proconsensus is available for consultation and assistance in matters intercultural and features experts in order to consult and to assist in the mediation of intercultural encounters, local and global, the universal and the particular

about the intercultural approach: 

1) the intercultural approach functions by taking into account three levels of systems, the personal, the structural, and the cultural and the process of interculturality occurs by focusing on three levesl of action: "de-centring," understanding the other's system, and negotiation between the systems

2) "what happens that is new in interaction if we persist in regarding the other person as alien and distant ... and if we defensively take ourselves as the norm ... or if we are content just to rub shoulders? cultural encounters do not need to be avoided if they can take place within a relationship of equals, without patronising sentimentality, and questions can be asked, for instance about our own cultural references and 'associations' ... if no one feels threatened with losing their identity or having to fit in with the one being foisted on them, it will doubtless be possible to work our way through all the surprising complexities inherent in encounters, procedures and life education which do not ignore differences and which start to build interculturality" (noelle de smet, "echec à l'échec," quel interculturel? 81 [1991]; trans. josé pascal da rocha)

3) in this brief exposé i touch on a most important and yet most undervalued and under-discussed -- or, if discussed then more often thank not unter den falschen vorzeichen -- issue, namely "interculturality / interculturalism." a professed cosmopolitan in the context of concepts and practices elaborated on by such thinkers as will kymlicka and anthony kwame appiah (see also tötösy "ethnizität", "ethnicity"), i view the issue of interculturality / interculturalism in an international context where europe is just one region of cultures with the omnipresence of exclusion. at the same time, the new europe -- i mean here the european union of 25 as well as the yet excluded romania, bulgaria, serbia, the ukraine, russia, etc. -- is in dire straights when it comes to intercultural communication in all its width and perspectives. in my view representing a regression, nationalisms in all areas whether culture or business are rising anew in europe (and everywhere else, for that matter). but first, what do i mean by interculturality/interculturalism? here is one possible definition, taken from my ten-point conceptualization of the emerging discipline of comparative cultural studies: "the second principle of comparative cultural studies is the theoretical as well as methodological postulate to move and to dialogue between cultures, languages, literatures, and disciplines. this is a crucial aspect of the framework, the approach as a whole, and its methodology. in other words, attention to other cultures -- that is, the comparative perspective -- is a basic and founding element and factor of the framework. the claim of emotional and intellectual primacy and subsequent institutional power of national cultures is untenable in this perspective. in sum, the built-in notions of exclusion and self-referentiality of single culture study and their result of rigidly defined disciplinary boundaries are notions against which comparative cultural studies offers an alternative as well as a parallel field of study. this inclusion extends to all other, all marginal, minority, border, and peripheral and it encompasses both form and substance. however, attention must be paid of the 'how' of any inclusionary approach, attestation, methodology, and ideology so as not to repeat the mistakes of eurocentrism and 'universalization' from a 'superior' eurocentric point of view. dialogue is the only solution" (tötösy, "from comparative literature" 259). 

clearly, the above definition in scholarship is based on explicit ideological and practical premises where interculturality/interculturalism stands in opposition to "essentialism" -- the concept that best describes the various forms and practices of self-referientiality, nationalism of varied types, and altogether its built-in exclusion of the other. and examples of essentialisms abound world wide and keep rising. the december 2005 riots in paris showed the misguided thinking and practice and the opportunities the french governments -- and french culture altogether, indeed -- missed when it comes to the integration of its immigrants and the situation is no different whether in germany, austria, or any other european country (with some positive attempts in place in the united kingdom, perhaps). whether policy making, education, government, or scholarship, intercultural communication -- a basic ingredient of integration -- is still unexplored in europe. here is a recent quote by a pakistani teacher in the us who returned to texas after an extended period of lecturing in europe, dr. shemeem burney abbas: "the attitude in europe is still very colonial ... it doesn't allow this kind of scholarship to flourish. there's more innovation here, more curiosity, more interest in learning about other cultures" (qtd. in applebome a20). and this is in the us where, as we know, things are not all wonderful and where racism and exclusion do exists; the substance of the matter is the comparison with the situation in europe, of course. why, for example in germany and in austria, the discourse in general and in scholarship does not allow for the designation of türkisch-österreicher/in or türkisch-deutsche(r); instead, the designation is migrant, a term and concept that effectively prohibits the recognition of a turkish person to be recognized and accepted as an austrian or german of turkish background. of course there are real "migrants", people who maintain residences in both countries and who spend 50% in one country and 50% in the other, but we are not speaking about this minority of commuters. rather, the issue is the integrative recognition of individuals and groups of immigrants of no matter what type who have an other cultural/linguistic background than the majority culture but have lived for a long period of time in their adopted country.

the concept and practice of multiculturalism is, today, often derided in germany and in austria and more recently also in the usa and in canada as a failed approach (in france, for example, the issue did not get even that far...; it should be noted, however, that there are substantial differences in concept and in the practice of multiculturalism between the us and canada, see kymlicka; see also tötösy, "ethnicity" ). what participants in this discourse do not see, in my opinion, is the fact that it is not the concept and practice of multiculturalism that are "at fault" but the "how" of its practice! in other words, if in the concept of multiculturalism it is a built-in requirement that the newcomer must be fluent and culturally adapted to german and to german culture in order to become a citizen (which does not necessarily mean acceptance, unfortunately) and this requirement is not paralleled with an inclusive attitude by the host culture/people and by integrative practices, multiculturalism is obviously not going to work. if, however, there is an inclusive attitude present and there are practices of integration at all levels of government, education, the work place, etc., in place, the newcomer becomes interested to integrate and will learn german.... unfortunately, what has happened in europe instead of integration is the ghettoization and exclusion of immigrants with the results of hostilities such as the paris situation of 2005. i am aware that in order to undo the thinking and practices in place across europe since the 1960s presents a difficult task, especially when there is a complete lack of thinking in the context of interculturalism and integrative multiculturalism in europe even in scholarship and at all levels of education. why, the basic idea of integration as a policy and practice on governmental levels has been begun only in the last couple of years in germany, for example.

or, let us consider the latent and often public anti-semitism and anti-roma in place in today's hungary, a newly admitted member of the european union (on this, see, e.g., publications by the munich-based scholar and journalist magdalena marsovszky; see also tötösy "imre kertész's nobel prize" <http://clcwebjournal.lib.purdue.edu/clcweb05-4/totosy05.html>) or the non-allowance of ethnic rights of romanian hungarians in romania, etc. while this rejection, implicitly and explicitly, of any other as a cultural attitude based in the said essentialist ideology has many curious, unfortunate, and unsavory results, perhaps the most recent and prominent example would be the objection by a substantial number of "true" and "authentic"  hungarians to the 2002 nobel prize in literature awarded to the holocaust survivor imre kertész (on this, see vasvári and tötösy). in sum, a europe that insists on the maintenance of national cultures and thus based in ideologies of essentialisms will remain mired in border disputes and exclusion with the obvious negative results including violence and the ghettoization of immigrants. a europe, however, that learns to accept the other and that adopts and practices interculturalism and integrative multiculturalism where a turkish individual becomes a turkish german (thus german), turkish-austrian (thus austrian), polish-french (thus french), or algerian-french (thus french), etc., individual who is not only fully integrated but at the same time is also accepted by society at large including on the street where he/she lives, would be a progressive europe. in my opinion, the ideology and practice of interculturalism remains of tantamount importance everywhere, including europe. europe would do itself great service to abandon all types and versions of nationalism and (cultural) essentialism and adopt, instead, interculturalism based on a regional approach instead of the sovereignty of nations approach. should this be possible, ethnic conflicts still in place in many european countries (e.g., romania, hungary, slovakia, czechia, the baltic states, etc.) would dissipate by design because instead of the emotional attachment to their own versions of history, all "nations" would become ethnic and cultural groups living side-by-side in a unified europe. (the above text appeared in an earlier version by steven tötösy de zepetnek, "interculturalism and europe," pädaktuell: fachzeitschrift der pädagogischen akademie der diözese linz 1 [2006]: 4-6)

works cited
appiah, kwame anthony. cosmopolitanism: ethics in a world of strangers. new york: w.w. norton, 2006.
applebome, peter. "our towns: a teacher straddling two worlds." the new york times (22 february 2006): a20.
kymlicka, will. politics in the vernacular: nationalism, multiculturalism, and citizenship. oxford: oxford up, 2001.
kymlicka, will. multicultural citizenship: a liberal theory of minority rights. 1995. oxford: oxford up, 2004.
kymlicka, will, ed. the rights of minority cultures. 1995. oxford: oxford up, 2004.
marsovszky, magdalena. "cultural essentialism and the exclusion of the other in post-1989 hungary." the new central and east european culture. ed. steven tötösy de zepetnek, carmen andras, and magdalena marsovszky. aachen: shaker verlag, 2006. 257-65.
marsovszky, magdalena. "imre kertész. einer von uns -- oder doch nicht? kulturkampf und identität in ungarn." mitteleuropa, europas mitte, europäische identität, literatur, geschichte , positionen. ed. barbara breysach. berlin: logos, 2003. 137-53.
tötösy de zepetnek, steven. "imre kertész's nobel prize, public discourse, and the media." clcweb: comparative literature and culture 7.4 (2005): <http://clcwebjournal.lib.purdue.edu/clcweb05-4/totosy05.html>.
tötösy de zepetnek, steven. "from comparative literature today toward comparative cultural studies." comparative literature and comparative cultural studies. ed. steven tötösy de zepetnek. west lafayette: purdue up, 2003. 235-67.
tötösy de zepetnek, steven. "ethnizität und zentrum/peripherie. deutschland, (östliches) mitteleuropa und das kanadische modell." kultur, identität, europa. über die schwierigkeiten und möglichkeiten einer konstruktion. ed. reinhold viehoff and rien t. segers. frankfurt: suhrkamp, 1999. 425-41.
tötösy de zepetnek, steven. "ethnicity and centre/periphery: cultural identity in germany and east central europe." culture, identity, europe. ed. rien t. segers. special issue of spiel: siegener periodicum zur internationalen empirischen literaturwissenschaft14 (1996): 38-49.
vasvári, louise o., and steven tötösy de zepetnek, eds. imre kertész and holocaust literature. west lafayette: purdue up, 2005.

please feel free to contact proconsensus for consultation and assistance