However, instead of tolerance, growing out of mutual respect, the policy of multiculturalism led to alienation. Some minorities who have created all the conditions for integration do not feel and do not even want to feel part of the British society. It was finally clear that one tolerance is not enough, as the newspapers emphasized: «The fruits of such super-tolerance are enjoyed by extremists, and it is in it that the roots of the July 7, 2005 bombings in London, the holy Jihad and the cult of the terrorist martyr» [Найт].
When a security conference was held in Munich, the report «Fear and Hope. New Identity Policy» was published in Great Britain [Lowles, Painter], which presents the results of a sociological study conducted by the Searchlight Educational Trust and devoted to the problem of nationalism and extremism, one of the most pressing problems to date, facing not only Great Britain, but also many countries in Europe. The authors of the report concluded that due to the increasingly obvious division of British society, caused by the unwillingness of immigrants to integrate, the problem of immigration in the UK has recently acquired a political character. At the same time, identification of a person on the basis of ethnic, cultural or confessional features becomes the main factor uniting people. The principle of dividing society into classes no longer plays such a role in the political life of the country and does not determine the political preferences of voters, as it was earlier; its place was taken by the principle of identity [Lowles, Painter].
Nowadays the UK immigration is perceived as one of the most significant problems, in the public consciousness it is firmly in second place after the economy. Sociological surveys show that the attitude of the British to immigration in recent years has undergone major changes. It can be argued that the era of multiculturalism in the form in which it existed over the past decades is coming to an end. The costs of multicultural policies have turned out to be too large, and this is becoming increasingly evident. That is the reason why the expert community in European countries is currently actively developing new models for the integration of immigrants, allowing them to be more successfully included in the host society.
Conclusion.
Speaking about the failure of the policy of multiculturalism in Russia, it is necessary to turn to an analysis of the possibility of building and the prerequisites for its implementation. One of the central problems associated with the prospect of implementing the policy of multiculturalism in Russia is the contradiction between the individual-liberal and collective interpretation of it. Today Russian legislation codifies the special rights of ethnic groups, but in Russian public opinion there is a strong opposition to the ethnization of social groups. It can be expected that with the growth of information openness and liberalization of public sentiments, the sympathy for individual self-determination and responsibility in Russian society will only increase, which will make it impossible to implement the policy of multiculturalism in Russian society as a strategy for the coexistence of self-determined ethnic groups.
The UK policy of multiculturalism led to alienation. Some minorities who have created all the conditions for integration do not feel and do not even want to feel part of the British society. The UK immigration is perceived as one of the most significant problems, in the public consciousness it is firmly in second place after the economy. Moreover, sociological surveys show that the attitude of the British to immigration in recent years has undergone major changes. Finally, the costs of multicultural policies have turned out to be too large, and this is becoming increasingly evident.
Consequently, it is possible to define multiculturalism in Britain and in Russia as a failure, although the reasons of the results are different. The main issue is whether researchers find an alternative to a multicultural project that does not justify itself. It seems that the stability and well-being of European states, Britain and Russia depend on the answer to this question both in the shortand long-term perspective.
Bibliography.
1 Воронков В. Мультикультурализм и деконструкция этнических границ // Мультикультурализм и трансформация постсоветских обществ. — М.: Буква, 2012.
2 Найт Р. Параллельные нации // Онлайн-ресурс. URL: news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/uk/newsid_1 704 000/1704695.stm. Просмотр от 05.
05.2017.
3 Состояние российского общества и исторические судьбы русской мечты // О чем мечтают россияне: аналит. доклад Ин-та социологии Рос. акад. наук // Институт социологии Российской академии наук.
4 Шнирельман В. А. Пороги толерантности: идеология и практика нового расизма. — М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2011.
5 Carl R. Islamists in the «rainbow» coalition // Society. — N.Y., 2008. Vol. 45, № 2. — P. 181−190.
6 Lowles N., Painter A. Fear and hope. The new politics of identity. A Searchlight Educational Trust project. — L., 2011.
