Ethnic Hostility among Ethnic Majority and Minority Groups

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1. Introduction | New questions skills, are related to changes in the strength of the negative effect of education on indicators of ethnic hostility among society’s dominant ethnic groups (Jaspers, 2008). Analogously, since educational degrees are unequally distributed across ethnic groups within Dutch society (Statistics Netherlands, 2008), effects of education on ethnic hostility may differ across the major ethnic groups in the Netherlands. Unfortunately, an accurate and detailed description of the educational integration of minorities in the Netherlands has been missing. A study on differences in the effect of education on ethnic hostility across ethnic groups is therefore incomplete without fi rst paying attention to differences in educational integration across ethnic groups. Part 2 of this book aims to come closer to answering the core question by addressing the following sub-questions: To what extent and why do trends in ethnic educational differentials exist?, and: To what extent and why does educational attainment affect ethnic hostility among ethnic minorities? The considerations outlined above have led to the following book structure. In Part 1, The Impact of Social Mobility and the Local Living Environment on Ethnic Hostility, I pursue to identify novel determinants of ethnic hostility among native Dutch and the major ethnic minority groups in the Netherlands. I expect to fi nd these in experiences of social mobility and in characteristics of local living environments. By applying a dynamic, a local context and a multiethnic group perspective, I will provide new empirical tests for theoretical frameworks commonly applied to explain ethnic hostility; Ethnic Competition Theory (Coenders, 2001; Scheepers et al., 2002), which integrates Social Identity Theory and Realistic Confl ict Theory, and Contact Theory (Allport, 1979 [1954]; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). 1 Part 2, Educational Attainment and Ethnic Hostility among Ethnic Minorities, fi rst zooms in on the educational integration of ethnic minority groups in the Netherlands and assesses the tenability of a rational action-based theory for school transition decisions, the Breen-Goldthorpe model (Breen & Goldthorpe, 1997; Goldthorpe, 2000), within a multi-ethnic setting. Part 2 ends with a study on the effects of educational attainment on indicators of ethnic hostility among the different major ethnic groups within the Netherlands. The multi-ethnic group perspective is very apparent in Part 2. Part 1 deals with sub-questions belonging to the domain of sociology’s overarching research question regarding the level of social cohesion within society. In Part 2, by fi rst studying ethnicity-based educational differentials, I shift my attention to sociology’s research tradition of social inequality, which deals with the haves and have-nots in society. I will also argue that these two research traditions are linked, since here I will posit that the effect of education on ethnic hostility is likely to depend on the distribution of educational attainments across ethnic groups. 1.2 THE SETTING OF THIS BOOK: THE NETHERLANDS At the presentation of the Scientifi c Council for Government Policy’s rapport ‘Identifi cation with the Netherlands’ (WRR, 2007), 27 September 2007, Princess Máxima of the Netherlands spoke the words: “The Dutch identity does not exist” (RVD, 2007). This statement provoked many reactions, such as asserting that the Dutch do have a national identity (e.g.”Máxima: ‘Nederlandse identiteit nog niet ontdekt’,” 2007; Zonnevylle, 2007), and that it is a mistaken and dangerous conclusion to equal questioning the Dutch identity with arguing that there is no Dutch identity (Ankersmit, 15
2007). Others complemented Máxima for pointing out that there is not one monolithic identity but, as the WRR itself argues in the report, it is all about the formation of identities in the plural (Karacaer, 2007). See Engelen (2008) for a scientifi c summary of the debate following the publication of ‘Identifi cation with the Netherlands’. Not that long ago, many Dutch thought of the Dutch identity as one encompassing ethnic tolerance, and the Netherlands was known abroad for its multiculturalism (Entzinger, 2003). The typical ‘Dutch tolerance’ of the previous century was not restricted to ethnic minorities alone, it included for example tolerance towards euthanasia and homosexuality as well (Jaspers, 2008). Even more generally, the Netherlands has traditionally been a country whose residents expressed high levels of (political) trust (Pharr & Putnam, 2000). But whereas more and more people have come to terms with homosexuality and attitudes on euthanasia have become more accommodating (Jaspers, Lubbers, & De Graaf, 2007), ethnic hostility has not witnessed a consistent decline – instead, it has fl uctuated heavily and far right voting has increased in the Netherlands, as it has in many other European societies during the last two decades (Lubbers, Gijsberts, & Scheepers, 2002; Norris, 2005). Within the ideology of multiculturalism, cultural diversity was considered to be a goal in itself. In line with this ideology, minorities in the Netherlands were stimulated to retain their ethnic identity. In the 1970s, this was expected to facilitate the anticipated re-migration of guest workers of the 1960s and 1970s – which in the case of Turkish and Moroccan guest workers did not take place. The Netherlands granted Suriname independence in 1975, which caused migration rates to increase sharply. In the 1980s, migration from the Dutch Antilles increased as well (see Lucassen & Penninx, 1997 for an overview of the migration history of the Netherlands). But also after the Dutch government recognised in the 1980s that the Netherlands was faced with permanent immigration, it kept supporting the development and preservation of minorities’ ethnic identities. It was assumed that strong group identifi cation and cultural integration (or emancipation) within one’s ‘own’ ethnic group would smooth inter-ethnic group relations and consequently lead to a minimal necessary integration within the Dutch society as a whole. In this time period, non-national migrants who lived in the Netherlands for a minimum period of fi ve years received local voting rights, and with government subsidies minority groups founded schools, made ethnic television programs and built places of worship (see Blok, 2004 for an overview of the development of Dutch integration policies). The Dutch integration policies of today can no longer be characterised as multicultural, instead they resemble more closely the ideology of assimilation in which minority members are expected to abandon their cultural identity and adopt the dominant group’s way of life. Some scholars argue that the strong current emphasis on civic integration in the Netherlands is a sharp break with the past (Joppke, 2004). Three key catalysing events in the 2000-2002 period worth mentioning are: First, the infl uential newspaper contribution of Paul Scheffer ‘The Multicultural Drama’ in 2000 (Scheffer, 2000), in which he convincingly argued that multiculturalism policies have led to the socio-economic marginalisation of ethnic minorities. Second, the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. This and other Muslim terrorist attacks fuelled fear of Muslim minorities and supposedly illustrated the clash of Western and Muslim civilizations (cf. Gonzalez, 16
Page 1 and 2: ETHNIC HOSTILITY AMONG ETHNIC MAJOR
Page 3: Promotores: prof. dr. N. D. de Graa
Page 6 and 7: Science is so much more fun when yo
Page 8 and 9: 3.4.1 Opposition to ethnic intermar
Page 10: 8.3.1 Theoretical implications for
Page 14 and 15: 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 NEW QUESTIONS 1
Page 18 and 19: 1. Introduction | The setting of th
Page 20 and 21: 1. Introduction | Research question
Page 26 and 27: Table 1.1 Outline of empirical chap
Page 28: 1. Introduction | Notes 27
Page 32 and 33: 2. SOCIAL MOBILITY AND ETHNIC HOSTI
Page 34 and 35: 2. Social Mobility and Ethnic Hosti
Page 36 and 37: social conformity favour more toler
Page 40 and 41: e more important than the infl uenc
Page 42 and 43: 2.4 RESULTS 2. Social Mobility and
Page 48: 2. Social Mobility and Ethnic Hosti
Page 51 and 52: 1987). Assessment of the importance
Page 53 and 54: The actual ethnic competition withi
Page 55 and 56: (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). Wagner e
Page 57 and 58: seven categories: no-religion, Roma
Page 59 and 60: the lower the opposition to ethnic
Page 61 and 62: Table 3.1 Hierarchical linear inter
Page 63 and 64: Table 3.2 Hierarchical linear inter
Page 65 and 66: In model 8 we focus on the characte
Page 67 and 68:
Table 3.3 Comparison of explanatory
Page 69 and 70:
3.5 CONCLUSIONS We observed a weak
Page 71 and 72:
9. The models presented in this cha
Page 74 and 75:
4. THE LOCAL LIVING ENVIRONMENT AND
Page 76 and 77:
unit such as states or countries, w
Page 78 and 79:
4. The Local Living Environment and
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
4.4 RESULTS 4. The Local Living Env
Page 86 and 87:
Table 4.2 continued Household compo
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92:
Page 96 and 97:
5. TRENDS IN ETHNIC EDUCATIONAL INE
Page 98 and 99:
5. Trends in Ethnic Educational Ine
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
the worsening economic conditions o
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Table 5.3 continued Male (Female=re
Page 112 and 113:
Table 5.4 continued Male (Female= r
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
6. EXPLANATIONS FOR ETHNIC EDUCATIO
Page 120 and 121:
To answer our research questions, w
Page 122 and 123:
6. Explanations for Ethnic Educatio
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Table 6.1 continued Pre-university
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Table 6.2 continued Lower general t
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Model 4 includes both the ability m
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
7. EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT AND ETHNI
Page 146 and 147:
among four ethnic minority groups i
Page 148 and 149:
7. Educational Attainment and Ethni
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Table 7.1 Summary of hypotheses Cor
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Table 7.2 continued Control variabl
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Table 7.3 continued 2nd gen. Turks
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Table 7.4 continued 2nd gen. Turks
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168:
Page 172 and 173:
8. CONCLUSION 8.1 INTRODUCTION 8. C
Page 174 and 175:
8.2 QUESTIONS, RESULTS AND CONCLUSI
Page 176 and 177:
8. Conclusion | Questions, results
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
local living environments (on ethni
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
8. Conclusion | Theoretical implica
Page 192 and 193:
ethnic hosting threat contact / res
Page 194 and 195:
8. Conclusion | Retrospect and pros
Page 196 and 197:
8. Conclusion | Notes 195
Page 198 and 199:
APPENDIX Appendix 197
Page 200 and 201:
APPENDIX 2.2 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Page 202 and 203:
Appendix 2.3 continued Mobility typ
Page 204 and 205:
APPENDIX 2.4 TUTORIAL DIAGONAL MOBI
Page 206 and 207:
*********MEANS and OLS***********.
Page 208 and 209:
impact on depY. *The relative impac
Page 210 and 211:
Appendix *The impact of the destina
Page 212 and 213:
vector d = d1 to d6. vector p = p1
Page 214 and 215:
*and with constraints our model wou
Page 216 and 217:
Appendix 215
Page 218 and 219:
Appendix 3.1 continued father’s s
Page 220 and 221:
APPENDIX 3.3 OPPOSITION TO ETHNIC I
Page 222 and 223:
Appendix Appendix 4.1 continued Eco
Page 224 and 225:
Appendix APPENDIX 4.3 VARIANCE COMP
Page 226 and 227:
Appendix 5.1 continued Ethnicity N
Page 228 and 229:
APPENDIX 5.3 ROBUSTNESS OF ES ASSOC
Page 230 and 231:
Appendix APPENDIX 5.5 MULTI-NOMINAL
Page 232 and 233:
Appendix 7.1 continued 2nd gen. 2nd
Page 234 and 235:
Appendix 233
Page 236 and 237:
BIBLIOGRAPHY Bibliography Abu-Rayya
Page 238 and 239:
Bibliography Buijs, F. J., Demant,
Page 240 and 241:
Bibliography (pp. 345-383). Oxford:
Page 242 and 243:
Bibliography euthanasia, homosexual
Page 244 and 245:
Bibliography Onderzoek (ISEO). Mart
Page 246 and 247:
Bibliography Politics, 58(1), 41-72
Page 248 and 249:
Bibliography Worchel (Eds.), The so
Page 250 and 251:
Bibliography 249
Page 252 and 253:
Summary in Dutch / Nederlandstalige
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
CURRICULUM VITAE Curriculum Vitae J
Page 266 and 267:
ICS DISSERTATION SERIES ICS dissert
Page 268 and 269:
ICS dissertation series 37) Andreas
Page 270 and 271:
ICS dissertation series 76) Inge Si
Page 272 and 273:
ICS dissertation series 115) Martin
Page 274:
Why do some individuals express mor
show all

Ethnic Hostility among Ethnic Majority and Minority Groups

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?