This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: Politics and Social Policy: Politics and Social Policy: Lessons from Europe Prof. Kelemen
Immigration, multiculturalism and the integration of immigrants Outline
Can we learn anything from Europe in this
Models of immigrant incorporation
Veil controversies across Europe
Danish cartoon crisis The New Colossus, Emma Lazarus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" On the other hand…
On Lou Dobbs
2010 Arizona law (sb 1070) 2010
gave the police in the state
broad power under state
law to check the legal status
of people they suspect are
illegal Lessons from Europe?
Similar policy challenges: today US is NOT only country with
substantial immigrant population
Foreign born population (2005 UN figures)
Different politics? Different policies? Immigrant incorporation
“the United States appears to be doing a
better job than most Western European
countries in affording opportunities for
upward mobility and political incorporation,
at least to the children of immigrants”
Mollenkopf and Hochschild, p. 15-16
Mollenkopf European immigration experiences
Lots of emigration
And historically (far back enough) substantial
“European states were mainly comprised
through disputes over borders or consolidation
of population groups who had lived in a
particular region for centuries, not by immigrant
populations that displaced a native-born
population who were almost wiped out through
disease and conquest.” – Mollenkopf and
Hochschild Post-WWII Immigration Flows
‘Guest Worker’ programs – Germany, Austria,
Belgium and Netherlands recruit guest workers
from Southern Europe (Italy, Portugal), North
Africa (Morocco), Turkey and Middle East
Decolonization reverse flow from colonies
back to ‘metropole’ (North and Subsaharan
Africans to France, Indonesians and Surinamese
to Netherlands, West Indians, Pakistanis,
Bangladeshis and Indians to UK)
Post-Holocaust openness: Asylum seekers and
refugees Recent Immigration Trends
After collapse of Soviet empire – easterners
Growing immigration to former emigration
countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland) (though this
has stalled now)
Increasing illegal immigration from North Africa
and sub-Saharan Africa – including thousands
coming by sea in dangerous conditions
Dramatically increasing Muslim populations Europe’s Muslim Population
Europe’s Europe’s Muslim Population
Europe’s Europe’s Muslim Population
Europe’s Estimated increases in Muslim
populations Total EU immigration in millions
_migrant_population_statistics ‘Boat people’ Summer 2006 Canary Islands Malta Immigration and the backlash
40 million projected by 2050
Huge numbers of illegal immigrants
Social problems (immigrant youth)
Cultural tensions (Veil issue, cartoon issue)
– Extreme right anti-immigrant parties gaining across
– Moderate, center-right parties adopting harder line Immigration
Different national responses to illegal
– 300,000 - 400,000 illegal immigrants
– Sarkozy says round them up and expel them Spain
– Roughly 3-4 million illegal immigrants (nearly
9% of population)
– In 2006, Gov’t granted mass amnesty Should EU play a role setting common
standards? Immigrant Incorporation:
Who belongs? How to integrate
immigrants? Citizenship and Incorporation
Restrictions on citizenship
In US citizenship by ‘birthright’ or by
‘naturalization’ (jus soli)
No ‘birthright’ citizenship in Europe. Citizenship
by blood (jus sanguinis)
Only 10% of immigrants in Switzerland become
citizens. (30% in Germany, 50% in France)
But while immigration policies have been
tightened, policies on citizenship have been
loosened Models of immigrant incorporation
Britain – Multi-culturalism
France – Assimilation.
– laïcité Germany – ‘Wir sind kein
einwanderungsland’ – ‘We are not a
country of immigration’
country British Multiculturalism
“Chicken Tikka Massala is now a true British
national dish, not only because it is the most
popular, but because it is a perfect illustration of
the way Britain absorbs and adapts external
influences. Chicken Tikka is an Indian dish. The
Massala sauce was added to satisfy the desire
of British people to have their meat served in
Coming to terms with multiculturalism as a positive
force for our economy and society will have
significant implications for our understanding of
Britishness.” – Robin Cook, British Foreign
Secretary British Multiculturalism
Official recognition of different ethnic, cultural,
and religious groups.
Focus on ‘race relations’, ‘ethnic minorities’,
‘cultural toleration’, ‘group rights’.
Unity in Diversity
Publicly funded religious schools, no headscarf
British multiculturalism in crisis?
– 7/7/2005 London bombings
– British Muslims: least integrated Muslim group
across Critiques of UK’s multiculturalism /
open immigration policy
Permissive stance vis a vis radicals?
Rise of British National Party (BNP)
Abu Hamza – radical Egyptian born imam
of Finsbury Park Mosque
of Sept 2006 - UK Veil controversy
MP Jack Straw says the veil is a "visible statement
of separation and of difference" and he asks
women visiting his surgery to consider removing it
women Immigration politics gets entangled
with worries over terrorist threats
with Madrid, March 11, 2004
170 dead, 500 injured London, July 7, 2005
52 dead, 700 injured Growing divisions?
13% of British Muslims think that the four men who carried
out the London Tube and bus bombings of July 7, 2005,
should be regarded as “martyrs”
7% agree that suicide attacks on civilians in the UK can be
justified in some circumstances, rising to 16 per cent for a
16% of British Muslims say that while the attacks may have
been wrong, the cause was right
2% would be proud if a family member decided to join al2%
Qaeda. Sixteen per cent would be “indifferent”.
35% would feel proud if a close family member joined the
56% of British Muslims believe that the Government is not
doing enough to fight extremism (only 49% of the whole population
agree) Source: Populus survey for The Times and ITV News ,
July Source: Pew Research Center, June 2006 Extracts from a speech by the foreign secretary
Robin Cook London,April 19, 2001
Tonight I want to celebrate Britishness. As Foreign Secretary I see every day the importance of our
relations with foreign countries to the strength of our economy, to the security of our nation, to
the safety of our people against organised crime, even to the health of our environment. A
globalised world demands more foreign contacts than even Britain has experienced in the past.
I also know that we are likely to make our way more successfully in the world if we are secure in
our British identity, and confident about its future. That security and confidence is important for
the inner strength it gives us in our conduct of business with others. I want to argue the case
why we can be confident about the strength and the future of British identity.
Sadly, it has become fashionable for some to argue that British identity is under siege, perhaps
even in a state of terminal decline.
Today’s London is a perfect hub of the globe. It is home to over 30 ethnic communities of at least
10,000 residents each. In this city tonight, over 300 languages will be spoken by families over
their evening meal at home.
This pluralism is not a burden we must reluctantly accept. It is an immense asset that contributes to
the cultural and economic vitality of our nation.
Legitimate immigration is the necessary and unavoidable result of economic success, which
generates a demand for labour faster than can be met by the birth-rate of a modern developed
country. Every country needs firm but fair immigration laws. There is no more evil business than
trafficking in human beings and nothing corrodes social cohesion worse than a furtive
underground of illegal migrants beyond legal protection against exploitation. But we must also
create an open and inclusive society that welcomes incomers for their contribution to our
growth and prosperity. Our measures to attract specialists in information technology is a good
example. Our cultural diversity is one of the reasons why Britain continues to be the preferred
location for multinational companies setting up in Europe. The national airline of a
major European country has recently relocated its booking operation to London
precisely because of the linguistic variety of the staff whom it can recruit here.
And it isn't just our economy that has been enriched by the arrival of new
communities. Our lifestyles and cultural horizons have also been broadened in the
process. This point is perhaps more readily understood by young Britons, who are
more open to new influences and more likely to have been educated in a multimore
ethnic environment. But it reaches into every aspect of our national life.
Chicken Tikka Massala is now a true British national dish, not only because it is the
most popular, but because it is a perfect illustration of the way Britain absorbs and
adapts external influences. Chicken Tikka is an Indian dish. The Massala sauce
was added to satisfy the desire of British people to have their meat served in
Coming to terms with multiculturalism as a positive force for our economy and society
will have significant implications for our understanding of Britishness.
The modern notion of national identity cannot be based on race and ethnicity, but
must be based on shared ideals and aspirations. Some of the most successful
countries in the modern world, such as the United States and Canada, are
immigrant societies. Their experience shows how cultural diversity, allied to a
shared concept of equal citizenship, can be a source of enormous strength. We
should draw inspiration from their experience.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/apr/19/race.britishidentity French Assimilationist Model
Unitarian, Universalist, Egalitarian nation state.
Assimilation is the basis of unity
The public sphere: Neutral- No place for
religious, ethnic, cultural differences
Differences are relegated to private sphere
Laicite: Strict separation of church and state
No official recognition/public funding for ethnic
and religious groups.
The Republican ideal in crisis?
– Uprisings in banlieues: 2005 French civil unrest.
Uprisings Sarkozy proposes ‘selective
immigration’ Paris Riots November 2005
Paris 9193 cars burnt
21 nights of riots
Source: French police Calais refugee camp, closed sept
2009 German exclusion
Ethnic nation: that is defined in terms of
“organic bonds between individuals
sharing same origin”
exclusive citizenship: because until
recently ethnic affiliation was the primary
condition of citizenship
Immigrants are foreigners:
‘‘Wir sind kein Einwanderungsland’- We are not a
country of immigration
(CDU), 2006 (then
„Wir waren nie ein
wir sind’s bis heute
(“We were never a country
of immigration and up to
today we are still not
one.) Islamic veil controversy across
Europe What is the Islamic Veil?
What Which one is the Islamic Veil?
Which The Islamic Veil across Europe
France: A ban on Muslim headscarves and
other "conspicuous" religious symbols at state
schools was introduced in 2004. April 11 2011
law bans women from wearing full-face Islamic
veils in public.
Britain: no ban on Islamic dress in the UK. But
schools are allowed to forge their own dress
code after a 2007.
Germany: states could change their laws locally
if they wanted to. At least four German states
have gone on to ban teachers from wearing
headscarves New York Times, April 21, 2010, Sarkozy Wants Ban of Full Veils
By STEVEN ERLANGER
PARIS — President Nicolas Sarkozy of France told his cabinet on
Wednesday that he would put forward a bill in May to ban the wearing
of the full veil in public places in France, despite a warning from senior
legal authorities that the bill may be unconstitutional.
Mr. Sarkozy wants a bill that goes farther than initial proposals, including
a ban on wearing the full veil — the niqab, which leaves only the eyes
uncovered, and the burqa, which is almost unknown in France — from
streets, markets and shops, according to his spokesman, Luc Chatel.
The full veil “hurts the dignity of women and is unacceptable in
French society,” Mr. Chatel quoted Mr. Sarkozy as telling the cabinet.
The idea of a ban is popular with the French and with his own political
party, while Mr. Sarkozy’s own standing in the opinion polls has rarely
been lower. An earlier proposal from a panel of the National Assembly
suggested a bill banning the full veil in public places
belonging to the state, like schools and public buildings,
and in areas where facial recognition is vital for security
reasons: airports, banks and even public transport.
Mr. Sarkozy’s push for broader restrictions was seen as a
challenge to the Council of State, France’s top
administrative authority, which warned in March that “a
general and absolute ban on the full veil as such can
have no incontestable judicial basis” and that it could be
thrown out by the courts.
The council said it would be clearer legally to simply issue
an order that women would have to uncover their faces
for identity checks as required. A law had to be based on
the protection of public order, the council said, not on the
grounds of personal dignity.
Jean Leonetti, a deputy of the ruling party, said, “The ban
must be total, or it’s incomprehensible.” The prime minister, François Fillon, said, “We’re ready to
take the legal risks because we think the game is
worth the candle.”
Fewer than 2,000 women in France wear a version of the
full veil, and many of them are French women who
have converted to Islam. The full veil is seen here as a
sign of a more fundamentalist Islam, known as
Salafism, which the government is trying to undercut.
On the left, the veil is seen as repressive and a
violation of women’s rights, even though many women
who wear the veil insist that they are doing it as a free
choice and see a ban as a restriction of their liberty.
In 2004, France
banned the wearing of head scarves in public schools,
but at the same time banned all signs of religious
affiliation, so the law did not legally at least single out
Muslims, as a ban on the full veil would seem to do.
Belgium is also preparing to vote on legislation to ban
the full veil, with a fine of up to $35 and possible
seven-day jail term for offenders who do not have New York Times, April 23, 2010, Veil Leads to Fine for French Driver
By REUTERS PARIS (Reuters) — A 31-year-old French woman has been
fined for wearing a full veil while driving, a further sign of
France’’s effort to clamp down on the niqab, the Islamic veil
that leaves only the eyes uncovered and that President
Nicolas Sarkozy says demeans women.
The unidentified woman told LCI television on Friday that the
police had stopped her last month while she was driving in
the city of Nantes, near the Atlantic coast of France. She
was wearing a black niqab, and the police handed her a $29
fine, saying that her clothing posed a safety risk to her
“My eyes were not covered,” she said. “I can see just like you,
and my field of vision was not obstructed.” She said she
would appeal the decision.
The incident has now reached France’s ministerial level.
On Friday, the interior minister asked the immigration minister
to look into revoking the French nationality of the driver’s
husband, who he said was a polygamist married to four
women, with whom he had a total of 12 children. France’s Islamic veil controversy
-“l’affaire du voile”
Background: – Growing Muslim population since WWII – now
roughly 3.5 million Muslims in France (6% of
– Model of ‘immigrant incorporation’ based on
assimilation and laïcité
Commitment to laïcité has deep roots in France and
reflects long struggle between secularists and the
Catholic Church in France
Catholic – Why women wear the veil: An expression of their religion?
A symbol of belonging to Islamic community?
An expression of traditional values / modesty of
Oppression of / social pressure on women? France’s Islamic veil controversy
-“l’affaire du voile”
Beginning in early 1990s, some cases of girls
being suspended from schools for wearing veil
In 2004, France introduces The French law on
secularity and conspicuous religious
symbols in schools
– Bans the wearing of any “conspicuous” religious
symbols in school
– So small medallions, small crosses, stars of David,
hands of Fatima, or small Korans are ok
– Veils, kippas and large crosses are banned France’s Islamic veil controversy
-“l’affaire du voile”
– 2010 French President Sarkozy introduced a
proposal for law banning the wearing of the
full veil in all public places in France
– April 2011 Law goes into effect, prompting
defiance and stirring controversy
defiance Sept 2006 - UK Veil controversy
Sept •2006 – British Member of Parliament (former Foreign Minister) Jack Straw causes controversy by asking Muslim constituents who visit him to remove their veil in his office. He writes article explaining: "wearing the full veil was bound to make better, positive relations between the two communities more difficult". •This stirs big public debate in UK, but unlike in France, the UK government does not look to restrict wearing of veil in any way An example from Turkey:
The clash between a secular
state and a veiled woman
Merve Kavaci: A Turkish politician,
elected as a MP in 1999.
Her appearance with her headscarf in
the parliament caused an uproar.
She was prevented from making her
She was stripped of her Turkish
citizenship, on the technical grounds
that she had not disclosed her US
citizenship according to the proper
What do you think about the French government’s
approach to the veil?
Does the ban on the veil reflect ‘Islamophobia’?
Is it a violation of fundamental human rights to restrict
women from wearing the veil? Or more generally to
regulate how people dress? Or is it perfectly legitimate
for a government to place limits on religious expression
Some feminists support restrictions on the veil, because
they say it is demeaning to women and/or because they
say women in some communities are forced to wear the
veil by male relatives. What do you think of this
What explains the difference between the French and
UK approaches to the ‘veil controversy’?
Could you imagine a similar law ever being introduced in
the US? Why or why not?
the Feb. 2006 Danish Cartoon Crisis
Feb. Free speech vs. respect for religion?
•Sept. 2005 Danish Newspaper JyllandsPosten sponsors cartoon contest and publishes 12 cartoons of the prophet Mohammed
•Editors explain that they have done this to stir debate over trend toward ‘selfcensorship’ in the media (writers/ cartoonists being wary of criticizing Islam)
•Initially little reaction, but Danish Muslim groups protest against cartoons calling them blasphemous and/or Islamophobic Anders Fogh Rasmussen – Danish PM “Freedom of speech is the most valuable right of liberty we must defend it to the very last” •Cartoons later reprinted across Europe, but not in US or UK. Several newspaper editors fired for reprinting cartoons. Free speech vs. respect for
•Protests erupt in countries across the Islamic world. Trade restrictions imposed on Danish products (such as legos) by many governments and businesses.
•Enormous political pressure on Danish government to denounce the cartoons / take action against the paper
Anders Fogh Rasmussen – Danish PM “Freedom of speech is the most valuable right of liberty we must defend it to the very last” •Danish Prime Minister Rasmussen takes strong ‘free speech’ stance, emphasizing he has no control over the press in Denmark and that they can print whatever they want. …another cartoon controversy
South Park regularly insults all religions
Following Danish cartoon crisis, South Park producers create
episode based around the Danish controversy, but Comedy
Central refused to broadcast cartoon image of Mohammed
Last week, producers planned again to air a cartoon with an
image of Muhammad.
Instead, image of Muhammad was replace by Santa Claus in a
bear suit. The word "CENSORED" appeared on screen
repeatedly during episode and mention of Muhammad was
Radical Islamic website posts threats aimed at South Park
On ‘The Simpsons’ Bart's chalkboard line at start of episode
reads "South Park - We'd Stand Beside You If We Weren't So
Scared." New York Times, April 26, 2010, Not Even in South Park? By ROSS DOUTHAT
By Two months before 9/11, Comedy Central aired an episode of “South Park”
entitled “Super Best Friends,” in which the cartoon show’s foul-mouthed
urchins sought assistance from an unusual team of superheroes. These
particular superfriends were all religious figures: Jesus, Krishna,
Buddha, Mormonism’s Joseph Smith, Taoism’s Lao-tse — and the
Prophet Muhammad, depicted with a turban and a 5 o’clock shadow,
and introduced as “the Muslim prophet with the powers of flame.”
That was a more permissive time. You can’t portray Muhammad on
American television anymore, as South Park’s creators, Trey Parker
and Matt Stone, discovered in 2006, when they tried to parody the
Danish cartoon controversy — in which unflattering caricatures of the
prophet prompted worldwide riots — by scripting another animated
appearance for Muhammad. The episode aired, but the cameo itself
was blacked out, replaced by an announcement that Comedy Central
had refused to show an image of the prophet.
For Parker and Stone, the obvious next step was to make fun of the fact
that you can’t broadcast an image of Muhammad. Two weeks ago,
“South Park” brought back the “super best friends,” but this time
Muhammad never showed his face. He “appeared” from inside a UMuhammad
Haul trailer, and then from inside a mascot’s costume.
Haul These gimmicks then prompted a writer for the New York-based Web site
revolutionmuslim.com to predict that Parker and Stone would end up like
Theo van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker murdered in 2004 for his scathing
critiques of Islam. The writer, an American convert to Islam named Abu
Talhah Al-Amrikee, didn’t technically threaten to kill them himself. His post,
and the accompanying photo of van Gogh’s corpse, was just “a warning ...
of what will likely happen to them.”
This passive-aggressive death threat provoked a swift response from Comedy
Central. In last week’s follow-up episode, the prophet’s non-appearance
appearances were censored, and every single reference to Muhammad was
bleeped out. The historical record was quickly scrubbed as well: The original
“Super Best Friends” episode is no longer available on the Internet.
In a way, the muzzling of “South Park” is no more disquieting than any other
example of Western institutions’ cowering before the threat of Islamist
violence. It’s no worse than the German opera house that temporarily
suspended performances of Mozart’s opera “Idomeneo” because it included
a scene featuring Muhammad’s severed head. Or Random House’s
decision to cancel the publication of a novel about the prophet’s third wife.
Or Yale University Press’s refusal to publish the controversial Danish
cartoons ... in a book about the Danish cartoon crisis. Or the fact that
various Western journalists, intellectuals and politicians — the list includes
Oriana Fallaci in Italy, Michel Houellebecq in France, Mark Steyn in Canada
and Geert Wilders in the Netherlands — have been hauled before courts
and “human rights” tribunals, in supposedly liberal societies, for daring to
give offense to Islam. But there’s still a sense in which the “South Park” case is particularly illuminating. Not
because it tells us anything new about the lines that writers and entertainers
suddenly aren’t allowed to cross. But because it’s a reminder that Islam is just
about the only place where we draw any lines at all.
Across 14 on-air years, there’s no icon “South Park” hasn’t trampled, no vein of shockcomedy (sexual, scatalogical, blasphemous) it hasn’t mined. In a less jaded era, its
creators would have been the rightful heirs of Oscar Wilde or Lenny Bruce —
taking frequent risks to fillet the culture’s sacred cows.
In ours, though, even Parker’s and Stone’s wildest outrages often just blur into the
scenery. In a country where the latest hit movie, “Kick-Ass,” features an 11-year-old
girl spitting obscenities and gutting bad guys while dressed in pedophile-bait outfits,
there isn’t much room for real transgression. Our culture has few taboos that can’t
be violated, and our establishment has largely given up on setting standards in the
Except where Islam is concerned. There, the standards are established under threat of
violence, and accepted out of a mix of self-preservation and self-loathing. This is
what decadence looks like: a frantic coarseness that “bravely” trashes its own
values and traditions, and then knuckles under swiftly to totalitarianism and brute
Happily, today’s would-be totalitarians are probably too marginal to take full
advantage. This isn’t Weimar Germany, and Islam’s radical fringe is still a fringe,
rather than an existential enemy. For that, we should be grateful. Because if a
violent fringe is capable of inspiring so much cowardice and self-censorship, it
suggests that there’s enough rot in our institutions that a stronger foe might be able
to bring them crashing down.
to Danish cartoon crisis / Southpark
Should there be limits on free speech when it
comes to speech that is ‘blasphemous’ or deeply
offensive to any religion? Why or why not?
American newspapers chose not to reprint the
cartoons. Why do you think this was the case?
What does the Danish cartoon crisis reveal
about relations between European governments
and Islamic communities in Europe?
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/25/2012 for the course 360 290 taught by Professor Dankelemen during the Spring '11 term at Rutgers.
- Spring '11