Search

Largely due to immigration, European societies have grown increasingly diverse. The current study seeks to determine how citizens characterize their experiences with this diversity and whether various types of intergroup exposure can influence immigration attitudes. This analysis takes a unique approach by comparing positive, negative, and neutral intergroup exposure characterizations, along with those reporting no exposure at all. Using internationally representative data from the 2014 European Social Survey, this paper demonstrates how these different characterizations predict citizens' immigration attitudes. Results indicate that positive and negative experiences have opposing effects that are roughly symmetrical in magnitude and both are more intense when experienced in high frequency. Neutral exposure is actually much more common than negative experiences and represents a net benefit compared to those with no exposure at all. The results present important implications for future research and highlight several encouraging patterns for diversity across Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social exclusion is complex, intractable, and devastating. It occurs where individuals or groups cannot fully participate in the typical activities of the societies in which they live, whether they are excluded economically, politically, or live in segregation. In this review, I highlight recent work in the area of social exclusion and ethnicity, focusing on Europe and Eurasia. Scholarship reveals ethnic hierarchies of exclusion in hiring and housing markets, educational approaches that cloak assimilationist practice in the language of inclusion, a plethora of strategies that minorities use to navigate exclusion, and more. While new research brings innovation and insight, it nevertheless remains fragmented along several dimensions. As scholars work to move the field forward, bridging substantive areas of exclusion, studying the complex dynamic of interactions between majorities and minorities, and collaborating across methodological divides would be particularly valuable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper argues that the well-known triadic relationship between kin state, resident state and national minority needs to take into account a fourth dimension: that of European institutions. This is illustrated through a study of relational identities on the EU’s Eastern border where the reconfiguration of ethnic relations followed the end of the iron curtain and EU accession. It considers two neighbouring ethnic minorities. One minority is part of the EU – the Belarusians in Poland – and the other is not part of the EU – the Poles in Belarus. The paper argues that the intersection of these four relational dimensions result in contrasting kinds of ethnic identification for the two minority groups leading to either fluidification or solidification under different circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper takes its starting point in the public discourse, of politicians and academics, that suggests that Europe, specifically the European Union, is suffering from a 'crisis of identity'. This is believed to stem from the recent enlargements, the pending 'problem of Turkey', and disarray over the European Constitution. This issue is addressed in two ways: first, through an exploration of the main current models and meanings of 'Europe', and second, applying an anthropological approach to identity, through examining the relationship between models and meanings of 'Europe' and local, regional, ethnic and national identities. In the first place, this suggests that there is not, and cannot be, agreement over the shape and meaning of 'Europe'. There is, rather, rooted in histories, geographies, politics, and cultures, a range of different Europes, which only coincide imperfectly, at best. In the second place, Europe is always viewed from local, regional, ethnic and national points of view. Each approach converges on the same conclusion: there can never be a clear-cut, consensual unified model of Europe. This is a normal situation, not a crisis, and, if anything, is one of the strengths of the European Union project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article assesses the analytical value of the “Kohn dichotomy” – the notion that there are two types of nationalism, resting on civic values in the West and on ethnic values outside the West. It begins by outlining the intellectual history of this dichotomy since its origin in the 1860s and by analyzing its main features. It contrasts the state traditions of Central and Eastern Europe and Western Europe in three areas: the geopolitical evolution of the state, the state’s perspective on its own population as reflected in efforts to measure “ethnic nationality” through such instruments as the population census, and divergences in citizenship law. It shows that data from recent programs of comparative survey research, and analysis of nationalist ideology, highlight the variety of forms that nationalism may take in the two parts of Europe. The article concludes that the “ethnic–civic” dichotomy is valuable as an ideal type with the capacity to shed light on the nature of ethnic affiliation, not as a categorical classification system. Different ethnonational groups comprise mixtures of people who use a combination of “ethnic” and “civic” reference points; they do not coincide with global territorial zones that may be identified with any level of clarity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]