a development empowers multiculturalism’s critics and indicates a flaw in its practicality over time, as it calls into question the value of an inflexible system that identifies individuals’ interest in an issue—here education—along a single, religious axis.