Ethnicities

Postwar migration to European cities has led to the progressive decoupling of civil, social and political rights from national membership. With its linguistic divide and its intricate institutional architecture, the city of Brussels is a strategic research context for a critical test of the limits of prevailing national integration models and the emergence of post- or transnational forms of citizenship. The Brussels Minorities Survey was set up to compare identifications and representations of citizenship in random samples of Turkish and Moroccan minorities, and in a matched comparison sample of working-class Belgians. First, a comparison of Turkish, Moroccan and Belgian self-categorizations reveals the multiplication of ethnopolitical identities, along with the continuing importance of formal national membership for identity construction. Second, in the absence of formal political rights for non-EU citizens, Turkish and Moroccan experiences of citizenship are closely linked to their informal participation in ethnic and cross-ethnic organizations. Typically, ethnic and cross-ethnic forms of participation go hand in hand, with a common emphasis on cross-ethnic and conventional types of organization. Finally, Turkish and Moroccan representations of (dual) citizenship are multidimensional, allowing for multiple and selective combinations of participative, normative and identity dimensions across national contexts. While Turks and Moroccans share with Belgians a social contract type of citizenship in Belgium, they also adhere to a communal type of long distance citizenship in Turkey and Morocco which centres on a close linkage of national and religious attachments. We conclude that multiplicity is a key feature of minority perspectives on citizenship, so that active participation in the national context of residence is complemented by enduring ethnoreligious identification in the national context of origin.

ABST RACT Many contemporary liberals increasingly accept that plural societies must aspire to far more expansive and inclusive ideals of justice and citizenship than liberal doctrine would suggest. The dominant perception is that extending the set of rights is the most effective way to implement a just and stable multicultural society. In fact, this is not a very plausible description of what people seek in demanding greater respect for diversity. Nor does it offer a compelling vision of how things ought to be. First, social expectations regarding recognition are not uniquely linked to rights; they encompass intractable struggles over values, as well as ways of living and evaluating. For example, a central feature of feminist, black and multicultural politics is the attempt to change social culture into a medium through which personal integrity and self-esteem may be acquired. Second, liberalism cannot easily accommodate this type of struggle, since it takes for granted a narrowly constricted conception of politics that is based on instituting public laws that harmonize the freedom of everyone. Anyone who takes seriously the idea that recognition surpasses legal relations of respect will then surely wish to consider whether liberalism must not be corrected and extended to reveal the political significance of the social conditions that enable individuals to experience themselves as both autonomous and individuated.

Values and practices regarding sex and gender are among the most fundamental constituents of a society's symbolic system, as well as of an individual's self. Gendered ways of behavior are symbolic markers of ethnicity, both in a process of labeling from the outside and in the construction of a subjective identity. Based on interviews with children of immigrants from patriarchal societies living in Norway — one of the countries in the world where gender equality has reached furthest — the article reveals the tension they experience between the ways gender issues are dealt with in their families and in the surrounding society. Their gender constructions can not be understood solely in the light of cultural influence, as if on a scale running from conformity to parents' culture to conformity to Norwegian culture. There is something really new in the making — new combinations and new creations — reflecting the particular social situation of the young people of immigrant origin. Feelings of obligations and debt toward the parents are strong, as well as the adherence to traditional family values. Still, there is clearly a tendency that ideas about individual rights, such as women's and children's rights to decide over their lives, are gaining influence.

This article proceeds from the argument that various forces of globalization have resulted in increased dislocation and uncertainty for many people in the world. Religion and nationalism, compared to most other identity constructions, are viewed as particularly relevant organizing principles at a time when modern society is making increasing demands on individuals. In comparison to much constructivist research, however, the article discusses the difficulties in understanding religious identity formation and nationhood without taking into consideration the sociopsychological aspects of category formation and the essentialization of the `other'. To clarify the discussion, an illustrative study of religious nationalism in India is made, with a particular focus on, and comparison of, Sikh and Hindu religious nationalism. I show how, in their search for `chosen traumas', similar processes of categorizing and demonizing the `other' have been prevalent in both the Sikh and Hindu cases. However, while Hindus were (and are) successful in fusing nationalist and religious concerns in their attempts to monopolize both sources of self and identity, Sikhs have been less successful in integrating the two.