A nationality, for example, is not necessarily a culturally relevant, self-monitoring group. The relevant communities for cultural analysis are probably not going to correspond to political or bureaucratic or census categories, such as Asian or Hispanic or Jewish or Black or Native American or what have you. One of the things that ought to make you weep is to witness the misuse and appropriation of the rhetoric of culture to serve the economic interests of political action groups. They were wrong. This has not and will not happen.
Multiculturalism is a fact of life.
Many of us live in nation states composed, as Reyes put it, of groups and communities with diverse practices and beliefs including groups whose beliefs are inconsistent with each other. Here's an example that has recently come to my attention. My example comes from a legal case in the state of Maine. One of the problems of life in a multicultural law and order society, especially for immigrant and minority groups, is that the law of the land often presupposes and codifies the substantive beliefs, values, emotional reactions, aesthetic standards, and pictures of the world peculiar to the group with the most power. A few years later, his conviction was overturned by the State Supreme Court, relying heavily on cultural analysis.