Garner et all Sources of resentment

Note that research was done with 43 people in four monocultural areas of Britain.
Racism not only about physical but also about cultural differences.
“where social and environmental conditions were better, there was, as a general rule, less apparent hostility to minorities.”
“By far the most frequent context for referring to ethnic minorities is that of perceived competition for resources- typically housing, but also employment, benefits, territory and culture.”
Onus for integration being placed on immigrants.
Integration seen as synonymous with assimilation.
“Placing the bouindary between ‘us’ and ‘them’ in a different place...does not abolish the boundary. The people forming ‘them’ are still racialised.”
“broadly speaking, people who interact more frequently and on an equal footing outside the workplace exhibit less prejudice than those who do not.”
Claims (in an indirect reference to the MORI poll) that there are in-built biases of polls showing immigration as an issue of major concern. Claim that when people are not prompted immigration does not score so highly.
Significant fear that the quality of services on offer are so poor that they cannot be extended to new arrivals.
Language barrier as a key issue in integration.
Emphasise information gap, especially on housing and entitlement to benefits as a major issue in promoting tension.

Muir

Points to the challenge to the “relatively hands-off” approach Britain has traditionally taken in relation to identity and citizenship caused by the threat of terror and the impact of globalization.1

2006 Mori Poll 40% see immigration as a major issue.2

“Sociologists have found that while (contrary to much media speculation) segregation in the UK is not increasing, it does remain high for certain groups in certain parts of the country”3

claims that new identity politics has set itself as against multi-culturalism which is believed to have gone to far and to be responsible for segregation.4

involves a stress on local identity, seen as essential to promote community cohesion.5

social cohesion can be promoted through: (1) tackling discrimination 2) tackling social inequality; many tensions caused when those on low income have to compete for welfare 3) cultural change through shared action (to increase contact), shared values, essentially those of citizenship (through citizenship education/tests, etc...) and shared identities 6

Promoting shared identity seen to have the specific contribution of promoting emotional attachment and a sense of solidarity.7

“Promoting shared identities can be no substitute for the difficult task of reducing social and economic inequalities.”8

Process of promoting shared identity should not be seen as a substitute for multiculturalism, which is a way of respecting difference within common institutions.9

“Rather than focusing on the much contested concept of multiculturalism, those who worry about segregation might do better to focus on the wide array of structural factors that in some parts of the country have allowed parallel lives to develop. These include the housing market, school choice and the poverty and low levels of social mobility that are acute for many minority groups.”10

“It is much easier for new migrant communities to retain links with their homelands or fellow immigrants in other countries than was once the case. In this context the role of institutions such as the BBC or the mainstream press in helping to define our collective experience as a society is much weaker than it was in the past, when many more people watched the same programmes and read the same papers.”11

points to a celebration of democracy, multiculturalism, music, arts, sport and heritage as means of developing a more open sense of British identity.12

1R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 4.

2R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 5.

3R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 5.

4R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 5.

5R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 6.

6R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 7–8.

7R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 8–9.

8R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 10.

9R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 10.

10R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 10

11R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 14.

12R Muir, The New Identity Politics, (London: IPPR, 2007) 15–16.

Solomos

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000014976 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000014959

refers to the difference between direct discrimination and indirect discrimination.¹

“from the very earliest stages of the migration process a number of local authorities, pressure groups and individuals raised the question of the impact of immigration on their localities.”²

at a local level issues such as “housing, employment and social problems” are linked in popular perception to immigration.³

“[Powell's] emphasis on the social and cultural changes brought about by immigration helped to create or recreate an understanding of Englishness or Britishness that was based on the notion of shared history, customs and kinship, which effectively excluded black and ethnic minorities from membership”⁴ “From this perspective the loss of Britain's national identity was due to the failure of the nation to recognise the repercussions of immigration on the national culture.”⁵

New Right move from “nativism and anti-immigration “ to seeing “the very presence of black and ethnic minority communities...as a threat to the way of life and culture of white citizens.”⁶ minorities presented as an “enemy within”⁷

“In practice the most resonant themes in racial discourses were not absolute notions of racial superiority, but the threats that black and minority communities presented to the cultural, political and religious homogeneity of white British society.”⁸

Thatcher's concern for preserving the “British nation” and “British character” linked to Conservatives taking votes from the National Front.⁹

points to the way negative social and cultural attributes are linked with terms such as “refugees” and “economic migrants”¹⁰

points to the development of anti-antiracist attitudes amongst the right.¹¹

difficulty in developing “the acid test for who is and who is not English or British?”¹²

uncertainty over the meaning of Englishness or Britishness due to the changes national identity has been subjected to.¹³

British dilemma “of what kind of multicultural society it should become.”¹⁴

Tory dilemma of being part of Europe without losing British identity.¹⁵

“One of the trends that became clear during the 1980s and 1990s was the attempt to reinvent a British national identity in line with its historical image as an 'island race'”¹⁶ points to the role of the Rushdie affair in shaping this debate.¹⁷

“is clear that the debate on immigration was as much about perceived dangers to British national identity as it was about the potential number of immigrants.¹⁸

entaglement of the labour party in the debate on British/English identity.¹⁹

New Labour's attempt to balance expressions of patriotism with an embrace of mutliculturalism. After race riots in 2001 and 9/11 “there was a noticeable shift in political language on immigration and race relations.”²⁰ refers to Blunkett's suggestion of a “British test”.²¹ increasing unease at the boundaries of multiculturalism.²²

“rather than questioning and challenging the moral panic that has broken out over the question of refugees and asylum seekers New Labour has...added to it.”²³

Emphasis on “social cohesion” and “integration”²⁴

“Labour's time in power may come to be seen as a tragic missed opportunity to “think the unthinkable” and “do the undoable”.²⁵

1J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 84.

2J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 95.

3J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 96.

4J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 172.

5J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 173.

6J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 174.

7J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 174.

8J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 174.

9J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 177.

10J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 184.

11J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 187–189.

12J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 210.

13J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211.

14J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211.

15J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211–212.

16J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 212.

17J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 211–215.

18J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 218.

19J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 219.

20J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 220.

21J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 220.

22J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 220.

23J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 253.

24J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 254.

25J Solomos, Race and Racism in Britain, Third Edition, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan 2003, 254,

Spencer

Version:1.0 StartHTML:0000000168 EndHTML:0000015417 StartFragment:0000000804 EndFragment:0000015400

S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95.

Quotes Roy Hattersley “Without integration, limitation is inexcusable; without limitation, integration is impossible.”¹

“The bi-partisan consensus that firm immigration control is the prerequisite of good race relations rests on the assumption that the hostility which some white people feel towards black and Asian people would be exacerbated if they believed that their entry into the country was not effectively controlled.”²

points to the way in which successive governments have failed to convince public opinion that immigration is under control, and the generally negative, and exaggerated, opinions regarding immigration in the general public.³

“Although it has become less socially acceptable to express negative views about black and Asian people within the United Kingdom, fewer inhibitions constrain expressions of such views about immigrants, foreigners, and, in recent years, refugees.”⁴

points to scholars (Jim Rose & Shamit Saggar) who suggest that politicians were responsible for fostering anti-immigration feeling with their emphasis on legislation.⁵

(writing in 1998) “Public fears that immigration is out of control are thus not justified. It has become increasingly difficult to enter the United Kingdom and numbers have fallen significantly over the last twenty years”.⁶

“the message sent to the public by immigration policy, that particular kinds of foreigners would not be welcome members of British society is in direct contradiction to the message relayed by government race relations policy- that existing members of minority communities in Britain should be accepted as equal members of society.”⁷ Quotes Roy Hattersley “if we cannot afford to let them in, those of them who are here already must be doing harm.”⁸

points to the way in which Immigration controls were targeted against Black and Asian immigrants.⁹ “In order to protect that legislation from challenge under the race discrimination legislation, immigrant law and its enforcement were and remain exempt from its provisions.”¹⁰

“It has been in the presentation of immigration policy that politicians have reinforced so forcefully the message that particular kinds of foreigners are unwelcome in the United Kingdom.”¹¹

points to the fact that after Thatcher's claim in 1978 that British people were afraid of being swamped by people from alien cultures a poll indicated that the number of people who considered immigration an urgent issue rose from 9% to 21%.¹²

“Once government decides to appease rather than assuage public concern, new measures have to be proposed to show that something is being done. Loopholes are identified, rule changes proposed, appeal rights abolished, time-limits shortened, defences removed.”¹³

“Post-war immigration to Britain has, it appears, contributed to a national identity crisis. Having lost its imperial, military, economic and sporting prowess, Britain is no longer confident of its role and cultural identity.” results in fear of the arrival of those with different customs.¹⁴ “There has been a clear resistance to updating Britain's self-image to accommodate the multicultural reality of British society and its history.”¹⁵

Against an open door policy points to 1) reality of strong fears of immigration 2) “Immigrants who settle in the United Kingdom must be entitled to the same civil, political, social and economic rights and benefits as other residents. To suggest otherwise would be to concede a future two-tier society of those who really belong and those who do not. Employment is not available to all who need it and social and economic rights...are expensive.”¹⁶

points to the Canadian declaration which is defined mainly in terms of positive goals and contrasts it with the “defensive, largely negative, tone of the United Kingdom's aims”¹⁷

“Let us reject, once and for all, the message of tolerance. Tolerance is what we feel for those whom we disapporve of, or dislike, but nevertheless feel obliged to be civil to.”¹⁸

1S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 74.

2S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 74.

3S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 75.

4S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 75.

5S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 75.

6S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77.

7S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77.

8S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77.

9S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 77–80.

10S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 78.

11S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 80.

12S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 80.

13S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 80.

14S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 83.

15S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 83.

16S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 84.

17S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 85.

18S Spencer, “The Impact of Immigration Policy on Race Relations” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 74–95, 90.

Parekh

Society needs to balance the need of cohesion and a sense of belonging with the right of minority groups to preserve their way of life.¹

Proceduralist view of integration: state as culturally neutral, minorities left free to choose up to which point they wish to assimilate the majority culture.²

Assimilationist model: need for a “common national culture” “the state has both a right and a duty to ensure that its cultural minorities assimilate or merge into the prevailing national culture.”³ cultural assimilation--> biological assimilation through intermarriage--> nationalist assimilation.⁴

Bifurcationist/liberal model of integration: focuses on public and private divide, unity in the public realm, diversity allowed in the private. Sharing of a “common political culture.”⁵

Pluralist model: need for a realisation of the multicultural nature of society, state has the role to promote the culture of ethnic minority groups.⁶

Millet model state has no independent status but is rather a “union of communities, a bare framework within which they should be free to pursue their traditional ways of life and engage in necessary social, political and economic interactions.”⁷ state should respect the individuality of the communities and work to preserve them.⁸

“The five models also entail different conceptions of citizenship. In the proceduralist model citizenship is purely formal in nature and consists of certain rights and obligations. In the assimilationist model it is grounded in the national culture and requires the citizen to share it as a necessary precondition of full membership of the political community. In the bifurcationist model the citizen is committed to sharing the political culture of the community. In the pluralist model citizenship has a plural cultural basis, and citizens bring their diverse cultures to the public realm and enjoy a culturally mediated membership of the political community. The millet model privileges communal membership and has no, or only a highly attenuated, notion of citizenship.”⁹

claims that the proceduralist model is logically incoherent, for any concept of a state must be based on certain (cultural) values, and thus it is impossible for the state to be culturally neutral.¹⁰

Assimilation (1) not clear what one is to assimilate into (2) rarely works in practice (3) impossible for liberal societies as it breaks the principle of equal respect for persons who are “culturally embedded and derive their sense of identity and meaning from their cultures.”¹¹

Bifurcationist model (1) the “common” public values tend to represent the values of a certain, dominant group. (2) Discourse of public unity tends to outweigh discourse of private diversity¹²

Defends pluralist/multicultural model (1) “cherishes unity and diversity and privileges neither.”¹³public realm institutionalises and celebrates diversity.¹⁴

Critique of the millet model (1) freezes and isolates communities (2) ignores that individuals may belong to diverse communities.¹⁵

on post WW2 immigration “the consciousness of colour was imposed on the immigrants by white society for they did not define themselves in terms of it.”¹⁶ “Two interrelated factors were judged to stand in the way of good race relations, namely the number of immigrants and white society's discrimination against them...Successive governments therefore decided upon the interrelated and mutually legitimising policies of restricting black and Asian immigration and combating discrimination.”¹⁷

Issue of integration emerges in 1960s, beginning of discourse of multiculturalism. Note however, use of term “ethnic minorities” rather than “ethnic groups” as was the case in USA and Canada.¹⁸ Resistance of language by conservative commentators.¹⁹

conservatives preferred assimilationist model, liberals bifurcationist model.²⁰ both shared the consensus that the public realm was to be shaped by the dominant, white, culture.²¹

Explores the impact of the Rushdie affair on the debate including (1) the shift of many integrationists to assimilation (2) the emergence of the pluralist perspective (3) realisation of the need for minorities to become actors in the debate (4) issue that Britain also had a cultural problem.²²

1B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 1.

2B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 1–2.

3B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 2.

4B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 2.

5B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 2–3.

6B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 3.

7B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 4.

8B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 4.

9B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 5,

10B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 5–7.

11B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 7–8.

12B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 8–9.

13B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 9.

14B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 10.

15B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 11–12.

16B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 13–14.

17B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 14.

18B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 14–15.

19B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 15.

20B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 15..

21B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 17.

22B Parekh, “Integrating Minorities” in T Blackstone, B Parekh and P Sanders, Race Relations in Britain: a developing agenda, (London: Routledge, 1999) 1–21, 18–20.

Sansone

L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556.

Basis of European multiculturalism 1) social pact, state's responsibility to care for the poor who submit themselves to certain conditions 2) colonial history, including the legacy of distinguishing rights according to ethnicity 3) the fact that these states often have a long history of ethnic minorities (e.g. Welsh, Scots...)¹

England (unclear why preference for England rather than UK) focus is on combating racism rather than cultural plurality, hence reference to racial, rather than interethnical relations as elsewhere in Europe.²

Immigration challenges social pact, as it becomes harder to accept one needs to pay to support outsiders; and raises awkward questions regarding the colonial past.³

points to the way that in the UK and other European countries, multiculturalism is promoted by the State via the educational system.⁴ Crises in multiculturalism linked to crises in the role of the state.⁵

Role of media, and media in foreign languages, in shaping debate on multiculturalism.⁶

suggests that some ethic minorities may feel threatened by multicultural practices and prefer educational practices which combat racism and promote a universalist outlook.⁷

criticises the way in which the multicultural discourse is often used to (1) conceal what different groups have in common 2) conceal differences within groups 3) fossilize concepts of ethnic identity.⁸ worse case scenario becomes a form of ethno-social engineering⁹

refers to pos-ethnic challenges to multiculturalism such as 1) second and third generation of immigrants and 2) poliethnic youth identities.¹⁰

1L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 537–538.

2L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 538.

3L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 538–539.

4L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 540.

5L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 540–541.

6L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 541.

7L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 542–543.

8L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 545.

9L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 546.

10L Sansone, “Multiculturalism, Estado e Modernidade— As Nuançes em Alguns Países Europeus e o Debate no Brasil” Dados 46:3 (2003) 535–556, 547.

houston et al;

T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org

“The word ‘Diaspora’ meaning ‘a scattering’ is used to describe this large-scale movement of people from their homeland to settle permanently or temporarily in other countries.”¹

factors that will fuel the increase in migration: economic inequality; the quest for education and economic opportunity; escape from political and social oppression demand for skilled workers; aging populations in the developed world, in need of personal care and pension support; religious persecution; inter-tribal conflict; students used to receive scholarships, but are now more likely to be funded from families; urbanization; population growth.²

“Change can be painful and the changes brought by the movement of peoples are no exception. While the outcomes may be creative, the process can be long and hard for everybody involved. There is no agreement on how diverse societies should live together. Different models are debated. The American ideal of society was the Melting Pot where everything is assimilated in the whole. For some that has been replaced by the Salad Bowl ideal in which each part contributes to the whole whilst maintaining its distinctive form and flavor. Some prioritize Integration while others emphasize Multiculturalism. Many want Contact but fear Assimilation, while others desire total Separation. Whatever form the interaction may take, the result will still inevitably be change and the changes have to be coped with.”³

Diaspora people vessels of cultural extension and economic support.⁴

“Many of us are caught in a cycle of kneeling before the toilet to clean it and kneeling in prayer for strength to do the same.”⁵

claims that the NHS would collapse without diaspora workers.⁶

opportunity to shape leaders from across the world.⁷

potential contributions of diaspora Christian communities 1) welfare of new society 2) reach out to fellow diaspora 3) reach out to other diaspora communities 4) reach out to marginalized people 5)mission bases 6) revitalize Christian community in host country⁸

Considerations for host Christian communities: 1) avoid patronizing 2) avoid racism 3) avoid fear.⁹

Consideration for diaspora communities 1) lack of resources and leaders 2) a minority within a minority 3) inward looking, ghetto mentality.¹⁰

“In the Christian world, Chinese Diaspora Christians have created a world-wide network for evangelism, as have the Filipino Diaspora Christians (See Chapter 7). The Association of Christian Ministries to Internationals (ACMI) was established in 1981 as a US/Canadian fellowship of international student ministry staff and volunteers to enhance networking, cross training and cooperation in North America and globally. It is recommended that all Diaspora groups learn from their experiences and explore networking in this way.”¹¹

presents as options for outreach among diaspora 1) churches emerging as homogeneous units within the diaspora 2) established diaspora churches plant new ones for their fellow nationals 3) different ethnic churches work together to plant churches for new ethnic group 4) international church 5) multiethnic churches¹²

1T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 7.

2T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 8–9.

3T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 13.

4T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 14.

5C Taguba quoted in T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 14.

6T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 15.

7T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 18.

8T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 19.

9T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 20.

10T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 20.

11T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 25.

12T Houston, R Thomson, RGidoomal and L Chinn, The New People Next Door, Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, (Lausanne Committee for World Evangelisation, 2004) available online at www.lausanne.org, 26.

Beckford

J Beckford, Three Paradoxes in the Relations between Religion and Politics in an English City , Review of Religious Research 39:4 (1998) 344–359.

Points to three million people associated to non-Christian religious communities living in the UK, concentrated in inner city areas.¹

“The Church's repeated state- ments of official support for multi-culturalism, coupled with its creation of a net- work of diocesan advisers on inter-faith relations, are evidence of the seriousness with which it regards this part of its mission. This does not mean, however, that all Anglican clergy or laity are enthusiastic about multi-culturalism. Nor should it be allowed to conceal the fact that Anglicans have usually been powerful enough in local communities to act as brokers on their own terms for 'other faiths.'”²

“the one-way deterministic approach which defines immigrants as "vic- tims" is unable to account for the dialectic process which interaction between the immigrant group and the state generates. This process results in the increasing integration into wider structures while, simultaneously, it fosters a separate cultural institutional identity (Werbner, 1991b:141 quoted in Lewis, 1994:72).”³

1J Beckford, Three Paradoxes in the Relations between Religion and Politics in an English City , Review of Religious Research 39:4 (1998) 344–359, 344–345.

2J Beckford, Three Paradoxes in the Relations between Religion and Politics in an English City , Review of Religious Research 39:4 (1998) 344–359, 351.

3J Beckford, Three Paradoxes in the Relations between Religion and Politics in an English City , Review of Religious Research 39:4 (1998) 344–359,

Jackson

"A European identity that is solely identified with the European Union, the Schengen Agreement, the free movement of peoples only within the internal market, or the tightening of external border controls, is an identity that deepens an ‘Us’/‘Other’ dichotomy"¹

"Europe’s historical and recent experience of nationalisms should be sufficient warning against the dangers of defining ourselves in opposition to who we are not."²(10)

suggests that essentialist definitions of national identity tend to be mythological--"These essentialist understandings of Europe fail to take into account our own shared history of ‘barbarism’, restriction of civil liberties, or of an earlier version of Europe founded in Greek’s classical version of democracy (which incidentally excluded women and slaves)" ³(10)

points to the inconsistency of the term "migrant" ⁴(10-11)

"It is currently estimated that 1.5 million migrants arrive and settle in the EU each yeaR The same estimates also suggest that seven million migrants within the EU have irregular status with a further half a million of these arriving each yeaR In total, 4% of the EU population, or 18.5 million people, is made up of non-EU citizens"⁵ (11)

o

"Philip Putnam recently wrote that, “In the short to medium run… immigration and ethnic diversity challenge social solidarity and inhibit social capital.” [2] Yet he goes on to describe the social capital that develops in communities where social and cultural diversities have stimulated mutual enrichment and more encompassing identities. "⁶ (11)

o

"Franco Frattini takes the view that, "There can be no immigration without integration"⁷ (11)

o

"MR Frattini is sufficiently pragmatic to understand that Europe’s workplaces and pension funds will increasingly rely on economically productive young people from the new EU member states as well as those from Africa and Asia."⁸ (11)

o

"Net migration to the UK hit 400,000 in 2005 - almost double the level in 2004" ⁹(11)

o

"I simply want to stress here that the discourse of integration fails to address the question of the lack of internal integration." ¹⁰(12)

o

Reflects on the reasons that Christian migrants come to Europe and then alerts:

"However, the indigenous churches of Europe should take careful note of research conducted by Vitoria University in Spain during March 2005. The results were based on more than 500 interviews with immigrants from over 30 different countries. 85% said they believed in God, but this was a decrease from 99% for those who said that they had believed in God when they first arrived in Spain. Of those interviewed, some 15% had abandoned belief in God and a further 10% were in the process of losing it. Only a small percentage, 5.8%, reported experiencing their faith grow."¹¹ (12)

o

"What emerges quite clearly, is that more regular church attendance tends to correlate with more positive attitudes towards migrant peoples." ¹²(12)

1 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 10 [available Redcliffe site]

2 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 10 [available Redcliffe site]

3 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 10 [available Redcliffe site]

4 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 10–11 [available Redcliffe site]

5 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 11 [available Redcliffe site]

6 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 11 [available Redcliffe site]

7 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 11 [available Redcliffe site]

8 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 11 [available Redcliffe site]

9 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 11 [available Redcliffe site]

10 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 12 [available Redcliffe site]

11 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 12 [available Redcliffe site]

12 Darrell Jackson , '‘Where do you come from?’ The impact of migration on European identity', Encounters 20 (October 2007), 10–14, 12 [available Redcliffe site]