Essentialising Territory in Identity Politics

1. Essentialising Territory in Identity Politics Dr. Marc Verlot and prof. Gunther Dietz

2. Creating a double track in identity politics • Growing critique on corporate multiculturalism leading to parallel lives • is sustained by “double track” in identity politics, i.e. differentiating between indigenous or historical groups and immigrant groups • Creates two different sets of rights • Rests on essentialised meaning of territory

3. Overview • Identity politics in Flanders and Andalucía • Looking at European initiatives • The naturalisation of difference in social sciences • Different processes – different rights?

4. 1. Flanders and Andalucía on a double track • regional identity has become a domain of government policies • Regions assert their identity in face of devolution and recentralisation towards Europe • Track 1: Based on native history, language and culture intended to reflect and support regional civil society • Track 2: multicultural policies towards immigrants and their descendants

5. Building a Flemish identity • Directed at “native” inhabitants, speaking Dutch • From 1995 set up a huge identity building project: Flanders 2002; refers to 1302, where “Flemish” citizens defeated French royal army • glorification of the past, emphasis on entrepreneurship of Flemish, reproduction and adaptation of symbols (flag, hymn, buildings, literature, etc.) • International renowned Flemish artists were subsidised to work as cultural ambassadors for Flanders

6. Multicultural Flanders • multicultural programme to promote cultures from immigrants in education, welfare and culture sector • Meant to help minorities “integrate” in Flemish society • Totally separate and not involved in Flanders 2002

7. Constructing an Andalucían Identity • Coalition of Andalucían politicians, academics and artists assembled in the Foro Andalucía 2000 • Using key elements such as gypsy flamenco music, catholicism, the Moorish heritage of Al-Andalus to assert modern tolerant image • “This autonomous community is shaped by the heritage of the three cultures, of the Christians, the Muslims and the Jews”

8. 2. Europe creating indigenous and immigrant minority rights • Charter of Regional or Minority Languages in 1992 • European Commission developed programme for “the protection of the historical regional or minority languages of Europe …” • Protects and sustains Sardinian, Frisian, Breton,… • However excludes languages of migrants such as Turkish or Arabic (which are numerically far more important) because of lack of historical link with territory • The development of minority rights by the Council of Europe • Working group since the 60’s • Ad hoc applied by OSCE to new members, not to existing members • Applies only to historical minorities, leaves out immigrant minorities

9. Discrimination between historical and migrant minorities • Belgium grants minority rights ( including own parliament and government) to 60.000 Germans; 120.000 Moroccans or 80.000 Turkish have no right to vote • Andalucía deals differently with Gitanos and Moroccans • Based on link with territory, but territoriality nowhere defined • How long before a migrant minority becomes a historical minority: 327,5 years or 327,6 years?

10. 3. Essentialising Territory • Kymlicka (1995) most well known author to argue for different rights between native and immigrant minorities • European context very different; no natives or aboriginals as such • Some social scientists in Europe make a theoretical distinction between processes of identity formation based on relationship with territory

11. Naturalising difference in social sciences • Temporal continuity (Leman 2000) leads to distinctive “language and territory ideology” (Myhill 1999) among historical minorities • Holton (1998) and Leman (2000) speak of specific migrant ethnicity, not rooted in past, but future oriented, more focused on substantialisation of community in present; ignoring territory and historical roots

12. 4. Different processes –different rights? • Processes of identity formation not inherently different, but applied differently in context • Examples of territorialisation between migrant communities: mosques, headscarves, Moorish legacy and new migrants • No basis for granting different rights • Theory of different etnogenesis leads to creation of “separate cultures” and legitimises segregation