Open Forum 2012 - Multiculturalism has foundered. what next?

Welcome to this open session here at Davos. My name is Dan Shapiro, I am the founder and director of The Harvard International Negotiation Program. The focus of our work is how you deal with the emotional and the identity based dimensions of conflict and negotiation. It is an honor to be here today with all of you and with our panelists as well. The topic of our session today is on Multiculturalism. And the idea that's it's more than just this abstract concept that's out there, but it's really about you and me and all of us and how we can interact most effectively together. And over the course of the past few days here at Davos, the conversations within the World Economic Forum discussions, there's been a strong undercurrent of conversation around how you deal with these issues of multiculturalism. How on the one hand, our world is more interconnected than ever with technology, globalization, economically and so on. Yet at the same time weג€™re seeing increased fragmentation within societies, increased tensions at the international levels. What's going on and what can be done about it? That's what our subject will actually be today. So before we hear from our distinguished panel and before I even introduce this panel, we have a wonderful opportunity today to hear from a global leader who I admire deeply. I also consider him a friend. So someone who from personal experience I recognize as someone who is just passionate about the world and I think the world recognizes that as well. Please join me in welcoming His Royal Highness Haakon, the Crown Prince of Norway. Thank you Dan, that was very nice, I enjoyed that. That was great by the way. You should ask him after when there is a Q&A, you should ask him about negotiation techniques, he is like incredible in negotiations. Okay, I'm in a school, kind of like this. It's great to be back by the way, I was here a few years back doing a session. I was at a school and we were hearing from kids, 16 year old, 15 year olds. I do that quite a lot. I go to schools and I listen to the insights of the young people and it's amazing what they have to offer and we have so much to learn. So it's always energizing for me. Okay, so these kids are lining up one after the other to tell their stories. This girl comes up to the mic and she is wearing a hijab, and she says, I have a friend in another school and there was a boy there, a Jewish boy that was bullied and it was bad, it was really bad. Then the Gaza conflict started and it got worse. She said that her friend decided to start going or being together with this boy during recess, during the breaks, but also on the way to and back from school. And that really improved the situation. Now of course her friends got a lot of heat for it from her peers, but it really improved the situation. It dawned on me that this girl had actually unraveled, figured out a way of solving a really complex problem that we in the grown up world are not really able to do. So in this example, multiculturalism is both successful and failing, foundering if you will. I had to look that word up, I didn't know what it meant. So we've got to be able to deal with the Reality, where multiculturalism in parallel at the same time is successful and at times it's failing. Now let me just tell you about or point out a few things. Through evolution, we have learnt how to tackle close relations, right? Family, friends, the people around us our tribe, right? Through evolution that has been what we have needed to survive, to prosper and to be successful. So we are good at these close relations, of being responsible in these close relations. But if you go into the Congress Center here or in Davos, in one day we meet more people than some of our predecessors far back met in an entire lifetime, right? Now the question is how would we be able to adapt to a world that is much more complex? We all have virtual relationships with millions of people. Will we be able to be responsible to such a large group? Are we able to react to the complex reality that we are exposed to in a constructive manner that will lead to a better world? In short, will we be able to be responsible global citizens? Now, it's important to remember that we have so much more in common as human beings then what separates us. We have so much more in common. A couple of years back, I attended a lecture by MIT professor, Eric Lander. He is one of the leading experts of the human genome. He told us some astonishing and quite eye opening facts. Only one thousandth of our human genome separates us. Genetically, we are 99.9% the same. At same point the human species counted around 10,000 individuals. 10,000 individuals worldwide, that's it. So we're all their descendants. We have much, much, much more in common than what separates us. The human genome consists of around three billion building blocks. Three billion. Up till now researchers have found four that determine skin color. Professor Lander estimates that there are between ten and 12 in all. Ten or 12 out of three billion, it's nothing. Now I wanted to also just mention that there's a lot of work being done on multiple identities. These are ideas by Markenson and (inaudible), the economist and the philosopher and many others. So multiple identities means that, Like, take me for instance, right? I'm a man, I have children, I like hip hop. I have a beard, that too. I'm Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, British and German. So the idea is we have all these multiple identities. And it's possible for you to strengthen several of these identities at the same time. It's not like if you're strengthening one, like if I'm becoming more Swedish, then I'm becoming less Norwegian. It's not like that. I can become more Swedish and more Norwegian at the same time. Right, so that's multiplied identities. So I would slightly advise against the idea of a melting pot. I would say what we would probably be better off thinking about, is how we live or how we act so that we show mutual respect and peaceful coexistence or maybe even compassionate coexistence. Forgive me, I just came from a session on the art and science of happiness. So I'm a little bit sort of on that track. Okay, Apier says, he's a philosopher, it is crucial to remember always, that we are not simply black or white or yellow or brown, gay or straight or bisexual, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist or confusion. But we are also brothers and sisters, parents and children, liberals, conservatives and leftists, teachers and lawyers and alter makers and gardeners, friends of the padres and the brumes, amateurs of grand rock and lovers of Wagner, movie buffs, MTV-holics, mystery readers, surfers and singers, poets and pet lovers, students and teachers, friends and lovers. Archbishop Tutu, the Archbishop Emeritus, Desmond Tutu says, God is really, actually just trying to teach us one lesson. I think he said that here when he was doing his session here. That we are all part of the same family. That's the lesson he's trying to teach us. Now if we really understood this lesson, there would not be war he says. There would not be starvation because we would not drop bombs on our sister and we would not let our brother starve. We can bring the world forward. Thank you for your attention. Thank you Haakon and I hope I proved myself right about Haakon. So I'd now like to introduce the distinguished panel joining us today, who will provide a variety of different perspectives on this question of multiculturism and with very fascinating, incredible backgrounds and experience. Let me introduce them not in sequence here but in alphabetical order, actually. With Cesar Conde, who is president of Univision Networks in the United States. Rosie Dasker, who is an author in the United Kingdom and is writing a book. Her book's just about to come out on issues of multiculturalism. Phillip Jennings, who is General Secretary of Uniglobal Union. And then we have Tumi Mkgabo, founder and executive director of Africa World Wide Media and also a young global leader with the World Economic Forum. We have Demet Mutlu, who is founder and chief executive officer of Trendyol. Sorry I should say Trendyol.com in Turkey and also a global shaper with the World Economic Forum. We have Lukas Reimann, a member of the National Council in the Swiss People's Party. And finally we have Mel Young who is president of the Homeless World Cup which is based in the United Kingdom. So let's start, Cesar, your perspectives. So, what's impeding multiculturalism from really taking hold? If we take, if one would agree with what the forum is suggesting, that multiculturism is floundering, it's in trouble in some sort of way, what's the problem and what can be done about it from your perspective? Sure. Thank you Dan and thank you for the invitation. You know, I would begin by saying that I think any discussion on multiculturalism depends on how one defines multiculturalism. I think if one defines it as I do, a society where empowered individuals choose to adopt part of the culture of the host society. But at the same time, proactively chose to be part of their ethnicity, part of their culture in the like, while at the same time living within a similar value system. In our case in the United States, democracy, freedom and such. I would argue that the United States is seeing a society where multiculturism is very successful and it's part of our DNA. I would give you a wonderful case study, case example the Hispanic or Latin American immigrant community in the United States, today is the largest minority group in the United States it's over 50 million individuals. We are one in six of the entire US population. I think that this case study is interesting because there's three reasons why it's been successful. I think one is because of its size. You know, its one in six of all of America. Second is because of its growth rate. Even though it's coming off a big base, it's growing exponentially, both from emigration as well as from birth rate. I think the third reason, it's the impact that it has had on the society. It's had both social, cultural, economic and certainly political implications. One quick anecdote, I think most people in the United States would argue that the Hispanic or the Latino vote is going to be the driving or the swing vote as to who comes out in the US Presidency in November of 2012. So I think a very good example of where multiculturalism has worked and is at the core of our American society. -Great. I think we want to dig further, and a little bit try and understand, is that a model that can be replicated in other places? What are the downfalls and strengths of that kind of model? Right now, the goal is just to get a short snapshot from each of our panelists here. Let's move on now to Rosie, please. Hi. I have been living in New York for the last six years. I'm the author of a book called A Small Fortune. Dan described it as about multicultural issues. Iג€™d like to say it's not exactly, it's a novel and it's a story and it's about the British-Pakistani community. I was born in Britain to a Pakistani father and a British mother and that really inspires the story. So it's a personal story but I guess I've been invited as an example of someone from a multicultural background. I really don't like the term multicultural. I feel it's freighted with all sorts of liberal baggage and right wing baggage. I think it would be nice if we could discuss what we mean by that, what we mean by multiculturism. But that aside, I've been living in New York for the last six years which is of course a perfect example of a very successful multicultural place. I don't believe that multiculturalism is in trouble, I don't believe it's a problem. And I'm interested to hear what the audience think. Great, thank you. And Phillip? I'm here. -Yes, there you are, you moved on me. I'm still here. -Please. Okay, good afternoon everybody or as we like to say in Nyon... My name is Phillip Jennings, I'm a union leader. As an organization, we see a world diversity, we see a diverse world which is the norm. Switzerland is a diverse country. I will never forget the time I went with my football team in Nyon and we spent a weekend in Moutiertown. It was on that occasion, I began to discover this whole sense of Rֳ¶schtigraben which I still struggle with, but it's a sign of diversity, multiculturalism, multilingualism and even if we couldnג€™t speak together, we yodeled famously together. In my job, my organization stands against discrimination. And we defend diversity. We are open to all cultures, religions, people of gender, *** orientation. At the same time weג€™re fighting tolerance in the workplace. I want a workplace free from fear. This whole question seems to go in ebbs and flows. Sometimes when political parties don't have a coherent economic project, they begin to move into other areas. We are living through a very special period in our economic history. 225 million people unemployed, one in two on a vulnerable contract, 80 million young people unemployed, inequality which weג€™ve not seen since the 1920's. Weג€™re living the Great Gatsby time again. This feeds into the conversation of hate, of scapegoating that it's someone else's fault. And that feeds into a political discourse which means these questions of diversity and tolerance become threatened. My message to everybody here is, that the way this world has been run, is not leading to cohesive societies. That it's not enough to take care of that 1%, but that 99% needs to have moments of hope, decent work, a decent school and decent education, and a home and that's not happening. I will fight that in my organization where-ever it shows it's face. I live in a diverse country, I'm proud of the traditions of this country, and I think many of the things which happen in this country which I hope to talk about in the local communes, is a sign of strength. Thank you. Tumi? Thank you very much, Dan. I have to say it sounds fascinating so you and I need to talk a little bit about your experience and what did you call it, Rֳ¶stigraben? Rֳ¶schtigraben. -Yeah. No later, later. I think one of the challenges for me, I'm a South African, and I'm sure many of you are familiar with our history. I'm very, very wary of labeling, I think Bruce is quite right, the label is where things tend to come undone. In my view, hereג€™s the reality. The reality is that we no longer live in an environment where weג€™re all isolated in little pockets around the world and have very rare occasion to exchange or meet each other. The truth of the matter is, that people talk to each other on a continual basis, particularly thank you very much to mobile telephony and technology. So theyג€™re all talking to each other, theyג€™re all trading with each other, theyג€™re all travelling across borders and this is the reality. It's not a question of whether this is going to happen, this is the world in which we live. So for me the question is very, very Simple. It's not about whether we should or whether it's working or not. This is where we are at. How do we ensure that, as the Crown Prince indicated earlier, that we live in a society and in a community and in an environment or a country in which people's views are respected, in which people's views are tolerated and in which we can coexist? Nobody is saying you have to suddenly meld yourself and become one big blob and all look the same, sound the same. Certainly not. The reality is that what makes us exciting, what makes us unique, what makes us interesting is that weג€™re different. Can you imagine if we all sat here and looked exactly the same, thought the same and sounded the same? There wouldnג€™t be much point would there? Anyway, I look forward to hearing a little bit more about this because I think it's a fundamental shift in the way we approach the subject, that I think this is where a lot of this comes undone, Dan. Thank you. Please Demet. As a Turkish Muslim female, I've lived in Europe, in Asia and in the United States. It's been a different experience in the countries that I've lived in and studied in and worked in. So what I found is that I also don't like the word multiculturalism. I don't think its thinking about the Multiculturalism, but it's about everyone just understanding each other and having the open dialogue. What I found and what the truth is, is that with the technology, everyone is connected. You can connect with anyone all around the world and this is just going to increase more and more. So before when we thought about technology, we thought that it would be like sci-fi and everyone would be in their rooms alone and you would just connect with the world in your room and just study by yourself. But its actually been the opposite. It's been connecting people all around the world so with this and with the way that the world is evolving, we all have to cope with this. Everyone is the same, 99.1% of us is, the prince had mentioned, weג€™re just about the same people. So the government, societies and companies and individuals that embrace this, those are the only ones that are going to be successful. So even now in business, when we see the successful companies, it's successful companies that have embraced multiculturalism. Leaders and within these firms, whether you're an entrepreneur, whether you're a business leader, whether you're within a corporate, it's those that are successful that have embraced this. So with the diversity and understanding consumerism in the world, the only way it is, is really to embrace it. So if you want to survive as a government, a person, a society or as a company, you really have to embrace all of this. Thank you and Lukas, please. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much as well. Thank you very much for the kind invitation. I shall be speaking in German. On multiculturalism, well, what I can say is that on the one hand it's been said it depends on the definition. Switzerland is a wonderful multicultural country, four different languages, four different cultures, it works, people live together. We have a very large share of foreigners, one of the largest in the whole world and it works. But my criticism starts in what has happened over the past few years, there's been indifference of the politicians and politics vis-ֳ -vis of immigration. Politicians said, well our doors are open, we are multicultural. We are open for each and everybody. We are an open and a tolerant society and there are a number of values. Democratic society has existed for a long time and all of a sudden, we are faced with immigration, with people coming into our country that do not appreciate our society, do not appreciate our values. Then this becomes dangerous for our liberal, democratic and open society. Having said this, I'm convinced that politicians have to act against this in order to defend our multiculturalism. Making sure that those who want a parallel society, they should not be admitted to this country. Thank you. We will move on then. We will move on then to our final panelist, Mel. Please. Good afternoon. Thank you Dan, it's nice to be here, nice to meet you and nice to be in Switzerland. I'd just like to start my short contribution by asking you a question. Anybody in the room think homelessness is a good idea? Okay, nobody. So I've been working with homeless people since 1993 and I've asked this question to many audiences, rich and poor, young and old all over the world. And never once in all that time since 1993 has anybody thought it was a good idea. Yet there are a hundred million people homeless throughout the world, in every country in the world and yet we still have it. I will maintain you can't have a sustainable society or a multiculturalism indeed, when youג€™ve got that level of homelessness. Because what happens is, is that these people are excluded from society. I sometimes describe in writing as the invisible people, they become invisible. Research has been done on this, in terms of people walking along the road, going to work every morning and a month later they are asked what they saw in the street. Around 90% of the people never saw the homeless person sitting in the street despite walking past them all the time. They become invisible. When I was in San Francisco recently, and in the US you have three and a half million people on the streets, by the way, and that's the richest country in the world, I was amazed at the number of people who were sleeping in the streets in San Francisco. I spoke to my friends who were good, nice people middle class. I said, it's terrible the homeless people in the center of your city. They said, homeless people? Are they there? Oh yeah, theyג€™re kind of cool. I went, it's not going to be cool, it's not an expression that can possibly be applied because they shouldnג€™t be there at all. But the problem is theyג€™ve been there so long, they become part of the landscape and it becomes acceptable. To me it's just not acceptable and you can't ever call yourself a society that is inclusive when you have that. And it's dangerous as well. Because what happens inevitably with that level of exclusion and people not being able to participate, is you'll have explosions of violence or people will get sick and then you will get sick. So it's in nobody's interest at all to have homelessness. Maybe later in the session we will talk about how we can deal with this. I run an organization called The Homeless World Cup. And what we simply do, we work in 80 countries, we make the homeless people visible. So we put them in football tops, they represent the country, some of you may know about it, Switzerland participates. And as a result, a lot of them change their lives forever. So there are lots of interventions that are really simple that we can make if we want, to create our society better. But first of all we have to see people in the first place and then do something about it. Thank you. So I thank you all. Weג€™ve heard a lot so far. First of all, one big point I heard was multiculturalism de facto, it is here. So our world has changed. It's not a question of whether we are going to be living in a multicultural world or not. It's here. It's in front of us right now. Second big point I heard was what does this word actually mean? What do we want it to mean pragmatically, what's useful in the world right now? I'd like to open it up to all of you and then hopefully to hear from all of you in our audience, questions that you might have as well. But first, what is your thinking very concretely, very practically, how might our world improve its way of dealing more effectively with differences of culture, differences of identity? What can be done? Youג€™ve offered some examples, but what's your thinking very concretely, for Switzerland, for really the world? Can I? -Yes, please. Thank you. Just to get the ball rolling, coming out of the Apartheid era in South Africa, we instituted a program called the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I'm sure some of you may be aware of that process. Now there is a lot of criticism said about whether it worked or whether it didnג€™t work or what was missing and so on. But I think the issue here is the principal of the process. In other words, you open up a dialogue that doesnג€™t point fingers and say, you were bad, naughty, you go to jail. You were nice and good, you stay at home and you, weג€™re not sure about so weג€™ll keep you there for a minute. It's not that kind of conversation. What it certainly did for our country was that it forced us to have conversations. It forced the people who were the persecutors in South Africa's instance, to actually come clean without the fear that they were going to leave the building and somebody was going to attack them for what they had done in what anybody can say was an appalling and diabolical situation. Similarly, those who were predominantly black or freedom fighters also performed some horrendous acts of *** and so on and it allowed them the very same experience. What was the net result? We could recognize that okay, these are our historical differences, we had issues about this, but now here's a point or a moment for us to move on and I'm always curious, you know, when I see people using the fact that we're different as a negative rather than saying, what happens if we all sit here and have dinner together or have conversations together and begin to understand what the other person's perspective is. It's not about assimilating it. It's not about agreeing with it. It's simply about saying, who are you? Where do you come from? What influences the way you view the world? What influences the decisions that you make? And in every time when I have had prejudices and actually sat down with people and had conversations like that with them, the net result has been exactly again what the crown prince alluded to, that we were more similar than we were different. And I think that's what I find so remarkable because we keep learning this lesson and yet we don't learn the lesson and it's quite interesting. If I may to my colleague on the panel here, frankly, I don't see how stopping a person coming into a country stops them influencing you in anyway whatsoever. Because technologically speaking, as an African for years, the only way we had information about the rest of the world was through television. What has been the net result? Look across the African continent, we wear Levi jeans, we wear All-star shoes, we listen to hip-hop, we love Akon. We think Norwegians are cool because they helped us during Apartheid. All of this happened not because the Norwegians came over the border and said we're going to hang out with you, it was because we had access to information about them, so the net result is that that's not what's going to stop people being influenced by external factors. Yes, you may physically be able to prevent them from doing so, but you don't stop the influence and the problem is if you don't have that influence happening in a context where there is somebody who can help you understand it, you cause conflict. Well, I would agree in principal that that conversation is necessary, the dialogue is necessary. Let me just give you a specific example from Switzerland. I think if someone wants to become a resident here then they need to be able to speak one of the official languages otherwise they shouldn't get a resident permit. If they want to come and live in this country, then it's very important for integration, for conversation, for them to be capable of speaking a language. The second point relates to specific individuals who have an increasing number of such individuals in Europe who immigrated here and did not facilitate such a conversation. I'd be happy to sit down with you for hours on end to talk about politics and the state of the world. But if it was a preacher who would simply condemn me and my position, then that wouldn't be such a pleasure for me. I think that if they're individuals who slightly reject, but who still want to live here, then you don't have that kind of conversation you're talking about. So in a way what I'm hearing in part is how does one preserve a certain identity, a certain culture and yet allow for the integration of other cultures, other groups? And it seems like an essential tension around this question of multiculturalism. Yes, Rosie, I saw you first. I wanted to engage with Lukas's initial points about, I feel like he describes Switzerland having more foreigners than any other countries in the world and I'm interested in discussing the notion of fear. The tipping point at which tolerance and toleration of the other, of other cultures who bring, as my colleague mentioned, amazing opportunities to the country in which they take up residence, they build business, et cetera, et cetera. The point at which, and maybe Lukas can talk about that, that toleration and embracing of the other becomes too much and I think that's the critical point and maybe we can discuss that tipping point because there's a lot of rhetoric about the flood of, let's talk about Muslims, the fear of Urabia taking over Europe, I think that's a very big and worrying conversation that spreads hatred and unfounded fear, I think, and I wondered if people would like to talk about that little, the tipping point really. Yes, yes. Let's get to that in a couple of minutes. You had a thought as well, yes. -Yeah, just a couple of things. First of all, for us it's very important that we have a workplace which is free of discrimination. And I also think in this whole discussion there is a danger if you're from a political party that you become to be seen as what it is you're trying to prevent. So becomes somewhat schizophrenic. That you're tolerant on one hand, but you're intolerant on another and there's a danger of you becoming the very thing that you're trying to prevent which means you become less tolerant. My experience in Switzerland, when I arrived, I got a letter from the Sandick. He invited me and all the other people who moved into this wonderful village called Cheserex in Nyon, we had dinner together. He made a speech, we were introduced to all of societies and we were made very welcome, we are a commune. We're happy that our commune is rich in all its differences, we're delighted that you are here, join something. So I joined the football team and because I played football I was asked to join the fire brigade. I became a pompier. Now Lukas, I can tell you, I was called out on action. They put this metal Swiss army helmet on my head, I had Wellington boots which didn't fit and they said, Philip there's a fire. I had no training, I could hardly speak French, but I tried, Lukas, I tried. That's when I realized I got to learn French, I don't care if the political party says it, I need it to save my life, so all of a sudden I've got the fire hose in my hand and the advice I got was, Philip, you're too tall for this fire, kneel down. So then I kneel down, then I turn the hose on to the barn which was on fire and I can tell you one thing, I don't know if he was a Swiss-German, a Swiss-Italian, a French farmer, an Italian farmer, a Muslim farmer, I had to save his barn and that's the message I say to you. It's a humanitarian gesture from one to another. When someone needs help, you help. When you need to put that fire out, you put that fire out. Don't fan the flames of division, we don't have enough firemen in the world. Let me just play devil's advocate for a minute though to the full panel because to some extent I could see someone saying, but my values will become corroded. You know to some degree there will be an impurity to the tradition, to the ritual, to the values that I've been raised on, that my people around me have been raised upon over time by bringing people of a different tradition into my culture. Yes, I might be able to have a conversation with them, but at the end of the day I'm going to be stuck because there's going to be conflict. Our values are so different that it will start to erode our own value system. Plain devil's advocate, how do you respond to that kind of opinion, perspective? I give a couple of thoughts. One is, I think one of the pre-requisites to have a society that gets along with so many different cultures is a recognition that everyone has contributed to the success of that country. One interesting example that comes to mind for us in the United States is in the early 60s there was a big movement to make sure that the books that children were learning in high schools represented the contributions of so many people in our history and I think there was a belief that not everyone had made positive contributions was represented there and I think that always will continue to evolve, but I think if you look at how the history that our student learn, there is certainly a fair representation of what all the initial immigrants to the United States, the Irish, the Italians, the Germans and the like made, but today you are also reading about the contributions that African-Americans and Hispanics and Asian-Americans and Muslims and the like are making and so I think that combined recognition that everyone's making a positive contribution is important. The second point I'd make, you know, I do think there has to be an open mindedness in the country, in the society that one's own culture may also blend in or be impacted by one's neighbors. And I'll give you just one simple example in the United States. It's a cullinary example. Sometimes, I don't know if people realize this, but, you know, we've had such a blend of different cultures and again, in this particular case, this influence comes from the Hispanic culture, today in the United States there is more salsa than ketchup purchased in the United States. There are more tortillas consumed every day than bagels and, you know, I think when you stop and think about that, you realize that, that doesn't happen just because of one community, it happens because everyone is beginning to gravitate, everyone is beginning to accept some of the other cultures and that's permeating mainstream. Right, right. Thank you. I'm really I'm hoping that we can keep digging deeper and deeper because it's one thing to say, boy it's nice for everyone to love each other, to be nice, but we know the realities in the workplace, and even in the family situations, how do you actually get to that place where people of different cultures can live and work and breathe effectively together? Tumi, I saw your hand and then we'll move... Yes. I find it interesting this notion that we're all born with culture. You know, the last time I checked there was no baby that was born with fur on it, a fur coat or loin cloth or beading in the hair. I mean, I don't know, maybe I haven't seen it, but I haven't heard of it, right? So the way I understand culture, it is man made, it is created by us, one. Second point, it evolves. The way, even in Switzerland, the way in which you practice what you refer to as your culture today, is very different to how people would have identified culture, what, 500, 600, 700 years ago. It's the same thing in Africa. It's the same thing in many, many parts of the world, so the notion that a culture is something that you bake and it stays like that is a very, again, it's a puzzling notion to me, because the very nature of culture is that it evolves. That's the first point I wanted to make. The second point, when you're asking about, you know, how do we balance the notion of wanting to preserve your own culture, which of course people want to do. In South Africa we have the same debate, where many people are complaining and saying, well you know, our languages aren't being recognized and so on and yet when you ask some of these people what is it that you're doing in an attempt to preserve your culture, in a way that is inclusive and fostering understanding rather than in a more sort of abrasive or aggressive fashion. The reality is we find that many of those, and I'm not saying it's the same for all, enough isn't being done in terms of helping us understand what your culture is. So prepare the food that you prepare. Make sure that you're singing the songs that you were raised with. Make sure that you are working to create an environment where your children can have a similar upbringing to the one that you had and long for. And I think that's one step. It's not all, it's not the thing that's going to solve it, but I think that's one way in which we can actively promote people's cultures and similarly understanding of other people's cultures which is equally important. As a person of Turkish origin whenever I go to Europe and say I'm from Turkey, one of the first things that I hear, especially from certain societies, would be, oh, there are so many Turks living in Germany and it's not in a positive way, it's in a negative way and the way that we're facing, so I really love the example of how the US has had a great melting pot and it's fantastic and Hispanics, but I think as part of this panel we should discuss, as you mentioned Daniel, what the multiculturalism of the countries where it hasn't been as successful and who and what can we do in order to make it more of a success and so what I find is that when I do talk to the people living in Germany that are Turk origin, they feel they don't have the equal opportunities, and so I think it's really about ensuring that they can also get into the culture, assimilate into the culture with equal opportunities and that's really with the education and that's really with teaching them how to fish, and so it's not placing the fish in front of them with welfare, but it's more ensuring that they have the great educational opportunities, so they can develop themselves and give back to the culture. So with the immigrants, rather than just giving them the worse places to live in and maybe the lowest paying jobs, it's how do we give them more of the opportunities and more of the education in order to contribute more. And so what we see is, the second generation of these immigrants, with the education they're having, they're actually giving back to society and there's some great examples and great leaders from these immigrant families, from all of these countries, and I think that's what's going to be really important. Right. So you're raising an issue that was raised earlier as well, I think more explicitly now. There are multiple elements to doing multiculturalism. One is the personal side of it, the other is the structural side of it and a few others talked about that on our panel so far, in the organizational context, in the societal context as well. I just want to make a couple of points here. I think one of the solutions around is about economic migration, so the issue is eliminate poverty and then people stop moving, because people are moving in very dangerous circumstances in ways to get to rich countries, apparently to be happier, but of course they end up being homeless or abused or people trafficked or whatever. And so the solution to that is in those countries, and areas where there is poverty, eliminate the poverty and then you eliminate the need for people to move in that kind of dangerous way. That's one point. The second point is about happiness. I've done a number of talks to some very rich people and it's incredible to me that how often they talk about how unhappy they are, so they have money, but they are unhappy and I can assure them the homeless people are unhappy as well. So how can we try and pull these things together in a society and, you know, look at our (inaudible), we have volunteers, and the volunteers afterwards write to us and say, it was the best experience of my life, I'm so happy about it. It changes the way they are. So if you are trying to create an inclusive society, a multicultural society, it's about removing these barriers of fear. People are frightened of the homeless person, I have no idea why, but they are or have made them invisible, but by bringing people in, you make yourself happier, you make yourself much, much better. For those, I think these types of solutions, if you apply them, make for a much better country, much better nation. With time ticking, we know we have a lot of knowledge, and experience in this room as well, I'd like to open it up now for questions that you might have. And for sake of time, what I ask is that the way you frame a question is in the form of a question and that you limit your question to no more than one minute otherwise, I apologize, but I might have an undiplomatic interruption and I see your hand back there, please. And if you could introduce yourself as well. Hello, my name is Graham (inaudible), I'm English actually, sorry. Welcome. -Thank you. My question is, you spoke about organization and I just had a very simple question, is democracy necessary for multiculturalism? Thank you for that and you asked it in perfect form. Maybe one more question and then we'll get two questions and we'll throw them to the panel. Yes, did I see over here in the fourth row, there's a microphone coming around. Would you mind standing up just so we can see where the microphone is. And you found yourself in the perfect spot to make it the most difficult to get the microphone to you. If you could introduce your name and your question. My name is Elin Stedler and I study at the University of Saint Andrews. I have to apologize because my question won't be in the perfect form. This summer I had a very troubling experience when I was in Washington at an Oxbridge learning academy, and we had a major falling out which was between my flat mate who was a Turkish Muslim and my co-student at Saint Andrews who was from India initially and she was extremely upset because he turned out to be gay and she said that that offended her religious beliefs and that offended her as a person and we had no idea how to confront that situation, how to talk about it, how we felt about it. I was wondering how your thoughts were on that situation. Thank you. So, two questions and I see these really hitting, one at the personal level, one at the structural level. Letג€™s start with the structural level and then weג€™ll move to the more personal piece. Democracy. Is it a necessary prerequisite for a multicultural society? Yes, no, maybe. What are your thoughts. Yes. Yes? I think of the Eastern bloc, pre-1989, those non-democratic societies were also very homogeneous. There was a lot of racism, a lot of anti- Semitism in many Eastern European countries. Since theyג€™ve opened up, since theyג€™ve become democratic, I think that has changed a little bit. I gather that thereג€™s a rising amount of anti- Semitism in Hungary, but I think thatג€™s sort of a recent example from history. Yes. -I have to say that I donג€™t know. Not because Iג€™m a non-supporter of democracy, if anything Iג€™m very very supportive of democracy. But I look across the African continent, and I look at examples of countries where there is democracy. They have elections, people go to the ballots, and they get the blue ink on the thumb. You know, everybodyג€™s voting, they elect. However, theyג€™re incredibly intolerant. So Iג€™m not sure, that automatically, by default, the fact that you have a so called democratic dispensation, will foster tolerance. So I donג€™t know that itג€™s as easy as saying yes or saying no. In my view, I think the jury in many ways is still out. Which then I suppose begs the question whether the assumption that a cultural environment or a culturally healthy environment, can only function in the context of a political system. To me democracy for multiculturalism is an absolute. And I think itג€™s about what are the constituents of it? Freedom of expression, freedom of association, the freedom to express oneself, the freedom to organize, and the freedom to enjoy the democratic freedoms that you have. Iג€™m pleased to say, that in the course of the last three decades, the world has become a more democratic place. When I started this job at Latin America, were military dictatorships. I used to go into those places, South Africa, we used to go into South Africa, and I think, as a white face I used to get through immigration without any difficulties. If theyג€™d known that I was talking to the Trade Union Movement and others, then the door would have been shut. Democracy is necessary in all its diversity. I would just have this hope, maybe Iג€™m naֳ¯ve, that the principal political actors would do more to bring their societies together, as opposed to scoring any political points by driving them apart. Iג€™d much prefer a political party to be straight on its economic plans, and say this is my plan for the country, as opposed to try to find those populace divisions which so divide us. So I would call for responsibility and restraint. And democracy is about openness. I know it hasnג€™t been mentioned here, we live in this globalized age. There are nearly 265 million migrant workers, and this is going to double in the course of the next two decades. Weג€™re going to have 5% of the worldג€™s work force who are migrant workers. Thereג€™s constant traffic. And at the same time in Europe we have a demographic challenge, where the level of prosperity that weג€™ve grown used to and developed and the well fed that we have which is currently questioned, we will not maintain this as our population actually does begin to shrink. So from the economics of the situation, we need, we need to have this fluidity in our labor markets, but we also need fair play at the same time. Thereג€™s one thing that bothers me, that 260 million or so, we have 27 million people humanly trafficked. This is the new slave labor. And I think there, political parties of all complexions, civil society and others, really have to stamp out this underside of the globalized economy, of 27 million human beings humanly trafficked, and a third of these are under the age of twelve. Back to the basic question, democracy a prerequisite? Yes, maybe, no, what? My answerג€™s yes, but. And the but being Iג€™m really concerned about democracy in this modern age. I think it got out of touch. Itג€™s more relevant I believe for the 1950s, itג€™s got stuck there. And with the speed of things like the internet, the technological advance, the politicians, I believe, arenג€™t becoming fit, in terms of their representation talent isnג€™t going towards political, weג€™ve got crisis of leadership I believe. I donג€™t think you can say you are a proper democracy, when youג€™ve got the level of homelessness, I won't go on about that issue, or when you have poverty, I donג€™t think can call yourself a democracy. And there are a number of challenges. So I think, the other thing thatג€™s happening is that the political parties, for them homelessness doesnג€™t become a major issue, because itג€™s just the middle that theyג€™re interested in getting into power. So theyג€™re focusing on a particular group of people in the middle and their interests are the top of the agenda, exclusion of all else. So I believe weג€™ve got a problem with democracy, and it really has to be modernized and we have to look at it urgently. Iג€™m convinced that it can only work with democracy, thereג€™s no other way. There has to be democracy, also a multi- cultural society can only work with democracy. What alternative would there be? How could democracy be modernized? The nice thing about democracy is that every man or teen, every small group can have a say, and weג€™ve solved that well. In Switzerland thereג€™s protection for minorities. The Cantons also have a say, we have a majority of the Cantons that has an impact in referendum. Everyone can collect signatures to have a referendum that plays a very important role for everybody. For a minority group that wants to achieve something, for example, more rights. But also for the Swiss who said well, we have to change something now, the politicians have neglected us. Democracy makes for a balance. And if the population feels this has gone too far, something has to happen. The population can react with those Democratic tools, and then there will be a better solution rather than deciding in an undemocratic way. I think democracy is an important element, definitely. Assuming democracy is perhaps necessary, there still is the challenge that was raised by the student in the fourth row here, how do you actually deal with these differences? Very practically speaking, what happens, when you have a student whoג€™s struggling with a fellow student who has a different value system, and those value systems come into conflict? To me this is really a huge part of the essence of the challenge, as much as South Africa has had this major transformation, thereג€™s still struggle there. Thereג€™s still struggle in Northern Ireland, thereג€™s still struggle in the United States. You know, really around the world. How do we grapple with, and really deal with these value based differences? To some degree I think even itג€™s a place to move somewhat away from explicit democracy, some of the more traditional cultures in the Middle East, the governments there, there are some common problems I think we all face around dealing with these value based differences. Whatג€™s your advice? What would be your thinking if that student approached you privately and said,I need some help, I need some advice here, you know, I forget the exact details, but something like my roommates are in the midst of a conflict right now. Thereג€™s a value based difference. One has strong religious values that *** activity should only be in one direction, and someone says, no, it should be in another direction. What do you do? How do you respond to that kind of situation? Well, I think the student was living in a country where homosexuality is legal and tolerated. And I would say, Iג€™m afraid youג€™re within a community in which it is an acceptable and it is not illegal, and you have to find a way of giving each other space, et cetera, et cetera. Thatג€™s an easy answer, and it goes back to the question of fear that we were talking about earlier. And the signs and symbols of otherness, the minarets, the banning of more minarets being built in Switzerland and recently in New York we've spoken a lot about multiculturalism, in America. And Iג€™d like to mention a recent example, which is the building of an Islamic cultural center in New York City. It had created enormous divisions and there have been huge protests against it, and weג€™re talking about America as the poster child for multiculturalism. Even in a place like America, even in places like New York, a country like America which constitutionally recognizes any person's right to practice their religion and freedom, even there you have huge problems. It's about fear. It's about ignorance. And what I think is really important is to have exposure at a very young age with the differences with the different cultures. And that's why I'm really hopeful for the future because now, as young people, we do have that exposure and I think the ignorance and the fear actually goes away when you realize that these people are just like us and so we're very similar. So I think that what's going to be really important is exposure, having more contact points, touch points, and that's why I think the future will be better in that way, and I think technology is going to be a major force behind that. Yeah. And one other thought if I may move away from my role for a moment as the moderator, there's a simple little exercise that we sometimes do in negotiation trainings and we call it the role reversal exercise. And it's simply having each person in the conflict for a minute move chairs and imagine they are that other person, and someone just starts asking them questions. What do things look like from your perspective? And people are often very resistant to talking in that other perspective. But to really have them talking that first person from that other perspective, they start to at least see that different world, as uncomfortable as that world might be or different as that world might be. I know we have a numbers of hands up. I want to make sure we have time to hear some voices. And you know what, is there anybody in the way back whose hand I can't see? Yes, sir, over there, please. Where's the microphone? Yes. The hands seem to be always completely opposite the microphones. And again, if you could state your name. My name is Hannes (inaudible). I went to Sea School, and now I'm a European businessman in several countries and speaking several languages. Don't you think that interface is one of the big issues, cultural interfaces? I think one interface was mentioned; it was portable. So if you can create like these computers, interfaces between human beings, and if you have a set of communication, this really facilitates working together and living together. Thank you. -No, thank you. And maybe we could even take that one step further. What have you found works in terms of interfacing, bringing people together to help promote that sense of deeper understanding? We have a lot of experience with that on our panel. Yes? I would just throw out, I think, you know, media and certainly social media in the new technology we're talking about. But the ability to recognize that there are other people in your same situation and be able to find some camaraderie in that I think is a big contributor. And I think media in that sense plays a vital, vital role. So be specific. What would that look like? Well, you know, in our particular case, I know that one of the challenges that we face in the United States right now is because of the macroeconomic situation and lack of jobs and the like in certain parts of the country. You know, we have a debate going on in the United States about undocumented immigrants, and there are approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants, and I think that conversation has become much more heated over the last few years because there is a lack of opportunity. And so having individuals who are caught in the middle of that discussion be able to have a platform to be able to talk to people in their similar situations, I think creates an outlet to begin the communication. Great. Yes, please. Yeah. I obviously would think a big yes to your point. I mean what we do with the Homeless World Cup is we bring homeless people from, last year, 64 countries and put them together. And they can't necessarily speak the same language. They have come from the same place in the world being homeless. But the energy and the collective spirit between them all is just fantastic. It's something to behold. And that's about the whole spirit of humanity played out in front of your eyes, and there you can build on something. But let me just tell you a little story connected with that for 30 seconds just to illustrate how you can create real change in people's thinking by putting people together. So a few years ago, our event was held in Cape Town in South Africa, and the team that was coming from Denmark told their manager that they were the poorest people in the world. There was nobody poorer than them living in Denmark. And the manager said, I don't know if that's true, you know. I think there might be people poorer than you. And they said, no, no, no. We are the poorest. And they felt really bad about it. So they went down to South Africa, to Cape Town, and they went to some of the shanty towns, and within about five minutes, they said, okay, we're not the poorest people. Actually, there's people much worse than us, we've decided. And it changed them in terms of their attitude about themselves and to other people. And they started giving things that they had to the other South Africans. In South Africa, homeless people said, wow! We never knew white people could be homeless. So their attitude changed, and then they became great friends together, and we're able to build on that experience of change. And so if you can create a way in which you move people away from being invisible, all we are doing is just creating a different infrastructure if you like, and put people in it together, you can create massive change. Great. Yeah. So yes, questions. Let me ask, where is the microphone? There's been someone eagerly with their hand raised. Right over there, please. Yes. Philip (Inaudible) from Germany, living in Switzerland. You mentioned before internet, you're understanding a lot more about people in the other countries. Is that the solution? My question is how much is done to understand the otherness in your own country? How much is done in the education, in training, in school, et cetera to learn about, let's say, I'm German, about the Turks, and that there's no training, no role play. There's nothing to make this community and understand them at home. And because it's nice to see them report, oh well, on Turkey, then you adjust to the values, but that's far away. It's something different if you have to share something in your own vicinity, and I feel that education has lost a little bit because of the challenges. And that's what I was saying about the exposure at a young age, so whether it's in school. So I went to school in New York City. And in New York City, in one of our schools, what we would have is we'd have our cultural days. So everyone would come from a different culture and they would bring things about their food, about their country, and just talk about it, and I think it was really fortunate at four or five years old that I had this exposure. And I think this has to happen in schools around the world and we need to expose children at a very young age what other cultures are about and what other people are about. So whether it's study exchange programs, whether it's talking about these cultures, whether it's videos, whether it's media like everyone mentioned, I think it's really, really important. I just don't think that the education systems are paying enough attention to this. You know, I find it interesting because in South Africa we have significant challenges in terms of education. And the question that everybody is asking at the moment is whether or not our education system prepares people for living in the future. Now, what I find intriguing about this notion is that it's always done in an economic business context. In other words, we need more engineers because we're going to need more roads, so math and science. But what we forget is that we're also going to be living next to Turks and Germans and Swiss and Norwegians and Swedes and all of this kind of thing. And in fact, there are many, many South Africans who are getting the skills, and what's happening? They're getting poached. So they live in London. There's a huge community of South Africans in London, in New York, in Atlanta, you know. There's like a black African guy who is the mayor of a city in Russia. So it's happening right now, and I think the point about education is so, so, so, important that's it's not just about whether you can read and write and do mathematics. It's also about the environment in which you are going to live, not just the environment of which you're expected to produce an end product. Yeah. Your comments remind me of a conversation I had last year with a top level negotiator from China, and I was very excited to meet this person to learn what's your technique? You're so good at negotiating. And he said, oh, well, you know. And he gave me the example of a recent negotiation he had with the United States representatives. He said, we spent about a week, our negotiating team, thinking about culture, before we went to negotiate with the Americans. I said, wow! You spend a whole week thinking about American culture! And he said, oh, no, no, no. We spend a week thinking about our own culture. And I think he was dead right, dead right. That's the power of education. Lukas? I couldn't agree more. Education is an important topic and you can reach a great deal of progress through education. But if we look at the Swiss educational system, then we do too much in this direction that we tend to forget our own identity and our own culture. Well, let me give you a few examples and please let me speak. There are a number of schools that do not have any Christmas celebrations anymore. There are schools that teach children the Serbian or Croat language first before they learn German. In St. Gallen, there was an inquiry and in other cities, What is the most frequent reason why young families move away from cities? And about 39% of those families said, We move away because there are too many foreign kids at school. We don't want to send our kids to those schools. In a class with five foreigners, it's okay; there will be integration. But if you have 17 to 20 or 18 foreigners out of 23 kids, there's no way you can integrate anymore. And comments to that, and then I want to note We're talking about multiculturalism. We're speaking within the framing that the Crown Prince had said of really trying to come from a place of understanding and listening, and I encourage that for today as well. Could the microphone come toward the front? And yes, to the woman with the cap on, please. Hi. My name is Maria Nunez Carver. I came here to Switzerland 11 years old. I was born in Brazil but my father is Swiss. So you say, Mr. Reimann, that people are going away and saying, Oh, we don't want to have anything to do with people that come from other cultures. And I'm coming from an integration class. I learned five languages. I did everything I could to be the best to have as much chances as other people had because they were born in Switzerland; they were full blood. I even heard this kind of things. How can somebody from a government, from a party, say that's something we want to support? Well, that was another value judgment what I said. The parents aren't saying, we don't want our kids to mingle with foreign kids. That's not the way it is. I think the parents see it as enrichment to have foreign children around. But there studies, there are also studies by the OECD that state clearly that if you have a certain number of foreign children at school, their children may have difficulties with language, and children that came later follow their fathers and mothers, and they're having difficulties. In the city where I live, there are three schools, and the school with the largest number of foreign children, it's 80%, those children leaving that school will not have success in the future. They can't go to high school. And my proposal as a politician is that we'll create what we call integration classes so that first of all, they go through this integration class, they learn our language, they are brought to the same level as the Swiss kids, and then they will be integrated into the ordinary school. This will be good for the foreign kids; they will be promoted; and it will also be good for the Swiss kids because they won't be leveled down. And the problem is when the parents move away, then you will have neighborhoods in cities with 90% share of foreigners, and in other neighborhoods it will be just 5%, and that could be avoided with my initiative. Tumi, response. It's not really a response. I just have a question because I'm trying to understand. You say that in the study, they showed that when there is a high percentage of foreign children in the school that sort of levels are dropping and standards are dropping. And therefore, the argument is made that these children should be put in a pen somewhere else until they come right and then bring them back. So my question, and I'm trying to understand, is in the context of the environment in which they're already in, does this study say anything about the difference if these children are given additional tutoring in the environment that they were already living without taking them away and putting them in a box but perhaps giving them an additional few hours in the afternoon? Does that make any difference at all? Well, I'm not really familiar with the details of the OECD study. Could you please be objective in the audience? But it's okay to have tutorial lessons in the afternoon. I have nothing against that. It's a fact and it's been proven, and teachers can confirm this that if you have a large share of foreigners with poorly integrated children, the level will come down. There will be a lot of time spent on language, on integration, on getting them used to the climate and so on. And that is not necessary, is it? So it sounds like part of the question is how to deal with a variety of different students within the classroom context, what makes the most sense, and what's the research that helps to support things one way or another? Yes. Could we unpack a little bit about, I mean, being a foreigner in Switzerland versus being a foreigner in Britain versus the United States versus Germany or someone like that? I mean are foreigners in Switzerland, do they feel stakeholders in Swiss society? I'm not sure if this is correct, and I hope someone will correct me, but foreigners aren't allowed to buy property in this country, is that correct? No, no, no. -No. That's not true. No. Look, I am Swiss by the way. I am Swiss. I made the promise. I am Swiss. I look at it from the labor market perspective. We are entering a future where we're going to require more people from other countries to come to Europe to do work. I just asked someone whilst I was coming here, What's the situation in - ? You talked about whether you can buy a home. I can tell you who builds the homes. 85% of the people in the construction industry in this country are here on work permits. Right. And then I asked, well what about Swiss chocolate? 65% of the workforce in chocolate factories are migrant workers. Which means they are not permanent members of the society. No, no. There's intergenerational change. This country works with migrant workers and the migrant worker has made a brilliant contribution to the economic success of this country. This should be seen a good news story above and beyond the fact that we have the different cantons, the different language groupings. If I was presenting the Swiss brand to the world, I would say, this is a good place to do business. We are harmonious. We can integrate workers in the modern context. This country will not work without migrant workers. My wife is a teacher. I can tell you she's had 30 nationalities in her class and you would be amazed of the wonderful and brilliant things they do. They learn more together. They have a good conversation together, Lukas. They actually begin to enjoy each other's company. And therefore, and I realize that in a city, ghettos have a problem in this regard. They do. But Switzerland is a small, extremely wealthy country. Britain is a very different kettle of fish. We can't kind of lump all these countries together. It's just silly, you know. -True. And I'm sure your wife has had a wonderful experience teaching in Switzerland, but Leeds is different and Bradford is different, and Brooklyn is different. -She also taught in East London. Right. And I've lived in East London myself. I know that story. So the big questions we're grappling, one of them is really the question of who is the we? And secondly, how do you define who the we is and how are you supposed to treat the not we, the other? And it seems like in essence, this is the debate and tension that I think is emerging here. Time for another question. Yes, if we can have the microphone toward the front, please. And if you could introduce yourself and the question. I'm Kristoff (inaudible). I'm a supporter and beneficent of multiculturalism. I'd like to ask the panel for advice about the borderline. It's a touchy issue of where tolerance ends. I'm citing such issues like forced marriage, female circumcision, anti democratic opinion. Where do we draw the line legitimately? Yes, it's a wonderful question. So a key theme that's come up so far has been the importance of, and I think everybody on the panel agrees with this, and the questions from the audience as well, the importance of understanding. And you're pushing this one step further. You're saying, yes, there is understanding but that understanding at some point is going to have to move toward decision making, within the governmental and informal realms as well. Where is the line? Where is the line? And to be specific, I like your notion of being specific around some of these issues such as forced marriage, et cetera. Where's the line? What's your thinking? I mean, I think it's really straightforward. It's the laws of the land. And in a democracy, you vote for the politicians that make the laws of the land. And I think the issues, take the issue of the force marriage, for example, if it's against the law of the land because that's the way the people, then it's against the law of the land. That's an issue that shouldn't be allowed. The challenge with forced marriage though is that people will take the people out of the country and then come back into the country. And so internationally, and Phil talked about this issue earlier, about human trafficking in these issues. We have to be collaborating together as government and as police forces to stop this type of trafficking and this sort of thing occurring. But at the end of the day, you have to have democratic systems and laws that we all abide by and there are some things which we find in these laws which are just completely unacceptable. And that should be where the line is. And just a quick snapshot, Rosie. Well, forced marriage, female circumcision, those are almost easier examples. What about Sarkozi banning the burka, the veil, where's the harm in wearing a veil? There's harm in a forced marriage; that's well documented. There's medical harm in female circumcision. What's the harm with the veil. But it pushes people's buttons. It presses the limits of toleration. I'm sorry, there is, as far as I'm concerned, there is never a day that I'm ever going to agree that the law of the land makes doing something right. I'm sorry; that's just not on. We had the law of the land. The law of the land in my country said that I couldn't go where I want. I couldn't marry who I want. I couldn't have children with who I wanted, I couldn't buy property in my own country. I mean, law of the land. Sorry. And to be quite clear, Well, if I can just finish my point and you'll be able to respond. Okay. As far as I'm concerned there is no environment that by simply saying law of the land it makes it okay. What I think society needs to do and this is where we need to just take the blinkers off and have a reality check. Okay? We live in a society where effectively there are no borders. Yes, there are borders, of course. But we talk languages and we travel and we do all sorts of things. The reality is that there is a recognition and there has to be a recognition about what is harmful to individuals. We have such things as human rights charters. Why do we speak as if these things don't exist? They exist. Got it. Now can I just come back with what I said, I said law of the land in a democracy. South Africa was a democracy. And so was Zimbabwe. It was a democracy. Wait, let me just finish my point, And then I'll let you finish your point. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, I apologize. My point was that I made earlier was that democracy currently had real problems, because it wasn't actually representing what the people say. So think your Sarkozi point, that was never a decision that was made by the people. There was not a democratic discussion. He made that decision and his political party made that decision. That's the problem with democracy at the moment. You're not getting into the proper debates so that people like Phil in Switzerland put his point of view and win the debate and the argument, and then the laws of the land are formed around that. And if you have a situation where you're going to say we're going to ignore the laws of the land, and not have laws of the land, you don't have a democracy. So democracy's got real trouble at the moment, I believe, because you end up being non democratic. So take homeless people again, in this country and other countries, they can't vote. They're not allowed to vote. That's not a democracy as far as I'm concerned. We need to create a way in which people can be included in a process quickly that allows proper laws, fair and just laws to run the country. And I recognize there's a lot more conversation that can happen here on multiple levels. And I apologize we don't have more time for questions at this point. But we started off with the basic notion of multiculturalism, what does this actually mean? Maybe this isn't the right word. It seems like a fluffy word. What's really behind it? And I feel like, I have a feeling if we had another 15 hours today, we really would get somewhere. But I want to close with just one final little anecdote that I'm reminded of from our conversation. One of my mentors, he's now, I believe right around 90 years old, Roger Fisher. Many years back was in the U.S. Army Air Corps; flew one of those big B 17 bombers. And the pilot of the plane they were breaking in a new engine on one of these planes, and the pilot was known to be this extremely adventurous, if not crazy, individual. And he decided, it's a beautiful, sunny day, he decided just for a little fun, he was going to turn off one of the engines on this big B 17 bomber flying over the cold north Atlantic waters. Nobody cared about anything this. And so he decided to turn off another engine. And another. And another. True story, until all four engines were off on this B 17 bomber. Everybody in the back of the plane was going crazy. What's going on? What's going on? They're thinking shall we jump out of this plane with our parachutes, even if we jump out, we're going to die in these cold Atlantic waters. The copilot had seen everything that was going on. And he had been as angry as could be at this whole situation. The pilot decided I have had enough fun and he goes to turn back on the engines. But for those of you have ever seen a B 17 bomber and tried to operate it, you cannot turn on any of the engines unless it's parked, unless you get the electricity. Suddenly the pilot realizes this fact. The copilot realizes this fact and the copilot all of a sudden just bursts out laughing and says, boy oh boy have you got a problem. And the reality is that plane was going down. They all had a problem. And I think that's the situation with multiculturalism. It's not just the problem, it is the answer as well. How do we build upon the opportunity of people's different cultural backgrounds? And just to end that story, how did Roger live? It so turns out that there was an young officer on board. It was not his duty to do so, but he recalled that there was a little generator, a put put generator in the back. They were able to start one engine and from there they were able to start all of the engines. So on that note, just with the note ultimately of thinking through how do we work effectively together with a shared problem, a shared opportunity in front of us. Please join me and a big thank you to all of your panelists, including his highness, Haakon as well. Thank you, Dan. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, three days ago I had the privilege to open the Open Forum, Davos 2012 in German, let me close in English, as we went through the English discussions here. You remember three points that I mentioned that are important for us at the World Economic Forum. The one is integrating older groups of interest, the stakeholders, and to really engage people of the government, businesspeople, NGOs, social entrepreneurs and I think all the panels, including this one, were good examples for this. My second point was that we are all open for engaged, honest, fundamental discussions. And have dialogue with the Davos people, and I'm happen to see so many people in here. And to have that dialogue with the students that came here from not only from Davos, but from all over Switzerland, Germany that join often every year. Expert and leaders that are at the annual meeting and joined here. And I see a lot of these badges and you immediately know who is at the annual meeting. But also whole groups like the Adinar Foundation who come every year to the Open Forum. A third point that I made was that I said we strive for respect and solution oriented dialogue. That does not mean that we guarantee harmony. That does not mean that we have a one and only solution. It does not mean even that we accept or buy into the opinion of another one. What it means is that we try to find a common ground for change, for development, for learning, for improvement. And I met a student yesterday in the evening that in a very challenging and great dialogue, who stood up and said the following to the public and to occupy. And she said, a very young girl, I think 17, 18 coming from the Swiss German part said, I'd love to see that occupy is here on stage. I love to see that a young woman cannot say what occupy wants, thinks and where they see solution. And I'm disappointed because you didn't show respect; you didn't go for the dialogue; you didn't strive for solutions and that is what I think is the point. Here we go for solutions. We may not find the solution. Maybe we find the little generator. But at least this is the soul of this, to be open, strive for a clear dialogue and let us at least get some more understanding. Let us get a common ground. Let me thank you, the school because we are every year, here in this room. Let me thank the team that organized this, all these sessions. Let me thank the advisor board that, of course, helps us to define with all of you the topics. Thanks to the speakers and the moderators who do a wonderful job. And now let me thank you, the audience because you really helped us to have a great dialogue. And I guarantee you we continue with this next year. We all look forward next year to the Open Davos. Thank you, all.