In their unique identity. in reflection, critics argue

In this paper, I aim to show how multiculturalism has affected different preference to particular social welfare policies. Different patterns of welfare state changed through the cultural difference and the perspective of multiculturalism. To examine the two relationships between satisfaction of two western countries, I will introduce the different type of welfare state in the two societies.

First, I examine the different social movement that affects the transformation of the welfare state. Second, I explore social movement that is affected by multiculturalism and social changes. Further, by recognizing the transformation of the welfare state through multiculturalism, societies may be redistributed into a new type of welfare state with the consideration of new risks. IntroductionIn the past forty years, the human has experienced a dramatic change in population in addition to the increase in immigration.

In the history, ethnocultural diversity has been viewed as a threat to political stability. Thus, immigrants had been highly discouraged by the public policies. Immigrants and other national minorities were mostly encouraged by the policy to assimilate them. However, during the past hundred years, many Western democracies have made adjustments to the earlier policies so that they shifted towards a more adaptive approach to diversity.

These new policies, as of “ multiculturalism policies” has enhanced the public recognition for the minorities and enable them to express their unique identity.  In reflection, critics argue that the multiculturalism policies contradict its initial purpose of protecting all individuals right. Critics argue that the recognition of multiculturalism involved in acknowledging the historic injustices which increase the distrust between the different group. Since most perceptions of modern society indicate that we are becoming more and more individualistic unless it comes to us versus them mentality. Immigration and welfare are two main topics that direct today’s political discussion. Globally, different countries with different welfare state systems are facing different challenges on policy changes because of the way each government executes the new multiculturalism policies. Indeed, one main reason that there is a strong link between multicultural policies and the welfare state is that it brings into a strong debate on the welfare state and about its affection on the solidarity (Keith 3).

In this introduction, I will discuss the main concepts of welfare state and immigration in the United States and Sweden. I will examine how these main concepts outline and address how immigration is an important factor when discussing the change of welfare states. Moreover, I will utilize influential political characters’ words and tweets to reflects the welfare state change through multiculturalization.

The Welfare States” The welfare state is a concept of government in which the state plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the social and economic well-being of its citizens(Wikipedia).” Promoting welfare is the identity of various types of governing form. This type of governing form prominently strengthens the social functionality of modern society. Nationally, the concept of the welfare state can be important in their distinct way, depending on the governmental policies and public’s opinion towards the society. In the 1990s, Gosta Esping-Andersen published one of the most influential books titled “ The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism”. Gosta analyzes the three main type of welfare states regimes: liberal/residual regime, conservative welfare regime, and social democratic regime. The liberal regime, compared to the other regimes provides a relatively low level of public services, which occurred most of the time in an immigrant society or society that has a high potential to advance socially.

The United States is an important example of liberal welfare regime. Some advantage of liberal welfare includes the less sensitive to demographic changes in population and lower tax. Other disadvantages include the high inequality and instability of the economics(“ How to Conceptualize the Welfare State”). Even there are minimum benefits for the lower income groups, the level of the service remain low. Moreover, the conservative regimes are where the social security involves, and it has a strong presence in the Catholic Church. Unlike the liberal regime, the conservative regimes benefit from a higher level of public support. It also allows the benefit recipients to retain their income level.

An example of a conservative regime country is Germany. However, this creates issue such as the high sensitivity to employment conditions. This can also result in a high payroll tax because of the increase in labor cost. Lastly, the social democratic regime emphasizes the importance of equality with regards to individualism. Sweden is a country with a unique social democratic regime and it is a role model for many other social democratic states. Social democratic regime provides high benefits and differentiated services with high taxes. Therefore, it reduces the social cleavages for the entire nation. Nevertheless, it is expensive and bureaucratic.

The strong government orientation represents its pressure on the budget because of high cost on social benefits. These regimes have been criticized that they are missing some important variables, which includes gender, ethnicity and most importantly multiculturalism. As time goes by, focuses such as immigration led to increased emphasis on rights and duties. There is a strong relationship between these new factors and welfare state due to the needs of policy changes. Although the ideal regime types provide the important basic knowledge and are useful, they are still limited to represent the real situations. In this research paper, I will analyze the recognition of people’s opinion then present the need of redistribution of welfare states with the consideration of ideal types of regime.

Immigrants and Welfare StatesIn the past twenty years, scholars had claimed the important role of immigration in the welfare states. Some even stated that diversity caused by immigration erodes the solidarity and on welfare state. This statement holds that majority of people would not support the new social benefits due to their perception of untrust.

Critics mentioned that acknowledging the historic injustices will increases the distrust between the different group. Some thought the social benefits has been disproportioned for immigrants rather that the natives(Jonsson, Onasch, Pellander, and Wickstrom 10). Some research have found that the increase number of immigrants has relatively smaller growth rates of welfare spending. These varied founding shows the variation in factors of the relationship between the welfare states and the immigrants. It could also lead to the mistrust between the native and immigrants due to the negative image Europeans attached to the immigrants. The negative images consist the idea to be less deserving of social benefits compares to the natives. However, with the institutional context, different welfare states are able to arbitrate the conflict and create trust between the natives and the immigrants. The definitions of equality for both the natives and the immigrants are meant to explain the social incorporation of the diverse population.

The equality is based on the agreement on the universal benefits and the comprehensive welfare states. On the other hand, it is easier for liberal states to create mistrust between the people because of the limited accessibility on social benefits through mean testing. Certainly, social democratic welfare states who focus on the huge benefits of equal rights, present the granted rights for foreigners than people in the welfare states.

Moreover, to arbitrate the effect on the result of diversity from immigration, welfare states must create immigration policy. During the past decade, welfare state has developed relationships with the immigration. More importantly they are usually divided into two important immigration policy: the entrance policy and the integration policy. I will analyze the two policies both in Sweden and the United States to better explain the relationship of welfare states and the immigrants. Policies are varied by the integration of multiculturalism and the entrance requirement for the immigrants.

Therefore, we focus on both the internal and external dynamics for change and challenges to the welfare states. The strong connections between the entrance policy and integration policy presents the debate on the effect of immigration to social cohesion under welfare states as well as the effect of immigration to economics under new welfare budget. Integration policies are important elements for the immigration policies due to the direct link to the welfare states policies. Integration policies consist elements that tend to show and regulate the immigrants’ relationship with the states.

It also regulate the immigrants’ behavior towards the native people and the state and vice versa. The integration policies changes constantly over time depends on the type of the regimes. Liberal regimes usually are less regulated than the universal regime as the liberal regimes has more f