Quote from Timothy Fitzpatrick on May 2, 2026, 11:26

November 7, 2018

Intervention by Ven.mo and Pot.mo Leo Taroni, Sovereign Grand Commander of the R.S.A.A., on the occasion of the conference promoted by the Chapter House "G. Carducci” of Lecce, on the theme ”Multiculture. Social and economic value for Europe”

In the now common linguistic sense, the term "Multiculture" is representative of societies that, in their field, include the artistic, literary, scientific and traditional heritage of different ethnic groups.
In past centuries, people were used to speaking simply of "Culture" because this immediately identified belonging to one people, to one people rather than another.

Greek, Roman and similar culture could thus be indicated as the set of customs and values characterizing the life of a people, taken in its singularity.

However, the intensification of the phenomenon that the mass media define as globalization has led linguists to conjugate the new term that, today, is the interesting theme of this Conference.
That said, it should be noted that together with the term globalization - prodromic of multiculture - the word "integration" has taken on a current relevance so that now, in the common vulgata, the components of this lexical triad appear insepable from each other.

It is clear to me that on the specificity of the topic in question, each of those present - including the same speakers - can and should have their own personal motivated opinion related to the multiple problems inherent in the term "Multiculturalism".
For this reason, I believe that a common interpretation of this recently established neologism is necessary which, precisely because of its connotation, has already created quite a few fierce and disfigured evaluations among politicians, religious, and writers who, with their interventions intend to condition, if not affect, the ideological choices of citizens.

Perhaps, the thought of Kenan Malik - a British scholar and philosopher of Indian origin - is not wrong, who in his book "Multiculturalism and its critics", wonders if it is permissible to build a cohesive social bond based on common values, where there is growing anxiety about the presence of the other within our borders.

The now inseparable symbiosis between the terms globalization and multiculturalism, has produced numerous diatribes regarding issues on equal dignity, coexistence and the effects of different cultures that often generate disruptive situations connected to the sudden change of the fundamental aspects of our culture and, therefore, of our identity.

In the situation created by multiculturalism, I believe that the interaction between individuals is decisive in the total conviction that, the mutual respect of individual stories, constitutes the basic and coagulating element for the constitution of a community of individuals in which the term "minority" is banned.
In the eyes of many, the idea of deleting the term "homologation" from our vocabulary may seem utopian, if understood, this, as a deminutio with respect to the fundamental rights of every human being.

Utopia, perhaps, but this is the ideal for which the Masonic Institution and the Scottish Rite in particular have been fighting for three hundred years: no living being is a minority compared to another, no living being can be homologated to another.
Not his culture, not his art, not his religion.

If these are my preliminary considerations, what are my propositions regarding the topic that, politely, I was called to deal with, indeed very interesting but certainly complex and, consequently, not an easy and perhaps not agreeable solution: "Multiculturalism as a condition for the Future of Europe"?
In this regard, I think it is appropriate to make a further consideration which I consider substantial, interpreting the term Europe, indicated above, as the European Union and not as a generic composition of individual states.

The path towards the building of the European Union has unraveled along a difficult process that, itself, has proudly represented an example of multiculturalism, even if - in the pass of the last two thousand years - there are many historical and cultural elements common to the different ethnic groups that make up the current European nations.

It seems to me doubt that, despite the supranational economic and political commonalness that has been established, even what is now called the Union is the substantial result of a multiculturalism that is limited to be that has found valid support on the foundations constituted by the absorption of laws, religious beliefs, artistic developments that have drawn their origin from the periodic invasions of one ethnic group compared to another.
The history of Europe is full of them and not a single Nation has suffered this bloody multiculturalism: once there was talk of invasion, today we talk of multiculturalism.

So what differentiates the first term - invasion - from the second, what are the characteristic elements that lead us to accept or deprecate one rather than the other?

The invasion is not necessarily the result of a belligerent and hostile moment; it can often manifest itself with the non-observance of the basic and ancestral principles of those who confront each other, it is often the result of a lack of observance of the fundamental principle of reciprocity between different identities.

It is often the lack of consideration of the Human Being in its Essence, free of its own historical, cultural, ethnographic moment.
These personal considerations of mine, not necessarily acceptable, lead me to believe that multiculturalism is not and cannot be a "condition" for the future of Europe alone understood as a union of several states or even, latu sensu, as a continent.

I believe, in fact, that splitting the concept of multiculturalism from that of globalization can lead to erroneous assessments regarding the subject of this Conference: the first is - in my opinion - the logical derivation from the second.

There is no multiculturalism if we do not first determine a globalization, understood not only from an economic point of view, but above all as a moment of international integration.

In this perspective I ask myself and I ask you: what multiculturalism as a condition for the future of Humanity in its entirety?
My life, my experience, in particular my membership in the Scottish Rite - Masonic Initiatory Order - lead me to think and live in the conviction that our today and our future cannot be limited to a vision purely limited to a single Nation, to a single Continent.

The incontrovertible reality shows me that in all countries, in all continents and supranational entities, we are called to face the problem of multiculturalism, even if each of these entities will have different approaches and solutions.

Perhaps, using an ancient and outdated terminology, we could talk about civil coexistence?

Perhaps, we simply want to say that, for hotels and is constructive, multiculturalism presupposes mutual, constant and convinced respect for the Other, regardless of the place, the Nation in which one is called to respect this principle?

I cannot betray my ideals by offering, to the question posed by this Conference, methodologies, interpretations and solutions that contradict and go beyond my being Mason and Scottish.

Our principles, our Landmarks never relate to the individual: the latter - although considered essential - is a constituent part of Universality just as Europe is a constituent part of the globality with which it correlates daily.

Consequently, I believe that it is necessary to determine how the interpretation of multiculturalism should be addressed and resolved so that every institutional system recognizes and respects the linguistic, religious and cultural identity of the different ethnic components present in today's complex societies.

So, from the universal, to the particular.

Many years ago I was welcomed, in my Mother's Lodge, with a statement that was fundamental for my relationship with my neighbor: "You are my Brother".
This assertion that, inwardly, I live daily, leads me to believe that multiculturalism - as it is understood today - is a false problem if, upstream, each of us does not recognize in the other himself, if we do not understand that the human limitations due to political belief, religious belief and ethnic customs distort the vision of the Unicum common that is in each Human Being.

Only then will Multiculturalism not be a condition for the future of Europe.

Lecce, November 07, 2018

Leo Taroni, 33rd SGC

Source: https://www.ritoscozzese.it/il-multiculturalismo-come-condizione-per-il-futuro-delleuropa/