European Tribune - Community, Politics & Progress.

Citizenship across Europe

by In Wales
Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 10:36:21 AM EST

In the process of researching for my next bit of coursework, I've found myself fascinated by the concept of citizenship and how differently it is approached across Europe. It goes a long way to explaining for me the stark difference in opinion between myself and Linca when we debate ethnicity issues, because the views held on citizenship here in the UK have developed within a very different historical context to France.

So I'll try to summarise some key concepts around citizenship rights, different models of citizenship in some European countries and how this relates to diversity and equality of minority groups, and women.

T.H. Marshall in the 1950's identified three components of citizenship, and more recently a 4th has been added giving us:

Civil rights - individual freedom, liberty, right to own property and right to access justice.
Political rights - the right to participate in the exercise of political power
Social rights - right to economic welfare and security, to share full social heritage, to live the life of a civilised being according to standards prevailing in that society
Cultural Rights - (more recently added) right to have one's national and ethnic differences accommodated and recognised

Cultural citizenship is where great variance occurs - some countries allow self-government rights, providing a form of political autonomy; others give polyethnic rights, providing exemptions from laws that disadvantage certain cultural groups; and also special representation rights to provide measures for overcoming structural barriers to the equal representation of certain groups. Many have rejected moves to include cultural rights within citizenship models.

Debates around citizenship are often focussed on questions of whether or not certain community groups should have certain rights, who should be counted as a citizen and whether the state should be responsible for citizens' social rights (eg access to state provided welfare) as well as for their civil and political rights. The debate around rights may necessarily entail correlative duties in others eg taking up jury service when called.

Then looking from the perspective of my favourite topic - some groups demand both equality in society and also for their diversity or differences to be recognised - which in many ways can be seen to be conflicting demands.

This also is increasingly bound up in the argument of whether or not the nation state - as a centralized,bounded and culturally homogenous primary political community - is still valid or whether our democratic systems are in need of redesign to accommodate increasing diversity and movement of people across borders, and new forms of identity and communications and investment in non-territorial identities, especially utilising the internet.

Minority groups struggle to have their identities recognised and citizenship rights redefined to accommodate this, and Governments are concerned with maintaining a common political culture underpinning the 'nation'.

So how should recognition of socio-cultural differences be integrated into a universal conception of citizenship that aims to treat all equally?

Politics of recognition challenges the notion of a homogenous society and opens up questions around whether ethnic groups should be assimilated into the dominant national culture or be allowed to retain their cultural identity, should the state actively encourage participation of women in public life and adopt strategies to enable this or should both genders be treated equally rendering gender politically non-pertinent?

How should the state address inequalities and injustice within contemporary societies that result in marginalisation and exclusion of groups - is insensitivity to difference to blame for that, therefore should difference be recognised?

Each country has its own cultural idioms and national styles of thought which structure discourse around citizenship and equality across different countries and differing nationality laws will create different concepts of citizenship. Citizen ship status has different thresholds depending on nationality laws the three key ones being:

Birthplace (or jus soli), bloodline (jus sanguinis) based on parent's nationality, and marital status.
States with jus soli tend to be more inclusive and less assimilatory than states which rely on bloodline as the basis of citizenship acquisition.

There are also differences in the nature of citizenship once acquired and four main citizenship models exist (summarised within blockquotes for ease of reading).

Liberal - a single political culture in the public sphere but diversity in the private lives of individuals and communities
Republican - the state promotes a single national culture and expects all to assimilate to it
Participatory - there is unity and diversity in public life, communities and identities overlap and are interdependent
Consociational - the state permits and expects each community to remain separate from others and to organise and regulate it's own affairs.

Each of these models attempts to reconcile conflicting demands for equality and difference and show that identity is central to current debates around citizenship.

To briefly provide examples of those 4 models, I'll mention Britain, France, the Nordic countries and Belgium:

Britain

Citizenship has been traditionally hierarchical in nature (subjects with rights)

Conditions of contemporary multiculturalism promotes new thinking laying greater emphasis on the articulation of difference

it has not yet been resolved how how to integrate diversity with the principles of equality

France

set within a republican tradition stressing the need for community integration

Assimilation has marginalised multi-cultural practices and largely ignored women's participation

New emphasis on parity and inclusion have modified the traditional republican policies of pormoting a largely formal equality

Nordic Countries

Women have been strongly integrated into political life

This has been achieved through quota systems, rather than through policies on parity such as in France, which shows a different response to citizenship demands between these countries

Belgium

The key difference is not race but the indigenous language groups

Separatist policies and the establishment of a federal state, keeping the two languages apart have been used to recognise difference

As I have more time I will add more detail in the comments below regarding the detail around differences in practice and policy across these countries. Please feel free to add your own information to build on this. It is interesting how used to our own country's perspective that we are that we do not easily see other ways of looking at how to address citizenship issues.

. Home
. About
. Contact
. New User Guide
. FAQ
. ET Editorial Guidelines
. Search
. Search (Google)

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Citizenship across Europe | 68 comments (68 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Britain (none / 1)

Historically in Britain, rights were handed down from above, where citizens were subjects with rights. There have been distinctive cultures and identities from the celtic countries and a 'black' presence in England since the 16th century although class distinctions have remained rigid.
Modern citizenship practices in the UK are characterized by allowing diverse cultural practices to thrive in civil society. All citizens are bound in the public sphere of life by the same set of laws and have formal equality irrespective of gender, ethnicity, religion, age or sexual orientation - allowing individuals to live their private lives as they see fit - but as such this confines multi-culturalism to the private sphere, a perspective that is heavily challenged. Britain is also increasingly being seen as a 'community of communities', which acknowledges the importance of difference and stresses that the differing needs of citizens should be recognised and to be treated equally, account of this difference must be taken.
So British society views that that it must be cohesive but also respectful of diversity with broad values in the national community that can respect differences between communities within the nation. Loss of social cohesion thus undermines equality, demonstrated by 'race riots' in Burnley and Bradford in the summer 2001, caused by institutionalised segregation of English and asian communities (via housing and education etc).
Government response to the demands of equality and diversity have included proposals that English language and the values embodied in the European Convention of Human Rights should be two features to unite British citizens (and citizenship tests were introduced to this effect.)
With respect to gender, an Act allows positive strategies to be adopted to increase the representation of Women in public life. This has included gender quotas (all-women shortlists) for election candidates, a very controversial measure although individual parties can choose whether or not to adopt this.
So to summarise, the British view of citizenship is in transition with a public recognition of difference being introduced to existing equality legislation, whilst actively asserting the responsibilities and cultural belonging of citizens.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 10:40:10 AM EST

Re: Britain (none / 0)

All citizens are bound in the public sphere of life by the same set of laws and have formal equality irrespective of gender, ethnicity, religion, age or sexual orientation - allowing individuals to live their private lives as they see fit - but as such this confines multi-culturalism to the private sphere, a perspective that is heavily challenged.

One could say this of France...

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:31:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Britain (none / 0)

This is partly why I wanted to put this up here to get views from people who have first hand experiences of the systems - to me that bit you picked out doesn't reflect my personal understanding of how the UK (or Wales at least) views diversity and equality.

I see diversity as actually being a very public sphere thing here, whereas what I understand of the French system more accurately fits that quote.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:44:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

France (none / 1)

French citizenship is an example of republicanism, stressing the necessity for the state and its citizens to be a community. Therefore active citizenship from below comes from the need for integration of the community.
The state is the expression of society and the organiser of solidarity, operating as an organic whole - this embodies universalism with the conception of political equality among citizens and establishing a direct link between citizens and the state.
National and ethnic origin of French citizens doe snot appear on official documents and has no legal or statistical significance. Naturalized citizens are expected to assimilate into the dominant culture and lose their particular cultural practices. As such this has led to strong opposition to multiculturalism due to perceived incompatibility with 'universal' citizenship. All particular identities including race and gender are confined to private life.
Yet this does not necessarily mean that al French citizens do have equal legal and political status, with differentiated citizenship not only an issue for ethnic minorities but also for women who were not given the vote until 1944. Women have failed to be integrated into the political elite with public discourse about gender and feminism not having any profile until Francoise Mitterand's Presidency (1981-1995).
Feminist campaigns for 'parity', the demand for equal numbers of male and female representatives in all political bodies, brought about the parity principle, regulating the proportion of male and female candidates and providing financial penalties for parties who do not abide by the principle. Parity is understood as a way of reducing false universalism with a new gender differentiated universalism, and obviously is not without criticism.
The French state had also been attempting to move away from the assimilatory label in relation to cultural diversity towards integration and greater public respect for difference. Integration became the aim of a range of state funded associations created to facilitate integration of immigrants. The principle of universalism has become increasingly contradicted by state policies causing concern from those fearing fragmentation and tribalism.

Your views, Linca?

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 11:22:14 AM EST

Re: France (none / 0)

Yet this does not necessarily mean that al French citizens do have equal legal and political status,

Huh?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:35:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

By this the implication is that for those can't or won't assimilate ie they keep hold of their differences - that the diversity becomes invisible because it is not recognised by the state or by legislation. Therefore causing disadvantage for those groups.

It's actually badly phrased in the textbook. I take it to mean that treating everybody the same ie exactly the same laws to cover all groups with no differentiating or expression of rights to safeguard from inequality - is in itself not ensuring equality for these groups.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:39:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

But it's extremely badly phrased. All French citizens do have "legal and political" equality.

What further analysis of real equality should follow, is another matter and could apply to all countries.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:43:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

afew:

What further analysis of real equality should follow, is another matter and could apply to all countries.

Very true - and it certainly applies to the British system. No matter how high profile equality and diversity issues are, and no matter what legislative improvements and other interventions are made, the fact remains that inequality is rife and hasn't been tackled effectively.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:46:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (4.00 / 4)

Indeed. The dead elephant on the table is that all Western cultures practice vicious economic apartheid and discrimination. Segregation between economic castes is close to total - more so in the Anglo countries, less so but still overt and fundamental in Scandinavia, between these extremes in most of the rest of Europe - and affects life experience and opportunity in extreme ways.

As a not particularly rich person there are places I can't go, food I can't eat, educational opportunities I can't afford, access to media and information which are closed to me, access to wealth creation which are also forbidden, and some transport systems still include segregated travel which discriminates between low, middle and high caste travellers. As a middle class person I'm allowed more autonomy than someone who works full time and whose working hours and caste hierarchy relationships are rigidly regimented to an almost totalitarian degree.

Since most people aren't particularly rich in real terms, none of this is unusual. Worse, it's not considered that it might be unusual in any way.

We don't quite have separate benches for rich and poor, but since the poor don't spend much time in rich enclaves, except as workers, we don't really need them.

If the same economic discriminatory practices we have today were defined by race or gender, we would be shocked and outraged. But because they're so deeply acculturated they're considered not just inevitable but even something that might be a good thing.

While this is happening, the question of rights becomes at least slightly academic. In practice there's a bare minimum of citizen's rights, which may rescinded in times of real and imagined threat without notice, and a certain amount of window dressing about equality and opportunity which is encouraged only to the extent that it doesn't affect the basic dynamics.

For example there's equal opportunity employment legislation, but the question of whether traditional employment is really the most fulfilling and socially productive use of time isn't raised. Women are 'encouraged into work', but questioning whether their work - and work by men - is truly productive socially, financially and ecologically, is an almost absolute taboo.

So although there's a veneer of rights policy, practical rights - the right to contribute in a different way, or to have access to education and resources, or in some cases to be entrepreunerial - are rationed vigorously.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 01:14:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

ThatBritGuy:

Indeed. The dead elephant on the table is that all Western cultures practice vicious economic apartheid and discrimination. Segregation between economic castes is close to total - more so in the Anglo countries, less so but still overt and fundamental in Scandinavia, between these extremes in most of the rest of Europe - and affects life experience and opportunity in extreme ways.

I've no idea if my course will address any of this at some point, I hope it does because it is crucial in achieving equality for minority or oppressed groups, to address economic segregation - not least because in the main, minority groups proportionally will find themselves largely on the wrong side of the wealth divide - so superficial measures to provide equality of opportunity is thwarted by economic inequality.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 02:21:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 1)

I'd be surprised if it does because 'economic apartheid' doesn't really exist as a socially acknowledged form of inequality in the same way that gender and race do.

It's not that no one is aware of it - especially in the UK and US, where everyone knows exactly what class they are, and who's above and below them.

But practical economic apartheid simply isn't considered a form of discrimination.

In fact the whole point of the anglo economies is the promotion of earning differentials and economic discrimination.

That's always been the main aim of neo-liberal economic rhetoric - it's not about sharing, innovation or mutual support, it's about imagined personal sovereignty gauged entirely by how much cash you have, and how wastefully you can throw it around.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 05:10:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

"neo liberalism" should be more precisely called "economic libertarianism", in the now famous tradition of Ayn Rand & Co (like, Alan Greenspan).

This is quite a telling proof to the fact that there is no such thing as "unlimited" freedom (or even tending there). And I say this from a more philosophical viewpoint, rather than the politically "progressive" sharing (in France, social "solidarity").

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 06:53:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

Yes, if I'd added (I almost did) anything to my "further analysis", it would have used the words "economic" and "class".

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 02:27:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: France (none / 0)

Plus I've also tried to summarise many pages of textbook into a smallish quote...

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:39:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Can you tell us where the quotes are taken from, who wrote them?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:24:22 PM EST

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Largely all taken from my Open University textbook - Exploring Political Worlds. I think there have been developments in the last couple of years that are fairly significant but not reflected yet in the book.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:36:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nordic Countries (none / 1)

The Nordic Countries are characterised by the participatory model of citizenship based on universalist social policies directed towards all citizens.
The presence of women in political institutions has increased dramatically since the 1970s. Especially in Denmark, gender equality politics became a political goal having a profound affect on political culture. Quotas initially played a part in Denmark, later being abandoned although other Nordic countries increased participation based on women's organisation 'from below' rather than integration into political parties.
Parity is a demand for a permanent right whereas quotas are understood as a transitory measure needed to integrate minority groups. Parity privileges a legal strategy and is rooted in the universalist culture, whereas quotas have been the result of legal processes and engage with participatory discourses, allowing for multi-differentiated citizenship.

Must admit here that participatory and parity type stuff is totally new to my vocabulary and I don't have full grasp of the concepts just yet. I am not fully seeing the difference between parity and quotas...

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 12:49:59 PM EST

Re: Nordic Countries (none / 0)

I would guess that parity is equal representation without formal quotas. And to a certain extent that has happened, a list at a swedish election - all swedish elections are elections for one or another list of persons - are now considered skewed if there are more then 60% of either gender (correspondingly less then 40% of the other).

This general sentiment was created through pressure from feminist organisations that every list should have a 50-50 distribution. It was very succesfull in breaking the male dominance in most political forums.

Afaik, no Nordic country has used legislated quotas for gender distribution (if we ignore earlier legislation with 100% male representation).

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 12:25:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Belgium (none / 1)

Belgium is bi-cultural and multinational, characterized by linguistic conflict between the Flemings and the Walloons. The consociational model of citizenship distributes executive power and economic resources in proportion to the size of the different linguistic communities. Belgium is a federal state with each state formally recognising one of the languages.
This is a separatist model keep each linguistic community separate from the other but also allows no space for other differences to be recognised institutionally or culturally. Following Belgium's colonial period, former Belgian subjects (form the Congo, Rwanda etc) were refused citizenship and ethnic diversity has not gained a central place within citizenship practices such as in the UK.
With respect to gender, the legal framework stipulates that electoral lists may contain a maximum of two-thirds candidates of the same sex., thus opting for legally imposed gender quotas (in contrast to party based quotas or parity).

I find this interesting because in Wales the concept of keeping Welsh and English completely separate would be utterly unnacceptable - illustrating the very different historical and cultural contexts that would allow one thing to work well in one country and completely fail in another.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 02:13:49 PM EST

Re: Belgium (none / 1)

I think this language of "keeping separate" is misleading.

in Wales the concept of keeping Welsh and English completely separate

What if we say Welsh is spoken in Wales, and English in England (and also in Wales)?

Wales may have attained a degree of autonomy in recent times, but for centuries England-and-Wales were one country.

It's not an exact fit with the Belgian situation, but still, Wallonia-and-Flanders are one country. The historical divide is (somewhat) like the English and Welsh: the Flemish are Germanic, the Walloons of Celtic (Gaulish) origin (Walloon, Welsh, and Gaul have the same etymological root). The two groups occupy clearly different zones (with the exception of Brussels). The Flemish speak Dutch, the Walloons French. French is the overarching language (administratively, politically, and in class terms), which produces increasing linguistic friction. But it's history and geography that produce the separation between the groups, rather than a model of citizenship that "keeps" them separate, imho.

Whether it's sustainable in the long term (break-up into two countries), is another question, that applies also to the UK to a fair extent.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 05:55:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Belgium (none / 0)

afew:

But it's history and geography that produce the separation between the groups, rather than a model of citizenship that "keeps" them separate, imho.

Not arguing with that, the current model they have is a result of the historical context of the country and ditto for Britain and France etc. Any attempt to debate things like citizenship and equality and basic rights is complicated by the fact that different models have developed across Europe and there are different national ways of thinking even in countries that on the surface are many things in common.

I have no idea if the way the separatist model is described in the textbook is an accurate reflection or if it is over-simplified for the aim of demonstrating a model. As you point out there are similarities with Wales/England yet here, the linguistic aspect is considered as our 7th equality strand, so language as an equality issue has not eclipsed other equality issues as the textbook suggests has happened in Belgium.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 09:45:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Belgium (none / 1)

To my eyes, pillarization looks like "a model of citizenship that keeps communities separate". I understand that "models of citizenship" are as much codified in law as abstracted from the way the political life of the community organizes itself. That is, whether the "pillars" are constitutional or not, they are (or were) real.

I have to admit I don't quite understand how this all works in practice, not being Dutch or Belgian, and that Nomad has said pillarization is archaic in the Netherlands and Elco B has stressed belgian unity at every turn.

Maybe this diary would be an excuse for Dutch or Belgian ETers to clarify this.

Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 09:58:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Belgium (none / 0)

Yep. But we haven't seen Elco since August. Hey, Elco?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 02:50:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (4.00 / 2)

I am not sure where I would put Switzerland, it has 3 primary language regions, which are also different mentality and culture wise. However, there are none of the problems Belgium seems to have. Each region is represented in the central government.

So I would say, Switzerland is something inbetween the participatory and the consociational model.

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 02:53:42 PM EST

Re: Citizenship across Europe (4.00 / 4)

I'd be interested in seeing this textbook.

Marshall is the go to guy for anything about citizenship, but I'm not sure about this "cultural" citizenship.

There's this lingering idea of "universal human rights", but unfortunately there is no such thing.

Human rights are culturally constructed, and once you get into multiculturalism, this becomes apparent.

Gender rights in Arab and African communities stand out.

I'm not saying that we need to invade countries in Africa and Asia where FGM (female genital mutilation) is the rule. That would cause the imposition of our values on them.

The flipside of this though, is that people from these communities in Europe and North America should have no right to expect to be able to continue the practice once they have immigrated. To allow it is an imposition of their values on the country they come to inhabit.

But if we accept this idea of cultural citizenship, then we have to acommodate them. This is a mistake.

Like it or not, multiculturalism of this sort is dangerous, because it undermines the real basis of human rights. I.e. what a society has determined to be the rights of citizens.

There are no universal rights granted by God or nature, only those that societies choose to protect. And when you have cultural pluralism, you have a pluralism of understandings of what human rights are as well.

This is dangerous.

And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg

by ManfromMiddletown (manfrommiddletown at lycos dot com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 06:27:30 PM EST

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

That's the basic argument for the "French" vision of things.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 08:03:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

It's been an interesting read. I don't know how easy it is to get hold of outside the Open University. I'll look for the reference number when I get home though.

You make excellent points about cultural pluralism and multiculturalism, and this is very much what the whole debate is about. To what extent should we accommodate other people's religious and cultural practices if they move to a new country? Does it partly depend on why they've moved? eg an asylum seeker who intends to go home once it is safe to do so vs a migrant worker who chooses to settle here.

Certainly practices that we consider to be violations of human rights or of our domestic legislation would not be acceptable in Britain but around that people are allowed to be part of their cultural communities, follow their religion etc - they are not forced to assimilate and be made to lose whatever cultural identity and heritage they carry with them.

But at the same time it is viewed important that people who come to our country understand what our cultural values are - eg around gender roles.

Allowing communities to keep their identities does not mean that segregation is encouraged (in principle). Social cohesion and understanding of diversity and other cultures in promoted but often in practice gehttos develop where asylum seekers or migrants are placed and not given enough access to integrate into the wider community, reinforced by negative attitudes of indigenous populations.

The UK has a fairly long history of diversity and different cultures living alongside each other (not necessarily harmoniously) so the historical context enables the multiculturalism approach to develop here in a way it has not in France or elsewhere. But the whole debate is still very much ongoing and divided.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 03:45:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 1)

A very difficult area when you think about accommodating other people's religious and cultural practices are the intergenerational conflicts that may arise. And at this point we must also be able to answer, what are the cultural rights of the child? To what extent, and for how long can parent force a restrictive non-majority culture on a growing human being? These conflicts are primarily seen in the media in the very extreme cases of so called honer killings. However, the interest should not just be on those extreme cases where we can clearly say there are no cultural rights. But what are the rights of the child vs. parents in milder cases?

For example, a few months ago there was some ideas flying past in the Swedish media about abolishing parents' right to have their children exempted from sexual, physical and religious education based on religious/cultural objections. I.e. it can perhaps be said within the Swedish context that there is no cultural right to ignorance. You may keep your culture, but in no way do you have a right to remain ignorant (or enforce ignorance on offspring) on culturally sensitive topics. I don't know what happened with this proposal, if it was brought up in the parliament, voted on, etc.

by someone (s0me1smail(a)gmail(d)com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 08:52:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 1)

Have not seen it since the brief media debate, so I think it has been dropped.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 12:30:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

From the minority community's viewpoint, it's not an intergenerational conflict, or even imposition, but defending a system of values, and most importantly, protecting the wellbeing of the child.
Such behaviour appears mostly when there's a strong sentiment that the host country's values are deeply wrong (like, gender issues to muslims).

When this is the case, the truth is relative to where your own position is on the matter. The only way to solve this is by decree: my values are the right ones, because I am the host and the majority. This will lead to revolt, unless such issues are tackled and solved very very early by an immigration policy based on assimilation - at least concerning this kind of conflictual issues.
Playing the righteousness card (as in, we're more advanced than you, we know women position in society is a human rights issue, not a cultural one) is probably the worst solution.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 08:47:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

"Allowing communities to keep their identities does not mean that segregation is encouraged (in principle)"

It depends on how much those identities differ from the host country's. Russian immigrants to France integrate very easily and the problem (segregation or assimilation) isn't even posed. Migrants can have difficulties to adapt due to lack of enough access opportunities, or locals' negative attitude, but also due to their own lack of understanding, or negative attitude towards local values.
Without necessarily assumming ill will from either side , I think the problem must be considered both ways.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 09:00:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Not only about how identity differ, but about how they are percieved to differ. The Chinese culture is much more removed from the French one than the Arab one ; but since Chinese culture is unknown, there are no reactions against aspects of Chinese culture that would be disagreeable to the majority of the French population. India's arranged marriages are no better than the Arab ones, yet as the Indian immigration is small and not perceived as problematic, that aspect is not protested against.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 11:38:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Not only about how they are perceived to differ, but also about how they express themselves to the outer world.
My theory is that the Chinese, while being quite different (I knew a chinese person well enough to make a bit of an opinion), are also quite careful to not impose on others (and the Japanese even much more so).
This "discretion" too is a part of asian cultures, just like exuberance defines all nations around the Mediterranean.
Just to say that it is still and always going both ways.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 03:14:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (4.00 / 3)

ManfromMiddletown:

The flipside of this though, is that people from these communities in Europe and North America should have no right to expect to be able to continue the practice once they have immigrated. To allow it is an imposition of their values on the country they come to inhabit.

I read the abstract (and a little bit more) of a phd thesis in anthropology (or maybe something else) a couple of years ago. The topic was FMG among somali expats in Sweden. As I remember it the conclusions were that there were no documentet or findable cases of FMG in the population, however there was an almost universal belief among somali expats that many other somali families mutilated their daughters. The source of this belief appeared to be the main stream media.

Even more interesting the pressure for mutilation came mostly from the belief that everyone else was doing it, and thus the chances for the daughter to get a good (preferably swedish-somali) husband. In the end adaptation to the mayority community won over the minority community practices as imagined by the MSM in the mayority community.

Just thinking about imposition of values and such.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!

by A swedish kind of death on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 12:49:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Looking at these four citizenship models and the four example countries, three questions come to mind:

1 - where does "gender discrimination" come in, with respect to the four models? Would other kinds of citizen rights make sense maybe, like women rights, or children rights - and so on?
I'm saying this thinking at France's republican model's blindness to race as a criteria. There is no such thing as a "black citizen", they are all French citizens, and such distinction is forbidden (which makes efforts against supposed racial discrimination a bit erratic, and even strange). Does such a thing as male or female citizen, make sense then ? And yet there are quota laws in place.

2 - does the concept of "social rights" really make sense? I suppose we speak of rights that at some point translate into law - unless the discussion is purely philosophical. (I'm saying this thinking at the (non-null) possibility that France create a right to holidays (not as in, having days off, but actually going on holiday), just like it recently created a right to housing. Can we speak of a right to happiness, then? It's not a disingenuous question, btw. :)

3 - cultural rights, would they be subordinate to the others, or the other way around, is there any opinion in the book about this...?

Just a few thoughts.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sun Nov 2nd, 2008 at 07:08:48 PM EST

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

To my disappointment the course has so far only looked at race and gender. I'm hoping there will be more discussion around the other aspects of equality such as disability etc. It has only really discussed gender in terms of the public sphere and legislation/interventions to give women the right to vote and participate as representatives. In some European countries the right to vote is still relatively recent. It hasn't looked at how gender equality has been encouraged int he private sphere of hoem life of structurally through education and employment but that alone is a topic for a series of books!

Your first question - the answer depends very much on the country in question. I have to admit that I really still don't get the difference between France's parity principle and quotas.

We've discussed happiness here before - Tibet is an example of a nation that sees itself having a role in supporting the happiness of its population. Would that work in European countries? I doubt it because our values are all screwed up. Happiness is apparently being better and richer than everybody else and we can't all have that.

Social rights involves access to state funded and state provided healthcare, education, transport etc. but how far these should go and what they cover is arguable. Exactly how much should the state be responsible for?

As for cultural rights, I don't sense a clear opinion in the book about whether it should be dominant above other rights - more the discussion is around what policies different countries have. The thing the book lacks is the reality of whether these policies translate into practice, hence my bringing the discussion here.

In the UK there are the 6 equality strands that are meant to be equal to each other but in areas where conflict occurs (religion vs sexual orientation) it gets left to the courts to take a decision. More emphasis is placed on gender and race in terms of profile and resources put in, and research done.

My rights trump your rights is a big debate still and I feel it is a fundamental flaw in the way we approach equalities, with a silo mentality. As I learn more about taking a broader human rights approach, I find there is a lot of value in exploring that further.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 04:15:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

"To my disappointment the course has so far only looked at race and gender."

I kind of realized that, but I was wondering how race and gender fit into the four models you described above. Is it ok to make race a criteria of measuring citizen equality? How can you be sure it is the discrimination to blame for the low numbers of woman CEOs, and not dislike for power, or lack of inclination to upper management (I don't even say less competence, it would certainly sound like an anti-feminist speech). And there are many such examples about this kind of criteria.
In short, I'm personally still hesitating about the French model. Are the French blind to race issues, obfuscating the truth, hypocritical in the end, or are they right that race or religion should simply not be a criteria (or else we assume inherent racism of society). But if this is true, why not apply the same logic to gender or age discrimination.

Then again, laws aren't always completely logical, or based on some coherent political philosophy. SO well.

"Tibet is an example of a nation that sees itself having a role in supporting the happiness of its population."

I didn't know this, actually I was puzzled, because happiness sounds like such a subjective topic. How do you put that into law..? - unless you find some objective definition of it, applicable to every human being.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Mon Nov 3rd, 2008 at 08:27:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

The logic of the book is more that by looking at citzenship and nationality models we can see how the approaches of different countries towards integrating/assimilating/separating different racial groups or giving women access to participate in public life may change. This is slightly different to race and gender fitting into the citizenship models, if I make sense?

ValentinD:

How can you be sure it is the discrimination to blame for the low numbers of woman CEOs, and not dislike for power, or lack of inclination to upper management

Ah yes, but why would women have these attitudes and not men? From toddlerhood, gender stereotypes are ingrained in the way that most children are brought up, even if not overt. Throughout schooling, images and messages presented to children reinforce stereotypes and this in turn may reduce aspirations and ambition or self confidence, perhaps.

But an interesting point ThatBritGuy has made on the topic of women CEOs before is that most men are also not in those positions of power. We look at the proportions of men and women in those top slots and see very few women, but forget that this is only a small proportion of men also who would be capable of reaching those positions and yet don't. So perhaps a certain type of personality/approach favours people getting into positions of power and once there, they perpetuate that oppression and exclusion of other people who are not like them and continue to dominate and set the rules by which we must all play if we want those positions too.

I generally don't like implications that women are biologically more likely to want/not want something because we then usually resort to stereotypes and not to facts and that is what perpetuates myths and makes this such a tricky topic to discuss. I don't think there is a clear answer.

I'd agree that race and religion should not be a criteria, but I think that racism and sexism and ageism etc etc is inherent in our societies and until we fully establish cause and impact we can't seek to find the best way of removing discrimination.

My objection to the French way of approaching race is that they cannot back up their claim that racism isn't a feature of society when they collect no stats to measure this. But I'm also aware that I come from a place that looks at race very differently and to introduce monitoring of race in France, it would involve asking people to define themselves as something other than French, which goes against universalism.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 03:23:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

There's no real claim that there is absolutely no racism in French society... But the deeply held belief is that any form of differentialism creates segregation, which can only reinforce racism.

As for the point about very few men getting to top executive positions : talking about the subject of access to those top positions with sexual discrimination in mind hides the fact that those positions are simply not open to everyone ; that only a very small caste actually has access to those position. The problem of access to top positions by women becomes then not a study of sexism in the wider society, but of sexism in the castes that have this access.

For example in France, the Grande Bourgeoisie is possibly doing more sex differentialism than society at wide. Possibly because the importance of women, as social linkers, as educators, is seen as too important in those castes. Note that often for these castes, lineage is as important as the self.

That means that un-gendered education in the middle classes might not be enough to see women in top positions, at least in stratified societies. It is not a coincidence that the societies that had more success in reaching broad sex equality - and in imposing it - are also the more equal societies.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 05:50:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

In Wales:

But an interesting point ThatBritGuy has made on the topic of women CEOs before is that most men are also not in those positions of power. We look at the proportions of men and women in those top slots and see very few women, but forget that this is only a small proportion of men also who would be capable of reaching those positions and yet don't. So perhaps a certain type of personality/approach favours people getting into positions of power and once there, they perpetuate that oppression and exclusion of other people who are not like them and continue to dominate and set the rules by which we must all play if we want those positions too.

Lets not forget about class either. If you are born a Wallenberg in Sweden, CEO is one of your career options. Other career options include diplomat.

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!

by A swedish kind of death on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 11:25:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 1)

"Let's not forget" is underreporting. Class is the first, second and third motivation behind one's possibility to get into CEO-type positions.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 11:35:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Do you mean motivation or determining factor?

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 11:38:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

motivation for choosing someone as CEO, thus determining factor.

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 11:39:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Why would women have those attitudes? No idea, I don't say they have them, but that they might. I don't say women should or are made to stay in the kitchen (Lord forbid! :) ), but I do say I knew much more who loved taking care of details, or house organization, than men. Now that may well be culturally induced, of course, but are we certain, are there any scientifical studies showing that?
I also don't believe in biological determination to do this or that, except noting women seem to be more sensitive and to have a stunning motherly instinct.

But that wasn't my point. My point was that we often hear that since blacks are 10% population and 1% in parliaments, this automatically means racial discrimination. Or since women are 51% of pop. and just 20% in parliament, they must automatically be discriminated against. If women are just 5% in the army or technical jobs, it has to be because of discrimination.
Such crude correlation are anathema to any statistician who knows his job - you can't draw such conclusions without a serious study of the suspected correlation.
Or maybe they're done, and it's just me unfamiliar with it.
But if not, making laws based on such gross deductions is a bit -- how to put it ? :) Risky!

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 03:26:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

As to inherent sexim and racism in society - they probably are present, but in what proportion, due to which causes, are they ever mistaken for something else - or conversely, and how should we go about it, are still wide open questions.
My baseline is that difuse social behaviours are best approached/corrected by education, rather than by law, unless we mean to dictate people what to think and do in a soviet type of social engineering.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Tue Nov 4th, 2008 at 03:36:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

ValentinD:

My baseline is that difuse social behaviours are best approached/corrected by education, rather than by law

I think we need both. We can try to educate until we are blue in the face but some attitudes cannot be shifted. And for those who continue to willfully discriminate against others, there need to be sanctions and a clear legal message that it is unacceptable.

My job is largely about trying to educate and getting people to understand where prejudice comes from and how it manifests itself and that is extremely effective. It is also resource intensive to provide that direct contact in order to changes attitudes and cultures. Legislation makes organisations more open to accepting our offers of training and support with compliance. It gives us a way in that we wouldn't otherwise have.

In the UK, there is stronger legislation covering the public sector than the private sector and we've seen better progress on achieving equality aims in the public sector, whereas discrimination remains rife in the private sector because they are not being forced to deal with the issues structurally.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 at 04:29:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

I agree with you, on condition precisely that we understood the root cause of the problem, and are able to bring effective legislation. I'll give you two examples: european countries (unlike the US) generally impose penalties for pro-fascist propaganda. Americans have a tendency to be reluctant about this (for various reasons, the most important being free speech). European states (like France) go further still, for instance to criminalize denial of concentration camps, which can be understandable: such denial is a serious offence to the victims memory and can be seen as nazi propaganda.
But when the slightest contradictory talk about the camps gets punished in court, serious questions arise about free speech. And when it goes to forbidding any kind of "denial" about supposed genocides, about which there actually is objective historical doubt, there's a problem.

And even so, when you notice certain people manage to do fascist (or racist) talk without using incriminating words (like negro), or others are immediately labeled extreme-right because we assume any mistake is intentional and hidden nazi propaganda, you realize this really gets too far, and come to prefer the american solution.

The second example is about (supposedly) racist managers. There is the clear case of the brown-skin or arab guy rejected even if best qualified.
Then there is the rejection because of foreign names; addresses located in bad neighbourhoods. When you realize certain HR don't hire from fear of the increased risk that those persons are unreliable, un-integrable in a team (and race is not the only possible reason, mind you - and those affected can sometimes be pure-blood locals with the misfortune of being born in a low educated family, in a bad suburb, with a weird name, say, Obama :) ), or even criminals, you understand that accusing them of racism, is a little bit overdoing it.

I agree that arguing that someone is automatically seen as unreliable because of his dark skin, is not OK. But what if it is so, statistically? Is the manager to blame, when the State allows bad suburbs and ghettos to exist? Should the company foot the bill/take the risk because the state doesn't do its job and prefers to enforce by law what can be a risk to business? This is why I think stuff like affirmative action (positive discrimination) should be extremely carefully crafted and quite limited in time.

Laws are meant to be instruments of regulation in precisely defined cases, rather than tools accorded to NGOs (often badly checked) to do social education, or social formation (as in, terra-formation).

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 at 06:11:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 1)

Discourse changes constantly. We've had equal pay legislation for over 30 years in the UK and it hasn't worked, there is still a pay gap of over 40% in some sectors.

The Government is currently reviewing and trying another way to make legislation more effective. But we can't fully anticipate how well the changes will work, we can only do our best with what we do know and understand. We've looked at where things are not working at the moment and maybe we can improve the legislation to catch some loopholes.

Fascists are getting cleverer in many ways. They know that if they use certain words they will get labelled as racist etc. This is the exact threat from the far-right now - they've suited themselves up to look presentable. They have distanced themselves from the thuggery skinheads violence and wrap up their agenda in apparently reasonable points of view, that are no longer overt with racial hatred, but it is implicit in the way they talk about issues.

As for holocaust deniers - there is no reasonable objective ground for historical doubt on that one - and the history of Europe is obviously extremely sensitive on this subject. The drip drip drip effect of holocaust deniers, of fascists spreading prejudice about gypsies or arabs or other groups is immensely dangerous because it encourages a slow but sure shift in attitudes. It perpetuates myths that people hear so often they utterly believe it is truth even without any evidence. It is this process that has seen far right gains across Europe.

Let's say that as a group (X) statistically they are more likely to be involved in crime or to be unreliable - there are as you point out wider factors that cause this that need to be tackled - but let's say you have a middle class and well educated person from group (X) with no personal history of crime etc. They have their name on the top of an application form that goes straight into the bin without being looked at. Again and again.

It's all very well to say what about the managers, but what about these people who are discriminated against directly because they come from or are perceived to come from group (X)? This keeps on putting barriers in the way of gaining meaningful employment or being treated fairly in schools, or being given access to healthcare. So it continues to reinforce the situation these people find themselves in and continues to block opportunities for individuals to make their lives better, and then the cycle continues.

You've pointed out elsewhere that the problem is on both sides and that is true, but one side actually has more power than the other and this fuels the inequality. It is so hugely complex and so much discrimination is not overt which makes it much harder to identify and then to tackle.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Nov 6th, 2008 at 03:38:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

"They have distanced themselves from the thuggery skinheads violence and wrap up their agenda in apparently reasonable points of view, that are no longer overt with racial hatred, but it is implicit in the way they talk about issues."

Exactly, and it's difficult to prosecute (and prove) the implicit without making a process of intention (or building conspiration theory cases).

I'm quite curious about equal-pay legislation. I wonder how it was taylored, to allow women the right remuneration for their work, competence and responsibility, all in the business and market context, while not falling into egalitarianism and making men feel discriminated.

As to managers, my point was that discrimination is not always a voluntary, malicious act of pure ill will. There are the intolerant, and those worried about the business, I wonder how the right provisions can be made to distinguish the bad sheep from the rest (unless we assume all managers are intolerant).
So, with the best intentions, we'll just cut the gordian knot with a progressive activist law - except that laws are supposed to be precise, impartial and fair, not activist, educational, or cultural.
One more example about gender quota in France: parties being heavily fined if not presenting enough women candidates, before the last elections they were making near desperate attempts to fill in the empty cases. Now I don't say that women don't feel attracted to politics (although it doesn't sound completely ansurd - men too begin to look quite discriminated in fields like teaching, medicine, or law, btw).
But in that particular case, all pretention of exigence has been abandoned, because the fine is something very real and quite painful.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Thu Nov 6th, 2008 at 03:38:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Don't have time before work to say much about our equal pay legislation but it exists to seek equal pay between men and women. So it works both ways - if a man has a female comparator doing the same job or work of equal value and he is getting paid less than her, then he could put in an equal pay claim. The reality is that it is mostly women on the poorly paid end of the pay gap.

The equal pay legislation doesn't force employers to do much - it provides a route to making a claim if a person is not being paid fairly and it can be shown to be a gender pay gap. Equal Pay Act applies only to gender and not disability, race etc even though pay gaps exist there too.

It also doesn't force employers to do equal pay audits. It is supposed to encourage employers to pay fairly because the sanctions for losing a case are high but in practice we haven't seen much improvement.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Fri Nov 7th, 2008 at 03:42:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

I don't know if it is always an automatic assumption that racism/sexism is the cause of non proportional representation but it stands out when you see a huge imbalance in the numbers.

It could be that the assumption that all things being fair and equal should lead to proportional representation is a fundamentally flawed one. Or it could be reasonable, I don't know.

But especially with gender the vast body of research suggests that the disproportionate gender balance in favour of men is down to a number of clear factors that include institutional sexism and structures/cultures that disadvantage women and also sexism and stereotypes in terms of attitudes that men and women hold about women.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 at 04:23:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

That was my problem, I'm under the impression that it is more social activism to protect minorities no matter how, rather than serious research.
And even so, I confess that when I worked as a software programmer, I would have loved to have more woman colleagues - unfortunately they all seem to prefer art or communication jobs.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 at 06:17:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

...or social-assistance jobs! :)

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Wed Nov 5th, 2008 at 06:26:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 1)

The social activism has arisen for good reason, but to make a serious case, it needs to be backed by evidence and there is plenty of very credible research and also social attitude surveys. The Equality and Human Rights Commission have recently launched social attitude surveys across Wales. I'll try to find time to diary some of the findings.

I was a physical chemist but left due to the sexism and poor attitudes towards disability. Discrimination has been a very real and detrimental thing for me, which drives my career direction now.

In terms of career choices ie to do the kind of thing you do, you need to have access to being educated to get qualified to do that. I wanted to do electronics at school and was not allowed to. The only ones who were able to get a qualification in electronics were all boys. It wasn't something I could take up as a hobby at home because I had no money to buy equipment with.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Nov 6th, 2008 at 03:17:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

"I was a physical chemist but left due to the sexism and poor attitudes towards disability"

I do sympathize, but do you think people can be made rational, tolerant, civil, nice! by passing laws?
Need I explain how an immigrant feels when he realizes people behave nice and welcoming because of political correctness and laws? How the friendly wrappings soon looks more like a wall, when it dawns on him that he can rarely get to the "real" people behind the comfy smiles. I suspect the disabled have their share of this too.

As to work, I can only tell my own experience, where women were always amongst the best students and employees, cherished, wanted, but never more than one or two. The last example I witnessed was a girl of about 30 who was viewed for responsibility positions and instead took advantage of the first opportunity to pass over to the Quality department. Just before, the other girl left for the States - to study languages. Oh well.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Thu Nov 6th, 2008 at 03:13:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

If there weren't laws against discrimination I wouldn't have been given a place to study chemistry in the first place. A very senior member of staff there told me that had I not been so talented they would not have let me do the practical classes - which meant that I could not have been given an accredited degree. Just for being deaf. He thought that was acceptable.

Frankly, I would rather be patronised and have false niceness come my way because people know that the law will not allow them to overtly discriminate - than to be completely denied access in the first place. Which is what used to happen.

The more you see people like me going about and getting on with life and achieving things, the more the stereotypes get broken down and the more used to diversity that people get. You need legislation to set out what is totally unacceptable. After time that becomes a new norm, previously excluded groups have better access and they become visible around society. And that begins the process of changing attitudes.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Fri Nov 7th, 2008 at 03:34:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Thanks for the information on equal pay, I could of course do a research, but I hoped you could give me an idea - which is what you did.

Personally I was never very interested in this and never knew any one disabled, so I guess my interrogations must have sounded pretty naive.
Anyway. Pondering on this as I was reading you, I was thinking laws against discrimination are no doubt useful - what I'm actually uncomfortable with, is pointing to this or that category.
I would be more for anti-discrimination laws, period - not gender, race, or any other category targeting law. Or even better, fairness laws.

For instance regarding work:
job profiles precisely indicating what is expected of the person, and what competences are wanted, in a standardized form (maybe imposed by law).
The kind of proof (diplomas, references, proof of knowledge) expected from the candidate for each point of competence.
Resumes without any kind of unnecessary information (age, gender, address, photo - unless precisely required, with a reason for it).
The final choice to be motivated, motivation sent to the last ring of candidates.
Anyone feeling anything unfair (be it for the name, address, gender, race, disability, or anything else), will be able to compare his/her own profile with the chosen one, and complain to some kind of state employment agency office if he/she feels motivation is not satisfactory. An investigation can take place then.
In short, a way to address unfair treatment in general, both upon hiring and firing, rather than activist laws and a favourable ear to woman- or skin colour- discrimination complaint.

I don't think it ok to give automatic assumption of truthfulness and righteousness to anyone managing to present himself in a vulnerable position (or frame someone else as oppressor) - be it immigrants against locals, women against men, poor against rich, children against adults and so on. We are all humans in the end, and the second categories rarely have as purpose in life to oppress the first ones.
It should always go both ways, opposing and mounting categories against one another is never a solution, even if the concrete situation seems to justify it at a given moment.

Maybe the French did get it right about race vs citizenship, in the end :)

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Fri Nov 7th, 2008 at 03:32:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

The move towards a culture of fairness (to include class and other factors that are currently not acknowledged) is happening in the UK. This is largely through the Equality and Human Rights Commission rather than through any big change to legislation. What the Commission is trying to do is to educate around attitudes and promote fairness for all, no matter what group they come from or where they come from or what class they are.

The reason that the legislative framework has arisen in the way that it has with separate Acts and Regulations for race, gender, disability etc is because these are the groups in society who need that extra protection because there is a long history of them being persecuted, marginalised and discriminated against. This covers things like employment but also education and access to goods and services.

There are clear problems with the framework as it exists though. I don't know if I could really say that they are activist laws because they certainly aren't set out the way activists would want them. The UK has 50+ pieces of equality legislation including amendments etc etc and you need a team of lawyers to understand it. No individual could exercise their right to justice without the help of an expert.

The laws actually are hugely precise. You must have comparators to prove discrimination (ie a person who does not come from your 'group' but otherwise has similar circumstances to you and you have been treated unfavourably compared to them) and it is not easy to prove a case of discrimination. Far from it being an automatic assumption that someone claiming to be discriminated against, has. It is difficult to win a case.

To take your proposal, almost everybody who didn't get a job could attempt to exercise a right to complain they'd been treated unfairly on any ground they wished to choose. Messy!

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sat Nov 8th, 2008 at 04:56:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

That sounds like moving towards legal enforcement of fairness rather than a culture of fairness...

Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Sat Nov 8th, 2008 at 03:08:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

The two aren't mutually exclusive. The Commission itself was set up to be a driver for change. It doesn't intend to have a strong enforcement role for the first few years year but to try rather to act as a catalyst for creating a better equalities and fairness culture.

A point worth making is that for sexual orientation, age and religion, the UK legislation has been created to comply with European Directives, thus it's forced a particular kind of legal framework around equality.

What does the French legislation based on these same EU directives look like?

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sat Nov 8th, 2008 at 03:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

In Wales:
"I don't know if I could really say that they are activist laws because they certainly aren't set out the way activists would want them"

They were alas supported and nearly imposed by activist groups which (and I say this with more sadness than anger) often acted ideologically rather than pragmatically, with an appalling lack of nuance (be it only for the many women who actually like to be mothers and devote to their house, instead of assumming an "anti-male" position), never politically representative, but always speaking for the silent majority.

In Wales:
"No individual could exercise their right to justice without the help of an expert."

It's true. And, alas!, this is the case with all judicial matters. It became (and for a long time) a thing reserved to professionals, even as the right of the individual to represent himself is maintained....

As to the "automatic assumption", I see it day in day out in society, and I also see leftwing activist French judges. Maybe Britain is more pragmatic and less ideological about all this.

As for my proposal, the core is in the standardised job ad and CV, and written motivation - nothing empirical in advertising a job, accepting/rejecting a resume, making a final choice. The system can hardly be abused by candidates if they must explain on precisely which point were better yet excluded, and did not get satisfactory (ie, to the point) explanation.
Those people here that fakely change their address out of the ill-famed neighbourhoods to get an interview. One could make such a complaint when his resume is again and again fitting, and he suspects the address is to blame for the rejection. Employers already, knowing written motivation is required, will hesitate to reject. They'll need to invent reasons, which is more difficult and an aggravating circumstance.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sat Nov 8th, 2008 at 09:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Our laws around gender are about providing women with choice - not forcing them to be anti-male or forcing them to work. The idea is to protect women from discrimination and to give women equal opportunities and equal access to participating in society as they wish.

There are some older brands of feminism that were anti-male and if you look at Helen's diary on Stonewall we've mentioned that kind of essentialist approach there, but that is not the current way of thinking. Feminists like myself want choice and fairness. So if women want to be able to stay at home and look after their family, they should be able to - many get forced back to work because they cannot afford to stay at home. Equally there are women who want to go back to work but can't because of sexism and appalling costs of childcare if they have no family support.

Of course activists supported anything that would bring new rights for groups that were discriminated against. Activists cannot impose any law if the Government really doesn't want to take something forward on it. It was activism that created the environment for new legislation to be seen as being needed. We are currently negotiating hard on the new Equality Act but no way will we get all the things we want from it - we might get some improvements though and that is as much as we can hope to do.

In the UK there are certain things that cannot be disclosed to the panel when they are assessing job applications - such as age, gender, race etc. I don't think that the issue around addresses is as big in the UK, there's no significant campaign around this, but in the same way that the UK anonymises many aspects of application forms, so too could the French.

What you are pointing out is a current gap in the legislation you have at the moment. So that could be extended to include particular things. But if you left it open to make a complaint on any ground, it would be tough to ever win a case - as it is already employers can provide any 'reason' they like for not giving a person a job and as I said before, making a case for direct discrimination is immensely difficult unless you can show a pattern of the employer not hiring from that particular group.

I'm not really getting what your gripe is with 'activists' - these are the people and groups who push for social change, and true not everyone will agree with their agenda but were it not for them and the change they've created around attitudes to gender and disability, I wouldn't have had an education, I wouldn't have a job and I'd probably have been institutionalised. It isn't about making people be one thing as defined by activist groups, it's about giving people the choice to be and do anything they want to.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 05:19:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

When I say activist or unbalanced or unnuanced anti-discrimination laws, I mean, say, quota laws, for instance the one I already mentioned, regarding women presence on electoral party lists in France. Or university quota laws (particularly the affirmative action ones in the US).

Also, when you mention the appalling cost of childcare, I'd say this isn't unfair unfairness, if you like, but life that is sometimes unfair. Men also sometimes make the choice of a warmy job in order to focus on their family life. (let alone that after what I hear from my married-with-children friends, I lean to be more and more against having children and leaving them to outside childcare).

My 'gripe' as you call it is not so much with activists (who are certainly useful and must be a bit extreme and noisy by definition, or else no one pays attention - which is quite sad per se, society-wise) - but with activist laws. Governments may like to appear progressist and modern when a thin layer of bourgeois intelligentsia promotes activist laws while having no idea of principles of law or terrain situations, but are thinking with their heart - at best (if not with an ideological agenda in mind).
And even activist groups must remain on their on level I think, and not view themselves as apostles of the new progressive society; keep a bit of distance from politics and political philosophy, which is quite a different thing. I support people fighting poverty and exclusion, but much less so when they get political, culpabilize the entire society and do so continuously and insistently whenever media exposure. I can be sensible to inequality matters, I can ask myself questions when everything becomes a matter of 'civil rights' (and that's a big issue regarding citizenship, if we were to return to the original topic of this thread : ), and I can resent being told what to think, feel or do, and even call that political correctness

(I can quote the case of the virgin muslim bride in France, a classical matter of civil rights conflicting with cultural rights, and where political correctness dictated that the annulment of the marriage be, well, annulled, even if agreeing with the law and with both spouses' will, because it could have been interpreted as favouring supposedly backwarded traditions (the muslim ones) against 'civil rights' (we still don't know which ones exactly).

So well. To sum it up, I guess I can say I'm all for choice and fairness, as long as it stays that and nothing more. :)

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 12:09:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

ValentinD:

Also, when you mention the appalling cost of childcare, I'd say this isn't unfair unfairness, if you like, but life that is sometimes unfair.

Proportionally women bear the brunt of caring responsibilities (be that by choice or not). Lone parent households are more likely to be headed by women. So who is more likely to be affected by the high costs of childcare? Women.

This isn't just a case of 'that's life' but an example of the way that the structure of society discriminates against women and reduces their access to participating in wider society. It also limits the jobs they can take and thus the amount they can earn and their ability to exercise the choice and control they wish to have over their own lives. If the state offered free childcare and if organisations were more willing to allow job shares and part time hours (not just for low skilled, low-paid jobs) to support women with working if they want to and also bringing up children, then many barriers that women face would be hugely reduced.

ValentinD:

I support people fighting poverty and exclusion, but much less so when they get political

But you have to get political to raise awareness of the issues and to create change. You have to target the people who have the power to create change - the politicians. It is not equivalent to culpabilizing all society but it points out that the way that society is structured is the root of a number of social problems and inequality.

Quota laws in some cases have proved to be a necessary evil because otherwise women continue to be marginalized. I'd far rather we didn't need quotas but experience shows that when we don't have them, nobody is trying to get women involved or they are actively sidelining the ones that do try to get involved. It is so important for society that we have a good gender balance at the senior decision making levels.

This isn't about bringing down the ones who are not part of the disadvantaged groups, but it is about addressing the huge inequalities that prevent certain groups from having full access and participating in society. It's about trying to get a balance back. Not every method or intervention has worked but the principle is there of trying to make things fair for the people who are historically at a disadvantage.

Ad astra per aspera

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 12:50:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

This kind of analysis certainly belongs to the old kind of feminism - I may not be an authority on it, but I do remember this :)

As I said before, it is not ok to establish policies function of who is "more likely" or "proportionally" this or that. What about the others, the minority who don't fit in, we ignore them for the sake of our little social engineering seance? I'm not mocking, I'm speaking in principle: this can be ok for an academic debate - certainly not when we speak policies and laws.
Second, your analysis should continue: why is it that women are more likely to be lonely parents? More likely to divorce; or remain with their out-of-wedlock child; or the father doesn't take responsibility; divorce judges almost always decide the child should stay with the mother.
The basic reason, in the end, is that women are the mothers and often the best fit to care about children.
This is not about society structure, but about built-in to the woman structure - you can call it biologic determinism, although I think it's more than that.

You could say nature (or God) discriminated against women. Men have their share of particularities to deal with btw, even though not as visible as motherhood.

And here we get to the basic confusion about civil rights: people are supposed to be equal in rights, but they're never equal in qualities. We're different - in race, gender, intellectual capacity, skills and talents, family and environment and so on. Each of these qualities amounts in the end to certain "discriminations". Blacks are considered less beautiful (by blacks too, btw - esthetical sense is absolute, not relative), men less sensitive, the intellectually-challenged (practically a disability) will "suffer" all their life - lower level jobs, lower income, less opportunities. It's normal, and it's life. We can't and shouldn't try to smooth out such differences - just take care about life-threatening ones.
Laws and policies should not deal with discrepancies inherent to the person, but consider the person neutrally.

Women having a children are aware of the consequences (or should be educated to be): a lot of time and energy to be spent with them (they'll be most likely to be the better at that) and a lot of satsifaction, of a different kind than a career though. And believe me I know men who put their career on hold for their family. Childcare replacing parents is not ok.
Parenthood is a choice, a natural one too, and it should never be regarded as a weight, ever.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 06:52:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

As I see it you get these problems when you think of people as split into very broad political groups which are somehow magically homegenised. So you have 'women' and 'blacks' and 'gays' and 'men.' But there's really not a whole lot of nuance going on in any of these definitions, and certainly not in the politics around them.

This means you're left with a broad-brush politics of generalities which ignores individuality, almost by definition, and it also a similarly absolute notion of 'equality' to the table.

I think the only way to untangle the knot is to split things differently - into a politics of relationship, where relationship tone defines the experience.

Both political and personal relationships live on a spectrum with exploitation and authoritarian abuse at one extreme and mutually beneficial consideration and symbiosis at the other.

The dynamics of authoritarian abuse are well understood - they rely on dogma more than reality, on strict power hierarchies maintained by psychological coercion and physical and emotional violence, and on the creation of a 'good' in-group and a 'bad' out-group.

What's not so understood is that just being 'progressive' doesn't make authoritarianism impossible. Altermeyer found that after fundamenalists, feminists were the next most authoritarian group in his study.

What's also not so understood, because it happens so rarely, is what consideration and symbiosis would look like if they were considered the most important core political value in every area of life.

We don't have any historical experience of a society which works like that, so it's difficult to imagine. And while it would be naive to pretend that aggression and dominance fights are going to disappear altogether, having symbiosis as a core moral foundation might go some way to making them less influential and destructive than they are today.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 07:16:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

Broad-brush politics and broad political groups was exactly my point, I find there's a lot of incomplete analysis and putting these groups in competition when they're naturally not so.

Considering relationships instead sounds interesting, but I don't see how it can lead to policies without playing the big brother (or the central commitee). I tend to think the society of individuals is already split between politics of symbiosis (amounting sometimes to political correctness) and sheer individualism (in reality egocentrism). Again, sociologically, this sounds quite interesting.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 07:51:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Citizenship across Europe (none / 0)

"organisations were more willing to allow job shares and part time hours (not just for low skilled, low-paid jobs) to support women with working"

Organizations are not willing because it's not good for their business - which isn't greed or insensitivity, but their very purpose of existence. Businesses are not there (and are not competent) to do social work for the society - and it often happens that most jobs except low level ones aren't fit to a part-time execution.

"that society is structured is the root of a number of social problems and inequality."

Society is quite a complicate thing... that's how social engineering begins. I think we should be very careful about assertions that we would see the society from high enough to be able to make this kind of diagnosis.

Quota laws in some cases have proved to be a necessary evil because otherwise women continue to be marginalized.
I know, and I know it's good to have the right balance. But I told you before, we can't know whether there is discrimination, lack of competence, lack of interest, biological determination or some other factor. It's quite easy to blame it on discrimination (as someone pointed before, CEO jobs often go on a club basis)

"This isn't about bringing down the ones who are not part of the disadvantaged groups"

This will however be a collateral effect. Say I'm an MP and someone in my county comes to complain that he was by far the most competent and best prepared, yet he lost the job to someone else because she was a woman (or an indian). This put him for 6 more months on jobsearch (that he did not deserve), his family in serious geopardy, ànd costed the state unemployment money. All this, to implement the little social engineering called positive-discrimination. Well you go explain that to him.
If even ten people like this exist, it means you made a law for a minority, that serves some and destroys others.

Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)

by ValentinD (walentijn arobase free spot frança) on Sun Nov 9th, 2008 at 07:37:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Citizenship across Europe | 68 comments (68 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]