Religioznost i stavovi prema imigrantima u Hrvatskoj

Abstract

Istraživanja pokazuju sklonost da se precjenjuje udio imigranata u ukupnom stanovništvu u zemljama primitka (Citrin i Sides, 2008). Ilustrativan je primjerice Eurobarometrov podatak za zemlje Europske unije, u kojima trećina ispitanika 2017. godine nije mogla procijeniti broj stranaca koji nisu porijeklom iz zemalja Europske unije u svojim zemljama. Oni koji su procijenili uglavnom su precijenili udio imigranata. Izuzetak su Hrvatska, Estonija i Švedska, u kojima su ispitanici, redom, potpuno točno procijenili, blago podcijenili i blago precijenili njihov udio u ukupnom stanovništvu svoje zemlje. U svim ostalim zemljama precijenili su njihov udio, a u devetnaest zemalja čak dvostruko i više. Među njima se posebno ističu Rumunjska, Bugarska i Poljska, gdje je dojam o udjelu imigranata osam puta veći od njihova stvarnog broja, i Slovačka, u kojoj je procjena veća čak četrnaest puta (European Commission, 2018).

Attitudes toward Immigrants Intertwined with Religion: Comparison of Croatia and Italy

“…For example, social cohesion based on ethnicity or religion, religious homogeneity, policies of state-religious relations in terms of favoring or restrictions, or type of the religion prevailing in a country, can be strong mediators of how attitudes will be articulated toward other groups. Kumpes (2018), exploring religiosity and attitudes toward immigrants in Croatia, came to a conclusion similar to both previous research and the findings in our research. In short, according to Kumpes (2018), those identifying as highly religious express more negative attitudes toward immigrants, and mainly perceive them as a cultural threat, while exploring the linkage between national identity and religiosity, Kumpes (2018) emphasizes that these two concepts are highly interconnected, thus concluding that negative attitudes toward immigrants are more expressed with participants that identify themselves as Roman Catholic and believe that nationality and religiosity are strongly connected; while those identifying themselves as non-religious, tend to have significantly lower levels of negative perception toward immigrants as a socio-cultural threat.…”

“…There are three main aspects of researching the role of religion in the sphere of migrations-the differentiation of immigrants based on their origin and country of origin; the characteristics of religiosity of the dominant society; and the establishment of an institutional legal framework that usually reflects certain historical relations between majority and minority groups (Foner and Alba 2008;Kvisto in Kumpes 2018). Additionally, Kumpes (2018) highlights the importance of contextual differences when studying migration topics, while Bohman and Hjerm (2014) emphasize the significant lack of comparative studies in terms of empirical research on the interrelation of migration and religion. Most research studies imply that immigrants are mainly perceived as a cultural threat (Mc Laren 2003;Sides andCitrin 2007, 2008;in Kumpes 2018), while according to the study by Pew Research Centre, European refugees are seen as a danger factor for possible terrorism, a threat to certain social and economic privileges, and a cause of increased criminal (Kumpes 2018).…”

“…Considering immigrant issues in relation to religiosity, a range of studies have shown that higher levels of religiosity are linked with negative attitudes toward immigrants (Bohman and Hjerm 2014;Kumpes 2018;Čačić Kumpes et al 2012;Scheepers et al 2002). Indeed, this kind of relationship depends on the various contextual factors within sociopolitical dimensions and is influenced by various characteristics of country's religious landscape (Bohman and Hjerm 2014).…”

“…Firstly, we hypothesize that negative attitudes towards migrants are positively correlated with higher levels of religiosity and stronger cultural identification. Hereby, we lean on the empirical research mentioned before, testing the linkage between high religiosity, national identity, and negative attitudes toward immigrants (Bohman and Hjerm 2014;Kumpes 2018). Secondly, we hypothesize that there is a difference between Croatian and Italian participants in their views of immigrants, as well as focusing on the difference between those declared as Roman Catholic and non-religious in Croatia and those declared as Roman Catholic and non-religious in Italy.…”

“…More specifically, we hypothesize that negative attitudes toward immigrants are stronger in Croatia than in Italy and are more negative among participants affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church in Croatia than those affiliated with the Roman Catholic Church in Italy. Within the framework of our second hypothesis, we lean on the contextual differences between these two countries, whereby countries with a communist historical background, such as Croatia, tend to be less receptive and hospitable to diversity, than countries with a longer tradition of democracy, such as Italy (Scheepers et al 2002;Kumpes 2018). In this sense, regardless of both being pre-dominantly Catholic, Croatia and Italy have a different background of religious and national diversity, different historical encounters with migratory groups, and have built their national and religious identities differently, which evolved as a consequence of different historical events of establishment and development of democratic values and norms, eventually producing two different relationships between religious and national identity (see Figure 1).…”