Sitting in the Fire of Difficult Dialogues – Public Participation in a Super-Diverse Neighbourhood

This paper examines theories of multiculturalism, interculturalism, and agonism which argue that through practices of intercultural dialogue, diverse interests, values and perspectives can be articulated and (at least temporarily) reconciled. It discusses the challenges in practice of achieving intercultural dialogue in relation to ‘contested practices’ at the neighbourhood level and draws attention to the role of different micro-contexts for interaction, skilled facilitation and the local state. The article draws on evidence from an ethnographic case study of a superdiverse neighbourhood in Glasgow, Scotland where long-term white and ethnic minority communities reside alongside Central and Eastern European migrants, asylum seekers and refugees, and other recent arrivals. The evidence comprises local data and documentary evidence, participant observations, qualitative and walk-along interviews with residents and local organisations. The findings highlight the differences between ethnic and social groups in the extent to which they are able or willing to hide their prejudices and participate in intercultural dialogue. The findings show that in this neighbourhood context political cynicism was a result of the perceived failure of the state to act as a ‘neutral arbitrator’ and to respond effectively to local grievances and concerns. Cynicism led to withdrawal from public participation processes and preference for social media and other forms of community activism with people who were ‘likeminded’. Overcoming political cynicism entails greater attention to social and spatial inequalities; different micro-contexts for interaction; and the role of skilled facilitators who can ‘sit in the fire’ of difficult conversations and enable all voices to be heard.