III. immigration and immigrants as perceived threats to social cohesion

Currently immigration is being read by many as a threat -- some right-wing and nationalist leaders will say, the threat -- to the cohesion of the nation-state. The multi-faceted grounds for such a reading can be approached via many of the concepts and issues outlined earlier in this essay:

with reference to the classical sociological concepts: the salient images of social cohesion in popular discourse and (mostly right-of-centre) political rhetoric are largely based on Gemeinschaft and mechanical solidarity premises which assume the necessity of a high degree of likeness (in traditions, values, practices -- and in some discourses, ‘race) among co-citizens in order to facilitate their close interaction. Given such a model immigrants, particularly those whose cultural patterns and appearances are easily distinguishable, are therefore considered to be highly problematic due to their prejudicially conceived un-likeness;

similarly, alongside common understandings of civil society or social capital, both of which place a high premium on values such as trust, civic responsibility and co-operation, there is often a presumption that immigrants’ cultural backgrounds preclude such value structures;

in any historical period of economic restructuring and widespread job insecurity, racism, xenophobia and the scapegoating of immigrants (who are thought to ‘take jobs’) always flourish, while the dismantling of the welfare state and other pressures put on the public purse by neo-liberal political restructuring has led to increasing concerns over ‘our’ common resources posed by ‘them’, the immigrants. Hence in Florida, California and elsewhere immigration is posed as a fiscal problem, while in Germany immigration is curtailed with statements like ‘Das Boot ist voll’ (‘the boat is full’).

particularly in an age when immigrants are rightly no longer required to ‘assimilate’, the cultural composition of society is obviously more pluralized; this further shatters the illusion of homogeneity on which the modern idea of the nation was founded;

further, immigrants are seen to challenge the nation-state as part of the threat ‘from above’ in that contemporary immigration is known to be part of unstoppable, larger processes of globalisation (including the new international division of labour, the relative ease and low costs of travel, the increasing material inequality of nations, and western images of ‘the good-life’ relayed through global media, which are all seen to propel the movement of people across borders);

immigrants are also seen as part of the forces which challenge the nation-state ‘from below’ by way of contributing significantly to the differentiation of society and the politics of recognition/difference/identity.

These matters are here described as ‘perceived’ threats because each can be readily challenged by contesting that immigration and immigrants need poise any more specific challenge to ‘social cohesion’ than other processes happening in Western society anyway. In fact, in some areas (especially regarding civil society and social capital), immigrants -- to the extent that such a blanket term can be used -- can be depicted as contributing positively to social cohesion, in their own respects (as neighbours, co-workers, service providers, etc.) and among other ways by demonstrating the workings of democratic ideals (for instance through their part in campaigns exercising basic rights).

The relationship between immigrants and their potential or actual positive impact on social cohesion is often stated in terms of ‘integration’ (cf. Weil & Crowley 1994). The following section outlines some of the current ‘key issues’ in research and policy regarding immigrants and ‘integration’.

[Back] [Table of contents] [Forward]