Oog voor lange lijnen. De relevantie van geschiedenis voor het integratiedebat in West-Europa

Samenvatting

The Importance of Historical Perspectives for the Understanding of Migration and Integration in Western Europe. This article compares the integration process of 'large and problematic' groups in Western Europe in the past (1840-1920) and in the last half century (since 1950). Applying the American debate on old and new migrants, I argue that there are many similarities in the settlement process of migrants in the past and in the present. Looking at the Irish in GB, the Italians in France, and the Poles in Germany in the 19th century, it is clear that in all these cases, integration was slow and migrants kept together well into the second generation. Moreover, when we look at the threat felt by the indigenous population, differences with the present are also much less obvious than is often assumed. In particular, the reaction toward the Catholicism of the Irish migrants in predominantly Protestant England shows many similarities to the way Islam is portrayed nowadays. There is also an important difference, however, which is related to the changed role of the state. Owing to the rise of the welfare state and increased controls over migration, the dynamics of migration have changed considerably. Whereas in the past, the coming and going of migrants were primarily determined by the ups and downs of the labor market, after WWII, the selection of those who came and, more importantly, those who stayed changed. These changes arose first of all from the decolonization process and secondly from a combination of the unintended effects of the welfare state and restrictive aliens policies. Whereas colonial migrants could enter freely, independently of the labor market situation, migrants who had built up social and legal rights had few reasons to leave when the economy slowed down after 1970. The consequence was a less favorable selection of stayers, which had an extra negative influence on the integration process. A 'human capital' argument therefore seems to be more relevant in explaining the situation at the present day than a culturalist 'clash of civilizations' thesis. Adapted from the source document.