Multiculturalism

Definition

Multiculturalism is a fluid concept whose meaning has shifted alongside political, social, and educational transformations in the modern era. According to dictionaries and databases—in particular, EBSCO Knowledge Advantage—multiculturalism can commonly be defined as the coexistence of diverse cultural identities within a single society. However, the contemporary understanding of the term emerged from the post–World War II global reckoning with race, democracy, and human rights. [1] Multiculturalism, as it emerged in post-World War II in the United States, referred to the social philosophy, political framework and set of cultural practices that challenge the earlier histories of racial exclusion, segregation, and white supremacy. The framework argued for a vision of the United States as a nation of people from diverse backgrounds, rather than upholding white, European cultures and values as the standard or ideal. Following the aftermath of the Holocaust and the collapse of explicitly racist political regimes, liberal democracies (specifically, the United States) began to reject earlier systems of hierarchy that had long justified racial discrimination, colonialism, and exclusion. This ideological shift provided conditions for development of multiculturalism as normative framework—one that emphasized equality across race, ethnicity, religion, and other identity formations. Within this postwar context, multiculturalism gained traction as social philosophy and a political project. At the same time, in the United States, multiculturalism cannot be understood without reference to a long history of racial violence and exclusion, from African American enslavement to Japanese American internment to the forced removal of Indigenous peoples. The dramatic rise in immigration also challenged prevailing notions of what and who counts as “American,” prompting transformations in education, public culture, and political discourse. As of today, shifting perceptions of multiculturalism in American society continues to evolve as demographic change, migration, cultural movements, and global politics reshape how societies understand identity and belonging. Likewise, our group acknowledges that multiculturalism encompasses both the recognition of distinct cultural communities, as well as the active pursuit of cultural preservation, educational pedagogy, and equitable policies in order for them to flourish.

Pre-World War II Foundations

In the beginnings of pre-World War II foundations, the notion of multiculturalism as a widely accepted construct appeared to be nonexistent. More specifically, American education was defined by policies of segregation, exclusion, and forced assimilation. These policies were often defined by legacy racial hierarchy as well as the existing domination of White supremacy. Furthermore, schools at the time functioned as means of social control, often leading to them eliminating cultural differences rather than finding the value in them. For example, the 1906 San Francisco School Segregation Act further proved this point by mandating that people of Japanese, Korean, and Chinese descent had to attend a separate “Oriental School.” [2] This policy focused on Japanese students and sparked outrage at the institutionalization of Anti-Asian sentiment on the West Coast. This type of framing of Asian students as being fundamentally incapable of mingling with white society further aimed to reinforce the prevailing racial hierarchies. The outrage resulted in local protests and even international diplomatic tensions with Japan, ultimately leading to presidential intervention by Theodore Roosevelt, who served as President during the time.

Similarly, another example that serves to illustrate the lack of the word multiculturalism at the time is with the founding of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School (1879-1918). This demonstrated how education aimed to erase other non-white/Anglo-Saxon cultures, rather than respect different cultural identities. Carlisle Indian Industrial School became the first federally run boarding school for Native American students, particularly children, who were forcibly brought to assimilate into their culture. These children were ripped from their families, forbidden to speak to their families, and even had to make appearance changes such as cutting their hair and changing their outfits to conform to a more Anglo-Saxon appearance. There is even a famous quote by the founder, Richard Henry Pratt, who says the infamous motto, “Kill the Indian, Save the Man.” [3] This echoed the prevailing belief that any other cultures were obstacles to the progress of “Man.” This frames it as an us vs. them narrative, which is not something that the post-World War II world, in which “multiculturalism” exists, stands for. Carlisle and other institutions like it believed in the idea that democracy required uniformity in culture, something that is extremely important for a national identity in the United States. 

Both of these examples serve to examine the state of multiculturalism before World War II, where multiculturalism was not only underdeveloped but flat-out rejected by the people of the time. Educational systems reinforced these racial hierarchies, which have long since been deprecated at the expense of other cultural identities. As we will talk about more in the next sections, these regimes began to change post-World War II, after the Holocaust, as most educators began to reconsider their assumptions. Eventually, educators will increasingly embrace this idea of multiculturalism as part of a broad world shaped by commitments to democracy, unalienable human rights, and education that reflects anti-prejudice.

Figure 1. Carlisle Indian Industrial School Native Americans Students Picture (1879-1918). [4]

Post–World War II Transformation  (1945–1960s)

In the aftermath of World War II, educators increasingly embraced multiculturalism as part of a broader post-war liberal world order shaped by the moral judgements following the Holocaust. American schools became central sites for this transformation, as policymakers and scholars sought educational practices that could counter prejudice and strengthen democratic values. One of the most influential initiatives of this period was the Intergroup Education in Cooperating Schools Project (1945–1951), led by curriculum reformer Hilda Taba. The Intergroup Project trained teachers to address bias through cooperative learning, democratic participation, and critical self-reflection, emphasizing that education could play a vital role in rebuilding a more just society. [5]

Figure 2. The front page of Hilda Taba’s Intergroup Education Through the School Curriculum journal article published March 1946. [6]

The application of intergroup education varied across local contexts, responding to demographic shifts and cultural change. In Pittsburgh, teacher training emphasized prejudice reduction and preparing new immigrants for civic participation and citizenship. In contrast, New York City faced the rapid migration of Puerto Rican communities, prompting educators to reconsider prevailing assumptions about language, culture, and assimilation. The Workshop-Field Study in Puerto Rican Education, launched in 1948, represented a particularly innovative response. [7] By sending teachers to Puerto Rico, the program encouraged direct engagement with Puerto Rican history and culture while also prompting educators to reflect critically on their own biases. Its eventual national expansion reflected growing recognition that meaningful educational reform required understanding students’ cultural worlds rather than erasing them.

These postwar efforts marked an important shift away from earlier models of forced assimilation and toward valuing cultural difference within democratic education. However, while early multicultural initiatives focused primarily on reducing prejudice and promoting tolerance, the decades that followed would demand a more radical rethinking of equality and participation. In the years leading up to the formal Civil Rights Movement, Black activists pushed the nation to confront the limits of multiculturalism when it failed to address structural power. Rather than seeking inclusion within a dominant white norm, they demanded full and equal participation in American democracy—rejecting the long-standing “melting pot” ideal that required marginalized groups to abandon their languages, identities, and cultures in order to belong.

This redefinition was powerfully articulated in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1954), a landmark Supreme Court decision won by Thurgood Marshall, the head National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) lawyer, that declared racially segregated public schools unconstitutional. In his public 1954 interviews, Thurgood Marshall clearly acknowledges the integral nature of integrating public schools for the good of the law, American students, and broader human society. [8] In the footage, Marshall identifies the significance of the case, the impact on racial equality and civil rights, and its future implications on multicultural education in the United States. Beyond its legal implications, Brown advanced what historians describe as the “integrative ideal:” the belief that students from different racial backgrounds should learn not only alongside one another, but through shared educational experiences. [9] The decision challenged schools to broaden curricula, include historically marginalized perspectives, and dismantle systems in which race determined opportunity. Yet, as critics would later note, legal mandates alone did not guarantee meaningful or equitable implementation.

Figure 3. An Interview with Thurgood Marshall, the chief NAACP counsel for the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education landmark decision. The timestamp 0:00-0:20 seconds captures the core arguments by Thurgood Marshall and for racial equality within the American education system. [8]

The promise of democratic participation envisioned in Brown was further deepened through grassroots activism, most notably the Montgomery Bus Boycott (1955–1956). Organized and sustained by everyday Black community members—especially women such as Jo Ann Robinson—the boycott demonstrated the power of collective action to challenge institutional injustice. It revealed that social change did not depend solely on courts or policymakers, but on organized communities willing to disrupt unjust systems. As a result, the boycott became a national model for civic engagement and nonviolent resistance. As Black communities demanded structural change, other marginalized groups recognized their own struggles reflected in the broader civil rights movement. The Chicano Movement, led in part by César Chávez, fought for agricultural workers’ rights while also demanding cultural recognition and educational equity. [10]

Figure 4. The documentary Eyes on the Prize, published by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), sheds light on the American Civil Rights Movement through utilizing photos, videos, and interviews to document integral events throughout the movement. The timestamp 0:00-1:40 seconds describes the intent behind the 1955-1956 Montgomery Bus Boycott, showcasing interviews with notable civil rights activists, such as Rosa Parks, the “mother of the civil rights movement,” and Jo Ann Robinson, the president of the Women’s Political Council. [11]

Similarly, the American Indian Movement defended tribal sovereignty and insisted that schools teach Indigenous histories accurately and respectfully. These movements expanded the scope of multiculturalism, reinforcing the idea that educational equity required confronting historical erasure, institutional power, and systemic inequality. Taken together, these developments reframed multiculturalism as both a political and educational project—one that moved beyond interpersonal tolerance to challenge the structures shaping access, representation, and opportunity. The goal shifted from simple coexistence to democratization: creating schools and institutions that were inclusive, accountable, and reflective of America’s full diversity. Contemporary educational spaces, including ethnic studies programs and interdisciplinary courses such as Tufts University’s Race, Colonialism, and Diaspora, continue this legacy by encouraging critical engagement with culture, history, and power.

Civil Rights Era (1960s–1970s)

Heading into the 1960s and 1970s, multiculturalism became more legally structured and implemented throughout the Civil Rights Era. In a country where supposedly “all men are created equal” but minorities, specifically black individuals, continually dealt with police brutality and other severe segregation, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a necessary implementation to preserve aspects of multiculturalism through a focus on prohibiting discrimination against a multitude of identifiers such as race, gender, sex, and class, while advocating for equality among American citizens. [12] These focuses included the protection of the right to vote no matter one’s identity, also getting rid of literacy tests and other discriminatory procedures previously required for non-white individuals to vote. While the Voter’s Act of 1965 legitimized these protections later on, this initial aspect of inclusivity remained vital, as it was an official legal introduction to minorities obtaining the opportunity to participate in the political sphere. Other focuses included outlawing racial segregation in schools, colleges, and other public and private institutions, responding to the lack of support in the educational, economic, and social fields non-white individuals faced, prior to the act. Moreover, the act prohibited discrimination legally, it did not necessarily mean that these biases disappeared socially; nevertheless, the act and the Civil Rights Movement, as a whole, played a pivotal role in the start of creating more space for federal civil rights initiatives to be put in place, such as the DEI (or Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) institutions. The implementation of these acts and development of movements, which protected the Black community, opened the door for other minority communities to advocate for and preserve their rights as Americans.

To expand on the aforementioned example of the Chicano Movement, beginning in the early 1960s, the movement aimed to advocate for Chicano and Latino individuals on their rights against structural racism in society and the working sphere. Participants worked to preserve cultural aspects, fight for labor rights and push back against discrimination through civil walk out protests, farmworker strikes, music, and art. [13]

Figure 5. This image captures Cesar Chavez, co-founder of the United Farm Workers (UFM), urging the resignation of a state official, reflecting broader efforts that eventually led to landmark labor protections and other significant legislation protecting workers’ rights. [14]

1990s–Present

By the 1990s, multiculturalism had evolved beyond the surface-level inclusion of cultural holidays, foods, and festivals in classroom spaces. Educators, scholars, and activists increasingly argued that such symbolic gestures, while well intentioned, failed to address the deeper structures shaping inequality in American society. As a result, multicultural education began to engage more directly with questions of power, privilege, and systemic exclusion. Contemporary understandings of multiculturalism now emphasize an intersectional framework—one that recognizes how race, class, gender, language, immigration status, and ability intersect to shape lived experience. Recent racial justice movements have made the urgency of this expanded vision unmistakably visible, pushing multiculturalism from theory into active political and educational practice.

The Stop Asian Hate movement offers a clear example of this shift toward structural analysis. Emerging in response to a sharp rise in anti-Asian violence during the 2019 COVID pandemic, the movement highlights how long-standing racial stereotypes—such as the “Yellow Peril” narrative and the model minority myth—continue to position Asian Americans as perpetual outsiders. [15] Rather than framing inclusion as cultural recognition alone, activists emphasize cross-racial solidarity and collective resistance to white supremacy. In doing so, Stop Asian Hate reframes multiculturalism as a commitment to dismantling the ideologies and institutions that sustain racialized violence, rather than merely celebrating difference. Notably, college students have also adopted positions opposing Stop Asian Hate; likewise, UCLA students developed a video in 2021 centered on the Stop Asian Hate movement, providing Asian American athletes a platform to proudly share their identities while standing against prejudice and encouraging solidarity and social action. [16] Media and newspaper sources, such as the TIMES Magazine, also acknowledge the hateful actions taken against Asian Americans, conducting intimate interviews in 2021 with Asian American families whose family members have survived hate incidents. [17] The TIME interviews highlight the personal narratives of Asian Americans whose emotional and physical health has been tremendously impacted, giving impact to the real, voiced experiences of individuals while spreading awareness about hate and anti-multicultural discrimination.

Figure 6. In 2021, the University of California Los Angelos (UCLA) Athletics Department recorded a ‘Stop Asian Hate’ campaign video with Asian American-identifying athletes at UCLA, uplifting Asian American identities and affirming the value of Asian American presence in the United States. [16]

Figure 7. In 2021, TIME Magazine produced a series of interviews with victims of anti-Asian American violence and their family members. [17]

A similar intervention can be seen in the Black Lives Matter movement, which challenges the assumption that diversity and representation are sufficient to produce racial justice. Gaining momentum in August 2014 in Missouri, following the police shooting of African American teen, Mike Brown, [18], the Black Lives Matter movement draws attention to police brutality, mass incarceration, and persistent economic inequality, BLM exposes the limits of multiculturalism when it fails to confront systemic power. The movement has prompted schools and other institutions to reevaluate curriculum design, hiring practices, disciplinary policies, and the role of policing in educational spaces. In this way, Black Lives Matter reframes multiculturalism as a transformational project—one that demands structural change and historical accountability rather than symbolic inclusion.

Despite their impact, both movements have encountered significant resistance. Critics frequently label these efforts as divisive or politically extreme, revealing the discomfort that arises when multiculturalism challenges entrenched hierarchies and long-standing narratives of national unity. This backlash underscores a persistent tension in American society: the struggle to reconcile ideals of inclusion with the realities of inequality. Ultimately, these debates demonstrate that multiculturalism remains an ongoing, contested process. A process that continues to shape how the United States understands democracy, justice, and belonging. 

Currently, the concept of multiculturalism is transforming on a global scale, with the media, transnational movements, and geographic migrations reshaping how individuals and groups discover their own identities. The future of multiculturalism lies not only in the hands of educators and academics, but also in the hands of students, parents, policymakers, and humanity as a collective. Anchored in history, rigorous academic analysis, and lived struggle, multiculturalism can move beyond acknowledgment to become a practice of democratic transformation. Likewise, each generation upholds a responsibility to engage with ideals of equity and collective belonging while multiculturalism evolves as both a social practice and an educational, policy-driven project.

Countermovements & Challenges

Today, while there remains great emphasis on the appreciation of distinct peoples, cultures, and the integration of multiculturalism into society, altogether, there have been several pushbacks. These criticisms, in turn, make it difficult to maintain this collective value of multicultural appreciation, particularly within the legal system. For instance, DEI (or Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives first introduced during the Civil Rights era have been stripped away under Donald Trump’s 2025 presidency. The executive decision to remove DEI initiatives created a shift back into merit based decisions putting civil and disability rights at risk for individuals, especially for minority groups. [19] Additionally, this discriminatory approach diminishes representation in places, such as like the work force and in media, which will eventually erase the multi-dimensional perspective of preserving and celebrating the unique stories of people from different backgrounds that make up our community and culture today. Moreover, with regard to the topic of visibility, there have been tens of thousands of books banned within American school libraries since 2021, allowing for the normalization of censorship, and hence, taking voices away from authors in demographics viewed as different or as threats to traditional American standards. [20] Other forms of censorship include the Don’t Say Gay Bill. The 2021 bill prohibited lessons, as well as general discussions on gender and sexual orientation in schools, increasing stigma on the queer community. [21] It is crucial to investigate recent instances of reflect anti-multiculturalist values and criticisms, as well as actively dismantle them in order to eliminate monolithic views regarding the social and political perspectives of ongoing struggles within marginalized communities. Otherwise, the representation and diversity that build the foundation of our democratic ideals will continue to be unseen, unprotected, and ultimately buried.

Figure 9. Trump signs an Executive Order to abolish DEI programs in the military and work force in January 2025. [22]

Additional Resources

Reflecting on the mid-1950s-late 1960s Civil Rights Movement, critiques such as those offered by Malcolm X—who sharply questioned the slow and superficial implementation of desegregation after Brown—serve as reminders that multicultural ideals must be accompanied by sustained structural change to achieve their democratic promise. To further demonstrate his stance, a 1963 interview with Malcom X has been included to reaffirm his skepticism over the 1954 Brown v. Board decision and the lack of accountability from white politicians and the general white public, in neglecting structural realities. [23] This 1963 interview with Malcom X hosted by C-Span’s American History TV acknowledges the shortcomings of post-World War II multicultural education.

Figure 9. The 1963 American History TV interview with a University of California Berkley student about the state of race relations in the United States and the progression of the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision. [23]

References

1. EBSCO. “Multiculturalism | Research Starters | EBSCO Research.” Accessed December 19, 2025. https://www.ebsco.com.
2. Eng, Aimee. The Japanese Question: San Francisco Education in 1906. Case 2006-3. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, School of Education, December 14, 2006. PDF file, 11 pp. https://caselib.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/cases/Eng_case.pdf.
3. National Park Service. “The Carlisle Indian Industrial School: Assimilation with Education after the Indian Wars (Teaching with Historic Places).” U.S. Department of the Interior. Accessed December 18, 2025. https://www.nps.gov/articles/the-carlisle-indian-industrial-school-assimilation-with-education-after-the-indian-wars-teaching-with-historic-places.htm
4. “Carlisle Indian Industrial School History.” Accessed December 19, 2025. https://home.epix.net/~landis/histry.html.
5. Johnson, Lauri D.,  and Yoon K. Pak. “Teaching for Diversity: Intercultural and Intergroup Education in the Public Schools, 1920s to 1970s.” Review of Research in Education 43, no. 1 (2019): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821127.
6. Taba, Hilda, and Howard E. Wilson. “Intergroup Education Through the School Curriculum.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 244, no. 1 (1946): 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271624624400104.
7. Bradley, Akirah. “A Time to A Time to Intervene: A Historical Overview of Pedagogical Responses to an Unjust Society.” The Vermont Connection, January 2007. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1216&context=tvc. 
8. Witnify, dir. Thurgood Marshall Interview Following 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education. 2022. 0:00-0:20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skBj26mHzcE.
9. Wilkinson III, J. Harvie. “The Law of Civil Rights and the Dangers of Separatism in Multicultural America.” Stanford Law Review 47, no. 5 (1995).
10. López, Ian F. Haney, and Ian F. Haney Lopez. “Protest, Repression, and Race: Legal Violence and the Chicano Movement.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 150, no. 1 (2001): 205. https://doi.org/10.2307/3312916.
11. Public Broadcasting Service, dir. Eyes on the Prize: Montgomery Bus Boycott (Pepsi Edition). YouTube, 1955. 0:00-1:40. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KXDIxGJSwE&t=1s.
12. Back, Christine J. “The Civil Rights Act of 1964: An Overview”. congress.gov library of Congress. December 18, 2025. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46534.
13. El Movimiento: “The Chicano Movement by Identity in the United States”. September 23, 2021.https://prologue.blogs.archives.gov/2021/09/23/el-movimiento-the-chicano-movement-and-hispanic-identity-in-the-united-states/ 
14. Pao, Maureen. “Cesar Chavez: The Life Behind A Legacy Of Farm Labor Rights.” National. NPR, August 12, 2016. https://www.npr.org/2016/08/02/488428577/cesar-chavez-the-life-behind-a-legacy-of-farm-labor-rights.
15. Kulkarni, Manjusha P. “Stopping AAPI Hate: COVID-19 Related Racism and Discrimination Against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, Its Origins, Our History and Avenues for Redress.” Asian Pacific American Law Journal 26, no. 1 (2023): 28. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48743279.
16. UCLA, Athletics, dir. – YouTube. University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), 2021. 0:00-1:32. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ELqkkC2pz0.
17. Lau, Tommy, Vilma Kari, Chui Fong Eng, Sung Family, and Carl Chan. “ Anti-Asian Hate: A Conversation with Families | TIME.” 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPvc2ZVYH6E.
18. BLACK LIVES MATTER. 2017; Faith in Action: A Handbook for Activists Advocates and Allies, n.d. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1tm7gsm.26.
19. Imbrogno, Robin. “The State of DEI Initiatives in 2025.” The Human Resource Consulting Group, Jun 11, 2025. https://www.hr-consulting-group.com/hr-news/the-state-of-dei-programs.
20. PEN America. “Banned in the USA: Rising School Book Bans Threaten Free Expression and Students’ First Amendment Rights” April 11, 2024. https://pen.org/report/banned-in-the-usa-rising-bans-threaten-1a/#heading-0.
21. Diaz, Jaclyn. “Florida’s Governor Signs Controversial Law Opponents Dubbed ‘Don’t Say Gay.’” NPR, March 28, 2022. www.npr.org/2022/03/28/1089221657/dont-say-gay-florida-desantis.
22. Luhby, Tami and Marsh, Rene. “Trump signs executive order aimed at weakening federal employee protections.” CNN. January 21, 2025. https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/20/politics/federal-employee-protections-trump-executive-order.
23. Malcolm X Interview (1963). American History TV C-Span, n.d. 0:00-39:54. Accessed December 17, 2025. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n88ONdIISV4&t=246s.

Contributions

Arav Sachdeva

Naima Ellis-Daniels

Niko Yanai