ICSW Expert Meeting on
Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion: Barriers and Remedies
June 2004, Bratislava

Some discussion points

Relationship between Integration and Xenophobia:

In recent years, the concept of integration has been criticized, especially by British immigrant minorities, as “racist”. Thus, given the respective hierarchical status in a society, it seems to be crucial to take into account who is defining “integration” and how.

With regard to anti-discrimination policies and legislation to combat xenophobic tendencies in society, August Gächter emphasized the distinction between people’s attitudes and people’s behaviour by raising the question: Is it enough to change (racist) attitudes or is it more crucial to change individual behaviour? At the workplace for instance, anti-discrimination training focusing only on attitudes may offer people an additional opportunity: People may change attitudes towards a woman/a member of a minority, but very often it is only a way of expressing the same views more politely but still holding the same (racist, sexist, etc.) views. Especially at workplaces with gatekeepers, who decide on access to the labour market, it is necessary to focus on their behaviour by special anti-discrimination training. The work on behaviour is also crucial with regard to anti-discrimination legislation, because one cannot legislate people’s attitudes but in a way one can legislate people’s behaviour.

The problem of xenophobia is not limited to individuals, but also concerns legislation, e.g. laws which prevent non-citizens from having access to goods and services, to housing and jobs etc. Despite the new EU anti-discrimination Directives there are still considerable differences in legislation between the Member States.

There was also the question about the economic dimension (e.g. economic status of highly-qualified foreigners holding top jobs) of xenophobia. Xenophobia has not always to do with being a “foreigner”. Walter Schmid gave a Swiss example pointing out that Italians are more accepted than Swiss students. Therefore, one should address the question of who is perceived as a “foreigner” and why?

The role of conflict in the integration process: Should conflict be given a more positive connotation (e.g. more “discursive” forms of conflict)?

Private sector:

What is the motivation for private companies to implement anti-discrimination measures? Different answers to this question were given such as the role of national or community-wide anti-discrimination legislation, more business-driven motives, i.e. benefits expected from employment of people from diverse national, linguistic, cultural etc., backgrounds, facilitation of “peaceful” relationships among workers.

It was also pointed to the growing importance of businesses led by ethnic minorities that may have the force of integrating “members of the majority”, e.g. theatre groups founded by FSU immigrants in Israel that incorporate Hebrew-speaking actors are very successful.

Awareness raising:

What is the motivation for private companies to implement anti-discrimination measures? Different answers to this question were given such as the role of national or community-wide anti-discrimination legislation, more business-driven motives, i.e. benefits expected from employment of people from diverse national, linguistic, cultural etc., backgrounds, facilitation of “peaceful” relationships among workers.

Especially our Slovak participants stressed the importance of awareness raising, while raising the question how a change in public opinion can be achieved? As for the role of politicians, the problem in Slovakia seems to be the lack of reaction to racist public discourses.

Multiculturalism/Assimilation/Values:

The discussion about multicultural or assimilative concepts of integration constantly raised the question of the ideological background behind these concepts and of their possible consequences. It was therefore emphasized that both concepts shall be used only in a descriptive way. The understanding of assimilation and the assimilation process was controversial: Dilek Cinar described assimilation inter alia as an ongoing sociological process, but stressed that assimilation should never be imposed. This raised the question of when does a “free choice” to assimilate become a “reaction under pressure”. In the discussion about integration/assimilation/multiculturalism, terms like “values”, “core values”, “cultural” or “ethnic” values or “supra-ethnic values” are often stressed, while 1) common definitions about those “values” are lacking and 2) it should be questioned where these terms are coming from.

In the discussion about “values” within society the question arose: How much do people have to adapt to the host society and how much can they keep their own traditions, identities, group affiliations? Depending on the individual’s functions in contemporary societies, could it be that it would make more sense to talk of core “competences” instead of core values?

In the debate of assimilation some participants mentioned examples of how migrants develop their own forms of integration, of “being different without being different”. For example Muslims in Norway developed a very Norwegian way of being Muslim, or catholic communities in a dominant protestant society may develop a very protestant way of being catholic.

With regard to integration programmes the introduction of compulsory language programmes for so-called “new immigrants” in Germany has been discussed. These include sanctions if German language classes are not attended. These sanctions, if linked to a cut-down of social welfare, could be a direct road to poverty for certain immigrants.

Examples of Good Practice:

Can Israel be considered a “good” practice model, from which the EU could learn because of the integration of huge numbers of FSU immigrants admitted to Israel recently?

Israel also seems to provide an interesting case in point with regard to the immediate political empowerment of immigrants revealed by the fact that 2-3 political parties represented in parliament have been founded by FSU immigrants.

---

Home	Contact: Dilek Çinar, Avraham Lavine