Everyday Autochthony. Difference, Discontent and the Politics of Home in Amsterdam (original) (raw)
Related papers
The notion of super-diversity has been employed to describe the urban condition in cities across the world. By focusing on the politics of culturalization in the Netherlands, I engage with scholars who claim that super-diversity may lead to a normalcy of difference. I argue that in the Netherlands a culturalist common sense has emerged which divides Dutch society into distinct and internally homogeneous cultures and which represents Dutch culture as a threatened entity that must be protected against the mores and moralities of minoritized, racialized outsiders. Focusing on working-class whites in a neighbourhood in Amsterdam, I show how plans to demolish and restructure their neighbourhood fuelled a discourse of displacement in antagonistic relation to “Others”. Rather than normalizing differences, this culturalist common sense has brought into being a field of knowledge and both reflected and supported views that produce and reinforce boundaries between “ordinary” neighbours and cultural and social others.
Shifting Notions of Citizenship in the Netherlands: exploring
2011
Notions of citizenship in the Netherlands are increasingly shifting away from liberal models of civic citizenship that, in theory, promote diversity, pluralism and multicultural understandings of citizenship and are moving, instead, towards a monocultural and assimilationist understanding of national identity and belonging. This trend, known in the literature as the 'culturalization of citizenship' constitutes the primary topic of this project.
As with much of Europe, the Netherlands has no explicit 'race' discourse; however, the state, through its public policy and administrative practices, does categorise its population along 'ethnic' lines, using birthplace — one's own or one's (grand-) parent's — as the surrogate determining factor. The contemporary operative taxonomy has until recently been binary: autochtoon (of Dutch heritage) and allochtoon (of foreign birth). Used earlier at the provincial level in respect of internal migration, the taxonomy was expanded in 1999 to demarcate between 'Western' allochtoon and 'non-Western' allochtoon, with the latter being further subdivided into first and second generation. Informed by a 'generative metaphor' approach (Schon 1979) that links cognition to action, this article subjects the allochtoon/ autochtoon binary to metaphor analysis and the Western/non-Western taxonomy to category analysis. The work done by 'birthplace' in the term pair suggests that they are, in their everyday usage, surrogates for a race discourse, carrying the same (ancient) assumptions about individual identity and the earth-air-sun-water of the spot on which one was born that underlies definitions-in-use of 'race'. Their meaning in contemporary policy discourse derives from the interaction of metaphoric and category structures, with implications for policy implementation.
Homing the Dutch: Politics and the Planning of Belonging -- An Introduction
Homing the Dutch: Politics and the Planning of Belonging
In this introduction, we show that whereas “home” in public discourses in the United States and many other Western countries is most often conceived of as a personal space, particularistic and exclusive, free from any external (state) interference, in the Netherlands, the metaphor of home as a public and ideological space is increasingly being used by policy-makers, urban planners, and social workers to legitimize their political programs, policies, and social interventions. They aim to make everyone feel at home in the nation, the city, and the neighborhood. This special issue Homing the Dutch: Politics and the Planning of Belonging deals in particular with the strong tendency in the Netherlands to govern and stimulate feelings of home and belonging in public space, building on an old tradition. The case studies that are being presented, all address instances of different (state-supported) projects or policies that attempt to improve social cohesion, integration, and livability by means of establishing “a feeling of home for everyone” in public space.
As with much of Europe, the Netherlands has no explicit ‘race’ discourse; however, the state, through its public policy and administrative practices, does categorise its population along ‘ethnic’ lines, using birthplace — one's own or one's (grand-) parent's — as the surrogate determining factor. The contemporary operative taxonomy has until recently been binary: autochtoon (of Dutch heritage) and allochtoon (of foreign birth). Used earlier at the provincial level in respect of internal migration, the taxonomy was expanded in 1999 to demarcate between ‘Western’ allochtoon and ‘non-Western’ allochtoon, with the latter being further subdivided into first and second generation. Informed by a ‘generative metaphor’ approach (Schon 1979) that links cognition to action, this article subjects the allochtoon/autochtoon binary to metaphor analysis and the Western/non-Western taxonomy to category analysis. The work done by ‘birthplace’ in the term pair suggests that they are, in their everyday usage, surrogates for a race discourse, carrying the same (ancient) assumptions about individual identity and the earth-air-sun-water of the spot on which one was born that underlies definitions-in-use of ‘race’. Their meaning in contemporary policy discourse derives from the interaction of metaphoric and category structures, with implications for policy implementation.
Notions of citizenship in the Netherlands are increasingly shifting away from liberal models of civic citizenship that, in theory, promote diversity, pluralism and, multicultural understandings of citizenship and are moving, instead, towards a mono-cultural and assimilationist understanding of national identity and belonging. This trend, known in the literature as the ‘culturalization of citizenship’ constitutes the primary topic of this project. In this dissertation, I argue that official and populist discourses concerning non-western Muslim immigrants in Dutch society today work to inscribe difference onto “foreign” (“allochthonous”) residents of the Netherlands while upholding an idealized notion of “Dutch identity”. My research revealed that it was not just government-sponsored integration programs that reproduced dominant understandings of belonging or difference through integration activities, but also, the everyday discursive practices of Dutch “natives” (called “autochthons”) who, at times inadvertently, reproduce exclusionary notions of national identity and belonging. My ethnographic research, based in three different neighbourhoods in Rotterdam (Bergpolder, Liskwartier, and Nieuwe Westen), revealed how local and national discourses of belonging are expressed in everyday practices. Although other scholars have explored immigrants’ integration and the politics of belonging in the Netherlands, this project takes a unique approach by exploring ideas of belonging using space as an entry point for analysis, paying particular attention to how individuals’ use, access and understand neighbourhood public places. Using Ryan Centner’s concept of ‘spatial capital’, I argue that “autochthonous” individuals are more spatially privileged in their ability to define and design public places in the neighbourhood than individuals who would be perceived as “allochthonous”. Contrary to the declared objectives of official citizenship “tests” and integration programs, the process itself reproduces boundaries and differences between “autochthons” and “allochthons”
Anti-nationalist nationalism: the paradox of Dutch national identity
Nations & Nationalism, 2016
Academic research on contemporary Dutch nationalism has mainly fo-cused on its overt, xenophobic and chauvinist manifestations, which have become normalised since the early 2000s. As a result, less radical, more nuanced versions of Dutch nationalism have been overlooked. This article attempts to fill this gap by drawing attention to a peculiar self-image among Dutch progressive intellectuals we call anti-nationalist nationalism. Whereas this self-image has had a long history as banal nationalism, it has come to be employed more explicitly for political positioning in an intensified nationalist climate. By dissecting it into its three constitutive dimensions – constructivism, lightness and essentialism – we show how this image of Dutchness is evoked precisely through the simultaneous rejection of 'bad' and enactment of 'good' nationalism. More generally, this article provides a nuanced understanding of contemporary Dutch nationalism. It also challenges prevalent assumptions in nationalism studies by showing that post-modern anti-nationalism does not exclude but rather constitutes essentialist nationalism.
2015
The integration debate in the Netherlands is more and more framed in culturalist and emotive terms. A ‘progressive consensus’ has formed among the Dutch since the 1960s, which is increasingly intolerant to those who do not share these morals. Citizenship, in terms of who is Dutch and who is not, is defined in culturalist terms of sharing ‘Dutch’ norms and values, and in emotive terms of ‘belonging’ and ‘feeling at home’. Because this discourse has a ‘nativist’ essence, immigrants and their children are regarded with suspicion, particularly those of Moroccan and Turkish descent, of which the majority is Muslim. Based on the results of various empirical studies, we explore feelings of belonging among second generation Moroccan and Turkish Dutch. We find that the culturalist and emotive integration discourse has counterproductive effects. Even though these effects are not all-pervasive, as they do not completely block processes of acculturation, and do not seem to negatively affect ide...