“…Moreover, as Brochmann and Seland states on the particular ‘undemanding attitude’ of Sweden:Even in the Swedish context, we would agree with Rogers Brubaker that it is impossible to define civic nationalism without involving ‘a crucial cultural component … a strong sense of separate peoplehood’. Peoplehood is thus understood in terms of a common language, and a specific political culture, necessary to hold the civic nation together (Brochmann and Seland : 440).…”
Section: Two Objections Against the Ethnic‐civic Framework: The Cultumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If a civic national identity also involves a cultural component, then newcomers must, in any case, integrate or assimilate with the values and norms of a culturally and historically particular national community. Hence, there is no ground for claiming that restrictive citizenship policies such as ‘nine years of legal residence and a formal test on language, history, culture, and political system’, as in Denmark, express an ethnic national identity in themselves (Brochmann and Seland : 437–8). Such measures may just as well be based on the argument that it is demanding to learn and adjust to the meaning and practices intimately linked to the political values and institutions defining the nation.…”
Section: Two Objections Against the Ethnic‐civic Framework: The Cultumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the recent decades, Denmark has adopted some of the most restrictive immigrant integration policies in Europe – particularly in relation to requirements for permanent residence, citizenship and family reunification. In the same period, Sweden has barely changed their (now) exceptionally permissive policies, while Norway has taken somewhat of a middle road (Borevi ; Brochmann and Hagelund : 341–50; Brochmann and Seland ; Koopmans et al. 2012: 1226).…”
Section: National Identity and Scandinavian Immigrant Integration Polmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2012: 1226). Faced with these striking differences, some comparative studies suggest national identity as an explanation (Borevi ; Brochmann and Hagelund : 35, 359–62; Brochmann and Seland ).…”
Section: National Identity and Scandinavian Immigrant Integration Polmentioning
The ethnic‐civic framework remains widely used in nationalism research. However, in the context of European immigrant integration politics, where almost all ‘nation talk’ is occurring in civic and liberal registers, the framework has a hard time identifying how conceptions of national identity brought forth in political debate differ in their exclusionary potential. This leads some to the conclusion that national identity is losing explanatory power. Building on the insights of Oliver Zimmer, I argue that we may find a different picture if we treat cultural content and logic of boundary construction – two parameters conflated in the ethnic‐civic framework – as two distinct analytical levels. The framework I propose focuses on an individual and collective dimension of logic of boundary construction that together constitute the inclusionary/exclusionary core of national identity. The framework is tested on the political debate on immigrant integration in Denmark and Norway in selected years. Indeed, the framework enables us to move beyond the widespread idea that Danish politicians subscribe to an ethnic conception of the nation, while Norwegian political thought is somewhere in between an ethnic and civic conception. The true difference is that Danish politicians, unlike their Norwegian counterparts, do not acknowledge the collective self‐understanding as an object of political action.
“…Moreover, as Brochmann and Seland states on the particular ‘undemanding attitude’ of Sweden:Even in the Swedish context, we would agree with Rogers Brubaker that it is impossible to define civic nationalism without involving ‘a crucial cultural component … a strong sense of separate peoplehood’. Peoplehood is thus understood in terms of a common language, and a specific political culture, necessary to hold the civic nation together (Brochmann and Seland : 440).…”
Section: Two Objections Against the Ethnic‐civic Framework: The Cultumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If a civic national identity also involves a cultural component, then newcomers must, in any case, integrate or assimilate with the values and norms of a culturally and historically particular national community. Hence, there is no ground for claiming that restrictive citizenship policies such as ‘nine years of legal residence and a formal test on language, history, culture, and political system’, as in Denmark, express an ethnic national identity in themselves (Brochmann and Seland : 437–8). Such measures may just as well be based on the argument that it is demanding to learn and adjust to the meaning and practices intimately linked to the political values and institutions defining the nation.…”
Section: Two Objections Against the Ethnic‐civic Framework: The Cultumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During the recent decades, Denmark has adopted some of the most restrictive immigrant integration policies in Europe – particularly in relation to requirements for permanent residence, citizenship and family reunification. In the same period, Sweden has barely changed their (now) exceptionally permissive policies, while Norway has taken somewhat of a middle road (Borevi ; Brochmann and Hagelund : 341–50; Brochmann and Seland ; Koopmans et al. 2012: 1226).…”
Section: National Identity and Scandinavian Immigrant Integration Polmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2012: 1226). Faced with these striking differences, some comparative studies suggest national identity as an explanation (Borevi ; Brochmann and Hagelund : 35, 359–62; Brochmann and Seland ).…”
Section: National Identity and Scandinavian Immigrant Integration Polmentioning
The ethnic‐civic framework remains widely used in nationalism research. However, in the context of European immigrant integration politics, where almost all ‘nation talk’ is occurring in civic and liberal registers, the framework has a hard time identifying how conceptions of national identity brought forth in political debate differ in their exclusionary potential. This leads some to the conclusion that national identity is losing explanatory power. Building on the insights of Oliver Zimmer, I argue that we may find a different picture if we treat cultural content and logic of boundary construction – two parameters conflated in the ethnic‐civic framework – as two distinct analytical levels. The framework I propose focuses on an individual and collective dimension of logic of boundary construction that together constitute the inclusionary/exclusionary core of national identity. The framework is tested on the political debate on immigrant integration in Denmark and Norway in selected years. Indeed, the framework enables us to move beyond the widespread idea that Danish politicians subscribe to an ethnic conception of the nation, while Norwegian political thought is somewhere in between an ethnic and civic conception. The true difference is that Danish politicians, unlike their Norwegian counterparts, do not acknowledge the collective self‐understanding as an object of political action.
“…Being a legal citizen is in Norwegian called statsborgerskap, which is a formal membership. However, being a Norwegian also includes an informal membership, which is what Brochmann (2002) calls the social dimension of citizenship, or medborgerskap in Norwegian (p. 59). This social dimension is about 'being a part of society', which often means being part of the nation.…”
Section: Scandinavian Welfare States In Diverse Societiesmentioning
2 based on stereotypical collective categories of difference -are used as boundary-markers between the majority and minorities. I conclude that, despite variations, all the Scandinavian countries grapple with the same tensions, and that there is a Scandinavian double standard regarding minority women.
After having coordinated their nationality laws since the late 19th century, the Scandinavian countries have moved in distinctly different directions in this field since the turn of the millennium. Today Sweden has one of the most liberal citizenship policies in Europe, while Denmark has one of the most restrictive. Norway occupies an intermediate position between its Scandinavian neighbours. In this article, I compare the differences in Scandinavian nationality law and the political processes that led to these changes. The highly divergent development of nationality law in the Scandinavian region questions the widespread idea that a general convergence towards liberalization of European nationality law is taking place. Although static concepts of nationhood cannot account for the recent changes in Scandinavian nationality law, ideas about national identity and social cohesion are still highly influential in determining the content of nationality law.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
