Search

The integration of vast numbers of migrants into European countries from North Africa and the Middle East continues pose challenges for policy makers. The many differences between these immigrants and the native population can make assimilation difficult. In order to increase trust and social cohesion between citizens and migrant populations, various forms of multicultural and assimilatory policies have been enacted with mixed success. This study challenges the usefulness of the current way people think about integration ideologies, namely as a choice between assimilation and multiculturalism. I hypothesize that we can better analyze public attitudes about integration by conceptualizing integration as a continuum of possibilities arranged along a scale of overall permissiveness. Using this continuum, we can entertain new and more effective ideologies as policy options. My field research conducted surveys with native-born citizens in the Netherlands and Belgium to gather information about the appeal and usefulness of these new integration ideologies. This paper finds evidence that the more moderate ideologies of interculturalism and "liberalism as identity" create stronger feelings of trust toward immigrant while minimizing in-group projection. Furthermore, in Belgium, interculturalism is seen as more desirable to the respondents than the current more extreme policies of multiculturalism and assimilation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]