Integration - Recognition - Identity

MIGRATION HAS BECOME AN UNSTOPPABLE GLOBAL FORCE

Printer Friendly Page

INTEGRATION – RECOGNITION - IDENTITY.

JUST AS CAPITAL RESTLESSLY HUNTS THE GLOBE,
OPENING A PLANT HERE AND CLOSING A FACTORY THERE
AS IT SEARCHES FOR THE HIGHEST RETURNS,
SO PEOPLE FOLLOW IN ITS WAKE,
LOOKING FOR JOBS THEY NO LONGER HAVE AT HOME...

MONEY, RESOURCES AND IMAGINATION ARE NEEDED TO HELP US INTEGRATE.

THROWING PEOPLE TOGETHER IN HARSH CONDITIONS
AND HOPING THAT GOOD RELATIONS WILL RESULT
IS NOT A POLICY, BUT AN ABANDONMENT OF ONE.
(Jenni Russell, Guardian. July/10/06)

Initially, immigrants do not make firm decisions about settlement or return and particularly so in the modern era of communication. Settlement begins with contact, competition and an accommodating period during which immigrants experience the discomfort of the new and then make personal decisions about what they experience and hope to aspire to in the mainstream of the new society. Gradually, long-term futures emerge from short-term trials and then accommodation validates a decision to either remain or return. If the decision is to remain a period of separation takes place in which individuals and groups define themselves in relation to the local mainstream. Then there is a demand for recognition of presence and lastly public acceptance.

Essentially, integration is a decision begun by an individual, family or a group. It is a multigenerational journey without a predictable destination. But some will not finish the journey and will continue to reside in ethnic milieus. So, to an extent integration and pluralism are compatible and what seems to emerge is a salad bowl rather than a melting pot.

INTEGRATION IS FROM THE LATIN WORDS INTER AND TANGERE, TO BE IN TOUCH.
BROADLY, IT COULD BE DESCRIBED IN AN IMMIGRANT CONTEXT AS;
BEING IN TOUCH WITH OR INTERACTING WITH THE ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND CULTURAL NETWORKS OF THE NEW SOCIETY.

The European Unions Common Basic Principles on integration have emphasised that integration is a, "dynamic two-way process of mutual accommodation by all immigrants and residents."

Integration is the ongoing forming of amalgams between one's own culture and the dominant culture one enters and resides in. It is not assimilation that is; the decline of an ethnic distinction and its corollary cultural and social differences. Assimilation robs people of memory leaving them weak and exposed. In integration there is a learning process taking place. There is not an imposed cultural unlearning process that demands a person or persons to conform to a set of social and cultural mainstream expectations. Assimilation as a cultural unlearning process used to be described as the melting pot in which one shed one's cultural scales and became less and less ethnically different to such an extent that one was seen and accepted as part of the dominant mainstream group unless excluded by other significant differences.

Much of the literature dealing with integration emerges from European immigration to the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. In the recent past research into integration is taking place in Europe because European states have at last begun to accept the presence of immigrants they have tried ignore for so long. While there was not always overwhelming acceptance of the arrival of European newcomers into those states, they were, however, coming with a lot of common soluble cultural baggage. They were expected to assimilate into the mainstream of societies that had an Anglo-Saxon Protestant core. At times of international tension immigrants were demonised similar to the Irish in Britain, Japanese during the Second World War and adherents of Islam at present.

However, at present immigrants are coming from diverse global geographical and cultural situations into societies where both the existence of and character of a national mainstream is blurred. For example, in Europe should an immigrant aspire to be Irish or European? At present European identity remains something that comes from the head rather than the heart. In the European context where does national identity fit in the absence of a European Constitution? So how is it defined culturally and socially and what is expected from immigrants on a journey of integration? What is the mainstream of Irish life?

So the question is; what is there to integrate into? Where does integration begin for the individual or group?
If, as it seems to be the case, that the present trend is toward secularism, how does an immigrant, for example, a Muslim, whose identity is territorially defined, ascribed rather than achieved, begin to integrate in a society the tradition of which is Judeo/Christian/Capitalist/Democratic? And not only that, but in a society that is seen as indifferent and in some instances hostile to such belief and religious affiliation in general. Muslims accept the tenets of Islam as integral in coping with both private and public aspects of life. So, will the adherents of modern deterritorialised Islam get their spiritual and public sustenance from the state in which they reside or from the umma, world wide Islam? In Australia the issue of religion in integration is seen with such importance that the Australian Government has commissioned a study: Religion, Cultural Diversity and Safeguarding Australia.

Integration is probably the greatest challenge facing global cohesion because it involves reinventing an internal identity and expressing it publicly in a deterritorialised world. Modern individual identity demands recognition of group identities. One's identity as a Muslim is motivated by inner belief. It is not supported by society but at the same time is expected to conform to social norms of that society. In Europe national identities remains more blood and soil based, accessible only to those ethnic groups who initially populated those spaces. Daniel Fried, US State Department's spokesperson on European affairs, thinks that Europeans still see Muslims as "unwanted foreigners". (Economist. 24/6/06) In the New World immigrants look over their shoulders rather than under their feet to source identity.

So, in modern migration will families be truly at home in more than one place? In times of international conflict will they become a suspect and marginal community as Muslims are at present?

Studies indicate that those immigrants with high levels of human-cultural capital have a greater opportunity of integration as compared to labour migrants. They have a greater opportunity of engaging the economic mainstream. However, labour migrants with less human-cultural capital will rely on ethnic contact within ethnic enclaves across a few generations. This seems to be the case of many in marginal ghettos world­wide and particularly in major cities of European member states. Of course lack of language skills in the immigrant generation has led to much of the isolation and invisibility that exists in immigrant enclaves in the next generations.

Particular proactive integration policies need to be put in place for those vulnerable immigrants to enable them to relate to the national mainstream and feel a sense of belonging. They are as necessary in modern economies as their skilled counterparts. They are not disposable.

Personally, it seems that Europe needs a new paradigm in dealing with the arrival of people from diverse cultures. In the past Europeans imposed their cultural, social, political, economic and social norms on people. Can Europe now accept the descendants of those people it dominated in a new paradigm of respect and equality?

Is it possible for Europeans generally and Irish people in particular to accept that these new immigrants from resistant cultures will in time change and enhance the mainstream of European life? Is it possible that the mainstream of European life could enhance these new cultures on its doorstep?

How should the mainstream of European Member States approach and support integration?

What core values can be expected from each citizen and resident?
What areas of diversity need to be nurtured and respected?
How to ensure political and economic participation?
How to give people a sense of ownership of a shared vision of society?

Some Suggestions:
Assure the stranger that she/he is not "out of place".
Learn to live in a pluralistic society.
Accept the mistakes of history.
Acknowledge feelings of hostility and threat.
Recognise a common humanity based on rights to basic needs in health, education, housing and services.
Study of culture to foster democratic values and attitudes.
Use dialogue as a solution rather than discord, fear or threat.
Define ourselves by what we like about ourselves rather than what we dislike about others.

Avoid scapegoating immigrants during election campaigns.
Access to communication systems, particularly local and ethnic radio.
Dialogue needs to be structured, initiated and encouraged.
Publicly funded policies of integration are needed to support the goodwill of people.
Collaboration of government departments and voluntary agencies.

The rise of the global city is an important feature of globalisation because the global city plugs the nation into the world's networks. And diversity takes place mostly in the city.
(D. Cahill. The Challenges of Immigration and Integration in the European Union and Australia. 2003)

"Today, nobody noticed me and I have not lived.
You have noticed me and I live again." (Chekov)

Back to Top