Suchergebnisse

Abstract. This article focuses on the political claims made by immigrants and ethnic minorities in France and Switzerland. We look at cross‐national variations in the overall presence of immigrants and ethnic minorities in the national public space, and the forms and content of their claims. Following a political opportunity approach, we argue that claim‐making is affected both by institutional opportunities and by national models of citizenship. The civic‐assimilationist conception of citizenship in France gives migrants greater legitimacy to intervene in the national public space. Furthermore, the inclusive definition of 'membership in the national community' favors claims pertaining to minority integration politics. However, the pressure toward assimilation to the republican norms and values tends to provoke claims for the recognition of ethnic and cultural difference. Finally, closed institutional opportunities push migrants' mobilization to become more radical, but at the same time the more inclusive model of citizenship favors a moderate action repertoire of migrants. Conversely, the ethnic‐assimilationist view in Switzerland leads migrants to stress homeland‐related claims. When they do address the policy field of ethnic relations, immigration and citizenship, they focus on issues pertaining to the entry and stay in the host society. Finally, the forms of action are more moderate due to the more open institutional context, but at the same time the action repertoire of migrants is moderated by the more exclusive model of citizenship. Our article is an attempt to specify the concept of 'political opportunity structure', and to combine institutional and cultural factors in explaining claim‐making by immigrants and ethnic minorities. We confront our arguments with data from a comparative project on the mobilization on ethnic relations, citizenship and immigration.

RésuméThis article attempts to assess the relevance of post‐nationalist and neo‐institutionalist theories to explain the structuring of public debates on immigration and ethnic relations in Switzerland. To escape the contradictory debate existing between proponents of these two theoretical perspectives, but above all to improve our knowledge of processes of globalization and of resistance by nation‐states in the field of migrations, we propose a systematic analysis of public debates in this field during the 1980s. This allows us to assess the impact of external pressures and of national traditions on the treatment of migration issues. Our analysis unveils three changes that may attest to the impact of transnationalization of migration issues on national states. First, an important growth of debates on issues concerning the integration of immigrants took place, especially in the field of the fight against discriminations. Second, there was a more active participation of immigrants in the national public debates. Third, variations in the activity of the extreme right and the Swiss People's Party occurred, and more precisely a growth of the latter. In particular, the introduction of the Law against racism provided a window of opportunities for the Swiss political actors. Thus, within the constraining framework represented by the nation‐state, which yields political resources and a structure of legitimacy for the intervention of political actors in the field of immigration and ethnic relations, transnational forces are a source of variations and changes which should not be overlooked. In particular, the introduction of a transnational anti‐discrimination norm provides other types of political resources and another structure of legitimacy. Finally, our analysis suggests that the development of personhood rights at a supranational level can be a source of change that yields new models and new scripts for the action of national actors.

Cet article tente d'évaluer la pertinence des théories post-nationalistes et néo- institutionnalistes pour expliquer la structuration des débats publics en Suisse ayant trait à l'immigration et aux relations ethniques. Pour sortir du débat contradictoire qui existe aujourd'hui entre les tenants de ces deux perspectives théoriques, mais surtout pour améliorer nos connaissances sur l'influence des processus de globalisation et de résistance des Etats-nations dans le domaine des migrations, nous proposons une analyse systématique des débats publics dans ce domaine pendant les années quatre-vingt-dix qui nous permet d'évaluer l'impact des pressions extérieures et des traditions nationales sur la gestion des questions migratoires. Notre analyse dévoile trois changements qui pourraient attester du poids de la transnationalisation des enjeux migratoires sur les Etats nationaux: une sensible hausse des débats autour des enjeux liés à l'intégration des immigrés, notamment dans le domaine de la lutte contre les discriminations; une participation plus active des immigrés dans les débats publics nationaux; et des variations dans l'activité de l'extrême droite et de l'UDC, notamment une prise d'ampleur de cette dernière. En particulier, l'introduction de la Loi contre le racisme a constitué une nouvelle fenêtre d'opportunités pour les acteurs politiques suisses. Ainsi, à l'intérieur de ce cadre contraignant qu'est l'Etat-nation et qui offre des ressources politiques et une structure de légitimité pour l'intervention des acteurs politiques dans le champ de l'immigration et des relations ethniques, des forces transnationales sont une source de variation et de changement qu'il convient de ne pas négliger. En particulier, l'introduction d'une norme anti- discriminatoire transnationale au sein de la nation procure d'autres types de ressources politiques et une autre structure de légitimité. Finalement, notre analyse suggère que le développement de normes des droits de la personne à l'échelle supranationale peut être une source de changement qui offre de nouveaux modèles et de nouveaux scriptes à l'action des acteurs nationaux.

This article attempts to assess the relevance of postnationalist & neoinstitutionalist theories to explain the structuring of public debates on immigration & ethnic relations in Switzerland. To escape the contradictory debate existing between proponents of these two theoretical perspectives, but above all to improve our knowledge of processes of globalization & of resistance by nation-states in the field of migrations, we propose a systematic analysis of 1980s public debates in this field. This allows us to assess the impact of external pressures & of national traditions on the treatment of migration issues. Our analysis unveils three changes that may attest to the impact of transnationalization of migration issues on national states. (1) An important growth of debates on issues concerning the integration of immigrants took place, especially in the field of the fight against discriminations. (2) There was a more active participation of immigrants in the national public debates. (3) Variations in the activity of the extreme right & the Swiss People's Party occurred & more precisely a growth of the latter. In particular, the introduction of the law against racism provided a window of opportunities for the Swiss political actors. Thus, within the constraining framework represented by the nation-state, which yields political resources & a structure of legitimacy for the intervention of political actors in the field of immigration & ethnic relations, transnational forces are a source of variations & changes that should not be overlooked. In particular, the introduction of a transnational antidiscrimination norm provides other types of political resources & another structure of legitimacy. Finally, our analysis suggests that the development of personhood rights at the supranational level can be a source of change that yields new models & new scripts for the action of national actors. 4 Tables, 2 Graphs, 41 References. Adapted from the source document.

Assesses Swiss post-nationalist and neo-institutional public debates on immigration and ethnic relations; discusses impact of external pressures, integration, discrimination, participation in national public debates, activity of the extreme right and Swiss People's Party, introduction of the 1994 law against racism, and other issues; 1990s. Summaries in German and English.

"Dieser Artikel versucht, den Stellenwert der post-nationalistischen und neo-institutionalistischen Theorien zur Erklärung der Strukturierung der öffentlichen Debatte in der Schweiz über Immigration und ethnische Beziehungen einzuschätzen. Der Artikel will nicht die Debatte zwischen diesen beiden unterschiedlichen Ansätzen kommentieren, sondern unsere Kenntnisse über den Einfluss von Globalisierungsprozessen und des Widerstandes der Nationalstaaten im Bereich der Immigration verbessern. Wir schlagen deshalb eine systematische Analyse der öffentlichen Debatte in diesem Bereich während der achtziger Jahre in der Schweiz vor. Dies soll uns erlauben, das Aufeinandertreffen von äusserem Druck und nationalen Traditionen zu analysieren. Unsere Analyse deckt drei Veränderungen auf, die das Gewicht der Transnationalisierung der Debatte über Immigration auf den Nationalstaat belegen: eine beachtlicher Zuwachs an Debatten über die Herausforderungen im Zusammenhang mit der Einwanderung, vor allem beim Kampf gegen Diskriminierung; eine aktivere Partizipation der Einwanderer in der nationalen öffentlichen Debatte sowie Veränderungen in den Aktivitäten der extremen Rechten und der Schweizer Volkspartei, die zudem erheblich an Wahlattraktivität hinzugewonnen hat. Insbesondere die Einführung des Gesetzes gegen den Rassismus hat ein neues Gelegenheitsfenster für schweizerische politische Akteure abgegeben. Innerhalb des nationalstaatlichen Rahmens, in dem politische Ressourcen und Legitimitätsstrukturen für die politische Auseinandersetzung im Bereich der Immigration und ethnischen Beziehungen bereitgestellt werden, sind transnationale Kräfte eine Quelle des Wandels. Insbesondere die Einführung einer transnationalen Anti-Diskriminierungsnorm in der Schweiz verteilte die politischen Ressourcen anders und veränderte die Legimationsstruktur. Schliesslich zeigt die Analyse, dass die Vorantreibung persönlicher Freiheitsrechte auf der supranationalen Ebene neue Modelle und neue Skripte für die nationale politische Auseinandersetzung hervorrufen kann." (Autorenreferat)

"Die Globalisierung führt zu sehr unterschiedlichen Reaktionen von besorgten Bürgerinnen und Bürgern, deren Interessen oder Identitäten durch die zunehmende Vernetzung der Welt bedroht sind. Der gegenwärtige Rechtsextremismus ist jedoch nicht, wie von manchen behauptet wird, eine direkte Reaktion auf den fundamentalen Kultur- und Wertewandel in Westeuropa. Er hängt vielmehr von der Politisierung neuer Konfliktlinien in der Gesellschaft bzw. von der Re-Politisierung bereits bestehender Konflikte ab. Er steht zudem im Zusammenhang mit der herausragenden Bedeutung bestimmter Politikbereiche, die die Hauptarena für die Kämpfe rechtsextremer Parteien und Gruppierungen geworden sind. Die zeitgenössische extreme Rechte trägt zur Politisierung einzelner Themen dieser Politikbereiche bei und nutzt sie gleichzeitig zu ihrem Vorteil. Allerdings wird dieser Prozess durch die bestehende politische Gelegenheitsstruktur - das jeweils vorherrschende Staatsbürgerschaftsmodell - eingeschränkt. Der Beitrag untersucht den Einfluss von Staatsbürgerschaftsmodellen - d.h. den kollektive Definitionen der Zugehörigkeit zum Nationalstaat - auf die Möglichkeiten der Protestmobilisation rechtsradikaler Akteure in Frankreich und der Schweiz. Unterschiedliche Modelle der Staatsbürgerschaft erklären zumindest teilweise die Unterschiede, die wir im Ländervergleich in Präsenz, Form und Inhalt heutiger rechtsradikaler Mobilisierung festgestellt haben. Sie bilden die kulturell-institutionellen Kontexte, auf die sich jene kollektiven Akteure beziehen, die zu Themen im Zusammenhang mit Einwanderung und Ausländern mobilisieren. Untersucht wurde dies an den vier Aspekten: (1) Präsenz im öffentlichen Raum; (2) Organisationsformen; (3) Aktionsformen und (4) Inhalt der Ansprüche und Forderungen rechtsradikaler Mobilisierung." (Autorenreferat)

This article proposes an account of individual participation in social movements that combines structural and cultural factors. It aims to explain why certain activists continue to be involved in social movements while others withdraw. When activists remain embedded in social networks relevant for the protest issues and, above all, when they keep a symbolic linkage between their activism and their personal life-spheres, sustained participation is likely to occur. When these two factors become progressively separated from each other and the process of self-interaction by activists loses its strength, disengagement can be expected. The argument is illustrated with life-history interviews of activists who have kept their strong commitment to a major organization of the Swiss solidarity movement, and others that, in contrast, have abandoned their involvement. The findings support the argument that the interplay of the structural positions of actors and the symbolic meanings of mobilization has a strong impact on commitment to social movements and hence on sustained participation or disengagement. In particular, the interviews show the importance of a sense of coherence and of a holistic view of one's personal life for keeping commitment over time. This calls for a view of individual participation in social movements that draws from social phenomenology and symbolic interactionism in order to shed light on the symbolic (subjective) dimensions of participation,yet without neglecting the crucial role played by structural (objective) factors.

This very exploratory paper looks at the impact of dominant conceptions of citizenship on the mobilization by the extreme right. Previous work has focused on the role of structural cleavages and institutional opportunities such as party alignments and competition. While we acknowledge the importance of such factors, here we focus on citizenship rights as the relevant political opportunity structure for the mobilization of the contemporary the extreme right in Western Europe. We start from the idea that one of the main characteristics of the contemporary extreme right is its framing of the notion of national identity in ethnocultural terms (as opposed to a framing in civic-territorial terms) and examine a number of hypotheses regarding four aspects of the mobilization by the extreme right: (1) its presence in the public space, (2) its organizational forms, (3) its forms of actions, and (4) the content of its claims. We illustrate our hypotheses through a comparison of public claim-making by extreme right actors in France and Switzerland, two countries that differ substantially in the models of citizenship.

We argue that the national state remains the main frame of reference in the field of immigration and ethnic relations. The cultural-historical imprint of the pattern of state formation has produced distinct regimes for the incorporation of migrants which largely explain variations in government policies, public debates, and collective mobilizations concerning this policy area. we first discuss the debate seen in the literature between supporters of the primacy of national sovereignty and post-nationalist theorists. We then describe the process of construction of a EU migration policy, stressing the economic foundations that has driven efforts at policy coordination and the prevailing intergovernmental approach. Finally, we present results of an ongoing project which show the strong variations that exist between counties as regards policies, debates, and mobilizations pertaining to international migration.

In this paper we discuss the institutional setting, both cultural and political, for the claim-making of immigrants and ethnic minorities and derive a number of hypotheses regarding variations in the extent, forms, and content of claim-making. The general underlying idea is that the political-institutional setting shapes the modalities of claim-making, while the cultural-institutional setting provided by the dominant definitions of citizenship and by the regimes for the incorporation of migrants affects its content. In addition, models of citizenship determine the space for the presence and intervention of minorities in the national public space. The degree of legitimacy of these groups for participating in the public debates is an important intervening variable in this respect. We confront our hypotheses with data on the collective claim-making by immigrants and ethnic minorities in France and Switzerland for the period 1990-1994. The data are part of an ongoing comparative project on immigration politics, citizenship, and the mobilization of ethnic difference in several West European countries. The method used in this project and in the present paper attempts to integrate protest event analysis and public discourse analysis in a broader framework for the study of the strategic claim-making occurring in the public space.

In this paper, we discuss the relation between social movements, public opinion, and political alliances with respect to the impact of movements on public policy. We first discuss the existing literature and sketch three broad models of the role of public opinion and political alliances (or the absence of such role) in facilitating the task of social movements in producing policy change: the direct-effect model, the mediated-effect model, and the joint-effect model. We test empirically each of this three explanations by means of time-series analyses of the mobilization of ecology, antinuclear, and peace movements in the United States between 1975 and 1995. The results show, first, that the three movements did not have a substantial impact on public policy, confirming that the direct-effect model has little explanatory power. Second, the mediated-effect model, too, is not supported by the empirical evidence, both in its public opinion and political alliances variants. Third, the joint-effect model is that which fits our data the best.