Immigration, Nationalism and Citizenship of Reciprocity

1. Immigration, Nationalism and Citizenship of Reciprocity Politics department graduate Colloquium 08-11-2012 Clara Sandelind The university of Sheffield

2. Structure of Presentation Attitudes to Immigration Nationalism and Immigration Qualitative Interviews Contribution, Achievement and Reciprocity Citizenship or National Identity? Redefining the Boundaries of Exclusion?

3. Attitudes to Immigration Demographic variables inconsistent results Perceived threats posed by immigration explain more Main group-level threats: economic and cultural Perceived threats to national identity seem to carry most explanatory weight

4. Liberal Nationalism and Immigration • Political liberal nationalism: • Nationalism has normative and/or instrumental political value • National identity is socially and politically constructed • National identity is non-essentialist • Yet national identity needs to remain stable • Immigration might undermine national identities • Problems: • Portrays national identity as passive • National identity impacts how people think about immigration • It’s only the perception of immigration as a threat that matters for political liberalism, and this perception can be changed through national identity

5. Qualitative Interviews 45 interviews in Sweden and England Aiming to find out how national identities are constructed to elicit certain attitudes to immigration Questions on identity, national identity, democracy, welfare and immigration Civic definition of national identity strong in both countries “Contribution” defines membership in the political community

6. Citizenship as Reciprocity “I genuinely think that after a certain number of years, even if you don’t have residency status, if you’ve contributed, if you’re working and you’re part of society, why not? Why not vote? I don’t understand. In fact, if we had a limited number of votes, I would rather take a vote from somebody who has no intention of using it, who doesn’t contribute to society the slightest, and give it to somebody who does contribute to society. It doesn’t matter where someone is from, if they’re adding value to their local community, whether they’re volunteering or they’re working or whatever they’re doing, if it’s adding value to their community and they’re influencing the community, then why can’t they vote? It seems ridiculous to me.” - Woman, Sheffield

7. Citizenship or National Identity? “[...]nationhood is a mediating phenomenon...a nation is a polity that feels like a community, or conversely a cultural or ethnic community politically mobilized; it cannot exist without subjective identification, and therefore is to some extent dependent on free individual choice, but that choice is nevertheless experienced as a destiny transcending individuality; it turns political institutions into a kind of extended family inheritance, although the kinship ties in question are highly metaphorical; it is a contingent historical product that feels like part of the order of nature; it links individuality and community, past and present; it gives to cold institutional structures an aura of warm, intimate togetherness.” – Canovan (1996, p. 69) Institutions more viewed as part of a mutually advantageous scheme of cooperation Contribution and achievement not part of family ties Belonging to a nation is effortless – active citizenship is not

8. Redefining the Boundaries of Exclusion? The idea of the active citizen Aristotelian and communitarian idea of citizenship or liberal idea of reciprocity? What does it mean for the boundaries of exclusion?