An Inclusive Europe: New Minorities in Europe

Full text

An Inclusive Europe:
New Minorities in Europe
Nada Turnšek, Helle Hinge
and Despina Karakatsani
London, UK: 2010
11
CiCe
Guidelines

This Guide has been written and prepared by a CiCe Network Working Group
Nada Turnšek, is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Education, University of Maribor.
Helle Hinge, is an Associate Profess at N. Zahle´s College of Education, University College
Copenhagen.
Despina Karakatsani is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Social and Educational Policy,
University of Peloponnese.
Series editor: Peter Cunningham, International Coordinator, CiCe
This report does not necessarily represent the views of the CiCe Network.
CiCe Guides for research students and supervisors.
ISBN: XXXXXXXX
CiCe Guidelines: ISSN 1741-6353
October 2009
CiCe Central Coordination Unit
Institute for Policy Studies in Education
London Metropolitan University
166 – 220 Holloway Road
London N7 8DB
UK
This publication is also available in electronic format at http://cice.londonmet.ac.uk
This project has been funded with support from the European
Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the authors,
and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which
may be made of the information contained herein.

An Inclusive Europe:
New Minorities in Europe
Nada Turnšek, Helle Hinge
and Despina Karakatsani

Contents
Introduction 1
National identity and minorities 1
Ethnic minorities in Europe - who are they? 4
Controversial issues and conceptual dilemmas 7
An Inclusive Europe

An Inclusive Europe 1
Introduction
All contemporary European states are multicultural in the sense that
their populations include both traditional and new minority groups.
Fuelled in part by political upheaval, economic difference and
freedom of movement entailed in growing economic integration in
Europe, an increasing number of people have settled, with varying
degrees of permanence, in countries other than their country of
origin.
The integration of immigrant populations is an important issue of
political debate in European countries as they search for appropriate
arrangements to facilitate integration while remaining mindful of
cultural difference. Although promoting inclusive multiculturalism is
seen as an important goal of multiethnic Europe, we are conscious
that our histories show that acceptance of diversity has not always
been self-evident in policy; and that, policy has often been
assimilationist in tone, placing periodic demands on immigrants to
give up their traditional lifestyles and adopt the dominant living
modes in the society to which they have immigrated. The dilemma
is often how best to reach the goal of inclusive multiculturalism.
In this booklet we raise conceptual and policy questions that serve
both to illustrate complexity and the importance of context. Rather
than advocating any particular policy or practice we provide
activities that encourage students to reflect on concepts and
policies.
National identity and minorities
The modern history of Europe is the history of nation-states and
national identity has been the dominant form of collective identity
since the eighteenth century. According to the French philosopher
Jean-Jacques Rousseau a nation was a demos nation, i.e. a political
and juridical community, and its citizens were socialised to feel
devoted to their homeland and enjoy the obligations of being a
citizen. His contemporary, the German philosopher Johann Gottfried
Herder, saw “nation” as an ethnos nation, which consisted of a
culturally homogenous people sharing one language, ethnicity, and
religion. A nationality connects a human being to a particular
geographical place, embodies a historical continuity, and is
constituted by a mutual belief that this group has got something in
common. National identity provides people with a sense of
belonging. However, this only takes place if people have the feeling
of being accepted members of the national identity.
According to the philosophical theory of social constructionism,
individuals and groups participate in the creation of their perceived
social reality constructed through language and social interaction.
Cultures, minorities, and identities are neither static, nor unified; their
meanings differ from one context to another, as they themselves are

constructions. According to Benedict Anderson (1991) a national
identity is a cultural construction, constituted by a mutual belief.
“A nationality exists when its members believe it does. It is not a
question of a group of people sharing some common attribute such as
race or language. These features do not of themselves make nations,
and only become important insofar as a particular nationality takes as
one of its defining features that its members speak French or have
black skin” (Miller 2000:28).
Many European countries have constructed a “we” discourse in
public debate which is synonymous with many national ethnos
identities in Europe. These identities in most cases imply that a “real”
citizen has a white complexion, a Christian belief, and speaks an
official national language of the country as his/her first language,
which means that the families have been speaking the official
language of the country for generations. Huynik (1991:158)
problematises this notion by asking ‘How many generations does it
take to become a full member of a nation? Moreover, this
construction has consequences for people that do not share these
characteristics. Citizenship and national identity can easily become
notions that include some and exclude others. A boundary, drawn
between “us” and “them” runs between nations as well as within
nations - between citizens who fulfil the expectations of being a
‘real’ Greek or ‘real’ Slovene, and those people (groups) who do not
fulfil these criteria, such as settled minorities, migration workers,
asylum-seekers and refugees.
According to Giddens (1996) identity is a reflexive project that has
to do with maintaining and revising narratives about ourselves. In
societies we construct our own as well as others´ identities; thereby
we state who is a full member of society and who is not. This implies
that the possibilities of choosing and changing identities is restricted
by the ways groups are perceived by other groups, especially the
majority, who hold the power of being able to define the status and
identity of minorities.
A ‘minority’ as a sociological term refers to a non-dominant or
subordinated social group that might be oppressed or stigmatised on
the basis of racial, ethnic, biological, or other characteristics. There
are many cases when groups of immigrants are not a numerical
minority; an academic usage of the term primarily concerns power
differences among groups. It typically refers to an ethnic group
understood in terms of language, nationality, religion and/or culture;
however, minority may also include any group which differ from
majority population in terms of social status, education,
employment, wealth and political power. Apart from racial, ethnic,
cultural (linguistic, religious) minorities, people with disabilities,
economic minorities (working poor or unemployed), age minorities
2An Inclusive Europe

(children or old people) and sexual minorities, may also be regarded
as minority as they are experiencing oppression and domination.
Louis Wirth (in Marshal 1998) defines a minority group as a group of
people who, because of their physical or cultural characteristics, are
singled out from the others in the society in which they live for
differential and unequal treatment and who therefore regard
themselves as objects of collective discrimination. Discrimination
may be directly based on an individual’s perceived membership of a
minority group; it is associated with prejudice and manifested in
intolerant behaviour directed against a certain group. It may also
occur indirectly, due to social structures that are not equally
accessible to all.
For example, evidence of structural and institutional inequalities are
highlighted in a recent Eurydice report (2009) in which data shows that
access to early childhood services may be hampered by a number of
factors to an extent that some children run the risk of being excluded.
The most common exclusion factors include affordability and shortfalls
in provision that indirectly cause lower participation of ethnic minority
children due to an accumulation of risk factors (low income, low levels
of education, language proficiency etc) in those underprivileged
families.
Wirth points out that membership of a minority group is subjectively
claimed by its members, who may use their status as the basis of
group identity or solidarity. Minority status is a source of collective
identity, and socially shared rules about who belongs and who does
not, determine minority status. In any case, minority group status is
categorical in nature: an individual belonging to a given minority
group will be accorded the status of that group and be subject to the
same treatment as other members of that group. A sense of solidarity
or group identity, and subordination status are therefore the two key
criteria accepted by most scholars in defining a minority group.
An Inclusive Europe 3

Ethnic minorities in Europe - who are they?
Today, European states are becoming places of increasingly diverse
population groups with different ethnic, religious or cultural
backgrounds, with multiple collective and personal identities; OECD
data (2007) demonstrate that since 1995 all European countries are
showing notable population increases as a result of international
migrationi. In some countries, immigration has occurred only fairly
recently, whereas others have long-standing experience of devising
and implementing policies in this area. Migration movements include
not only entries of people of foreign nationality, on which public
attention tends to be focused; they also include movements of
nationals and emigrants; and every country represents a unique
“pattern” of minority groups (see the Greek case, Box 1).
An Inclusive Europe4
Box 1: the Greek case
Like many regions of Western and Southern Europe, Greece has
experienced a significant change during the last three decades and
especially since the late 1980s. Immigration has been from both EU
(especially Poland) and non-EU countries (including Albania, the
Philippines, Pakistan, Iraq and Egypt, and other countries in Africa
and Asia).
Also people of Greek origin may also belong to the category
‘immigrant’. One recognized group of ethnic Greek immigrants, the
Vorioepirotes, are Albanian citizens mainly from Southern Albania
(Northern Epirus), who consider themselves, and are recognized by
the Greek State, as ethnically and culturally Greek. There are also
returnee-citizens of non-EU countries who are of Greek origin in that
they derive from Greece or regions beyond the borders of the Greek
state which were formerly influenced by Greek culture. The majority
of the individuals who belong to this category feel they have
‘returned’ to their ‘homeland’ and are Pontic Greeks or Rossopontiii,
i.e. emigrants from the region of Pontos at the Southern coast and
the Black sea to the ex-Soviet Republics. Pontic Greeks acquire
Greek citizenship upon arrival in Greece. Repatriates are Greek
emigrants who return to Greece on their own free will after a period
of permanent residence abroad. Individuals belonging to this
category may be Greek citizens or have acquired the citizenship of
the host country. Children of Greek emigrants are also included in
this category.

While old patterns of minority groups in European states persist,
immigration and rapid social and political change have produced the
formation of the so called new minorities. As both the number and
visibility of ethnic minority groups expand questions that need to be
addressed at a national and international level are: do the members
of minorities have the same social status and are they treated the
same as the members of the majority or nationals; are they enjoying
the same cultural and political rights; are the different types of
minorities enjoying the same amount of protection? (Jovanovi
2007: 4).
Almost all societies contain types of ethnic minorities such as
indigenous people, landless or nomadic communities, and
immigrants.
The term indigenous people is used to describe any ethnic group of
people who inhabit a geographic region with which they have the
earliest known historical connection alongside immigrants which
have populated the region and which are greater in number (Other
related terms include ‘aboriginal’, ‘native’, ‘autochthonous’ people).
Indigenous people’s ancestors inhabited a region before the arrival of
colonists; they lived independently or largely isolated, have
maintained at least in part their distinct linguistic, cultural and
social/organizational characteristics, remaining differentiated from
the dominant culture of the nation-state and; they are self-identified
as such and recognized as indigenous peoples, per se. Some of the
notable indigenous populations in Europe include the Sami people of
northern Scandinavia, the Nenets and other Samoyedic peoples of
the northern Russia, the Komi peoples of the western Urals, and the
Basque people, inhabiting northern Spain and southwestern France.
Their common problems are suffering discrimination and pressure to
assimilate into their surrounding societies, while loosing their
distinctive cultures.
In Europe there are several small nomadic or landless communities.
The best known are the Roma people, often known as “Gypsies”, the
Sinti and Kale. There are approximately 10 million Roma in Europe
mainly living in the Balkans and in Central and Eastern Europe; most
of them speak Romani language. The Sinti are mainly found in the
German-speaking regions (Germany, Switzerland, Austria), the
Benelux and some of the Scandinavian countries and in east France
(called ‘Manouches’). The Kale (more commonly called “Gitanos” or
“Spanish Gypsies”) in the Iberian Peninsula and southern France
more or less speak Kaló; there is also a ‘Kaalé’ group in Finland, and
Kale in Wales.
5An Inclusive Europe

“Travellers” is an administrative term which also applies to non-
Roma groups with itinerant lifestyles. Irish Travellers or (in Scotland)
simply Travellers are not Roma, but their nomadic culture has been
influenced by Roma; in Norway there is a small group of people who
call themselves Reisende; i.e. indigenous Norwegian Travellers.
Immigrants - the “new minorities” in Europe
An immigrant is often defined as a person, who for a variety of
reasons (including forced migration, economic motives, or the desire
to keep family together) has settled in a receiving country, or who
may be seeking asylum, have refugee status, or be an irregular
immigrant.
Citizenship (non-citizenship) and residence (permanent or
temporary) are the two concepts and legal instruments used for the
categorisation of immigrant people; however, they are not
internationally used in the same manner. The three main categories
of immigrants are: people with citizenship of their new state; long-
term residents; and, residents within Europe who posses the
citizenship of another EU State. Long-term residents who are third
country nationals have become a legal category in European
Community law with the European Council Resolution on the Status
of Third-Country Nationals who Reside on a Long-Term Basis in the
territory of the Member States (1996) and Chapter VIII (article 30) of
the Amsterdam Treaty.
The Roma people are recognized as citizens by most European States
in which they have been settled for a long time, but, the Roma can
also be considered as a new minority as far as their recent
immigration in Western Countries.
The term ‘new minorities’, has been generally used in order to refer
to the minority groups resulting from post World War II immigration.
In recent decades, most EU member States have experienced a
marked increase in the number of third country nationals (people
from non-E.U. countries). New minorities originating from
immigration thus encompasses categories of third country nationals
legally present on the territory of an EU member State and includes
not only migrant workers with permanent or seasonal contracts, but
also asylum-seekers, refugees, and ethnic migrants with the main
focus on the integration of the first generation. On the Tampere
European Council (1999) it was agreed that the legal status of third
country nationals should be approximated to that of the nationals of
the member States. The Council of Europe (2001) recognises a clear
link between migrants and minorities and stresses the importance of
stronger protection of migrants’ rights.
Social inclusion and integration of the newcomers includes legal
equality (ensuring the same human rights compared to citizens of
the receiving country, access to societies’ resources) as well as
6An Inclusive Europe

7
respecting the minority rights such as cultural, linguistic and religious
rights.
A comprehensive integration policy ensures that immigrants could
take an equal part in the life of society, and to participate in public
life in areas such as the labour market and education. Some
indicators proposed by the Council of Europe devised to measure
social inclusion are:
Do immigrants have the possibility to apply for family reunification
immediately upon their arrival in the host country?; Does the labour
law provide for cultural and religious diversity among workers?; Are
there legal provisions to promote awareness raising of minority
issues such as cultural diversity in the national curriculum for all
children?
Controversial issues and conceptual dilemmas
Official recognition of minority groups
The issue of establishing minority groups, and determining the
extent of protection of the (minority) rights they might derive from
their status, is controversial. In the politics of some countries, a
minority is an ethnic group that is recognized as such by respective
laws of its country and therefore, has some rights that other groups
lack. The question of what constitutes a ‘minority’ in terms of
international law has remained both disputed and uncertain, which
in turn has hampered national and regional initiatives in addressing
and applying provisions for the protection of minorities. In addition,
different terminology referring to a minority is used, and often lacks
definition. An absence of a universally accepted definition of the
term minority, represent a risk for the status and protection of the
rights of minorities; the implications are bypassing,
misinterpretations and denial of certain rights to certain people
(Jovanovi 2007, 6).
As a result, different minority groups often are not given identical
treatment. Currently, European states tend to make a distinction
between some ethnic minorities being officially recognised as
national minorities and other groups who are not. Some minorities
are relatively large or historically important or otherwise recognised
as important so that the system is set up in a way to guarantee
them comprehensive protection and political representation. Namely,
the concept of national minority is traditionally understood in a
European context as referring to ethnic groups living in a state, that
are linked to a nation that has constituted it’s own state, so-called
“kin-state”. The law of several European countries defines national
minorities referring to the historical ties with the state, the link to a
traditional area of settlement and the citizenship of the state. The
implications of those criteria are limiting the notion of national
An Inclusive Europe

An Inclusive Europe8
minority to the so called autochthonous or indigenous groups. In
addition, the “autochthonous” concept itself is not clearly defined or
applied in same manner in countries).
National minorities seen as historical communities are in many
countries defined in opposition with new immigrant ethnic groups
(Box 2). It seems that every country represents a unique response to
dealing with the problems and challenges arising from diverse ethnic
structure, each using their own criteria for official recognition on
some minorities and non- recognition of others.

9An Inclusive Europe
Box 2: Three models of minority rights protection in Slovenia
Full-protection model
The Slovene Constitution and the legislation on national
minorities assure the highest level of minority rights protection to
the national minorities; the 'full-protection model' is in place for
Italian and Hungarian minorities, so called autochthonous national
minorities, with ‘protection’ based on about eighty regulations and
the Constitutional provisions (article 11; article 64) which provide
a comprehensive set of rights – from the right to use national
symbols freely, to the right to establish organisations and develop
economic, cultural, scientific and research activities, as well as
activities in the field of public media and publishing.
Selective extending model
Protection of the Roma community is assured on the basis of the
'selective extending model'; the most important is article 65 of the
Constitution, which stipulates status and some special rights of
the Roma community.
Rudimental model
The so called modern minorities or new minorities (mostly
immigrants from the countries of the former Yugoslavia as well as
German ethnic community) are assured the right to preserve their
national identity by the 'rudimental model' guaranteeing the right
to freely express affiliation with nation or national community, to
foster and give expression to his/her culture, to use language and
script, in a manner provided by law in procedures before state and
other bodies performing a public function (articles 61 and 62 of
the Constitution)
In this three-level minority rights protection policy Hungarians
and Italians benefit from well-defined, extensive rights. However,
Komac (in Gosselin, 2003) argues that the autochtonous/non-
autochtonous dichotomy is incoherent as Italians who settled in
the country after the Second World War are considered to be
more ‘autochtonous’ than Croats who have been living in Slovenia
for a longer period of time.
Even though Slovenia is a home to Croats, Serbs and Bosnians,
who came when war broke out in ex-Yugoslavia or were already
settled in Slovenia when the country declared its independence in
1991, they do not have the status of an official minority. The
differentiated level of minority protection for Roma has also been
addressed in reports by EU institutions (see OSI 2001, 495).

Defining a minority?
An immigrant person with no-dominant ethnic, religious or cultural
background might face a personal dilemma whether to define
himself/herself as (primarily) as a member of a minority group or
not. Namely, self-determination of a person as member of minority
group is in most countries associated with certain positive measures
or entitlements designed in order to guarantee equal opportunities
as well as promotion of their social inclusion. On the other hand, the
term minority itself has negative connotations; it often implies a
status of “the Other” and “the Different” in society. Therefore it is
important for European countries to provide a range of special
support measures (however, it is worth considering if they need to
be exclusively bound to official minority status or even if we need to
use a term “minority” at all) as well as to guarantee a constitutional
right to self-determination.
A wide variety of support measures are available in European schools
that aim to promote integration and the academic success of
immigrant children. Several legislative and special support measures
have been developed aimed at ensuring:
(1) the right to education (including free compulsory education;
(2) linguistic support measures in order to develop proficiency in the
language(s) of the host country or language of instruction in schools;
(3) parallel support to be taught their mother tongue and learn
about the culture of their country of origin. In addition, education
settings are developing intercultural education as an holistic
approach to teaching conducive to interaction between cultures, and
are implementing appropriate teacher training and continuous
professional development aimed at developing new professional skills
needed to foster a philosophy of multiculturalism and active
tolerance (Eurydice 2004: 67 – 71).
The entitlements and positive measures are, in most cases, based on
child’s official minority status and often exclude some groups of
children.
In the same report (Eurydice, 2004: 13) it is noted that current
European legislation on the education of children who are nationals
of third countries and either have legal status or have been resident
for at least a certain minimum period, is concerned with granting
entitlement to education under the same conditions as those
applicable to nationals, but subject to certain possible exceptions.
However, it contains no provisions regarding the entitlement to
education of children who are third-country nationals and irregularly
present on European Union territory. Neither does it include any
positive measures for the assistance of immigrant children
10 An Inclusive Europe

Interpretations of the equal opportunities concept
Disputes about appropriate social inclusion policies often revolve
around different interpretations of the equal opportunities concept.
In some countries (even among scholars), equality is understood
primarily in terms of providing the same treatment for all people-
regardless of differing living situations (and needs) of people-such as
immigrants and their family members. In most countries, positive
and affirmative measures (in some cases called “positive
discrimination”) are seen as inherent to equality and thus justifiable
on the grounds of equality of outcome.
The exercise Starting Points (Schiindllauer, 2006) helps the
participants to understand that some circumstances and factors in
one’s life do represent disadvantage, and that on a road to successful
integration people are not starting from the same departure points; a
discriminatory system is often used to simply keep up domination of
a majority group possessing characteristics that represent an
advantage.
Exercise 1: STARTING POSITIONS
Objectives
To show different social starting positions and possibilities for individuals
on the basis of belonging to a different group;
To make people aware that there are some factors which can make it more
difficult to be successful in life;
To make clear that people start from different positions in life, and that
many starting position are fixed.
It is important to note that this is a very strong activity requiring
mutual trust within the group. The facilitator of the activity must be
sensitive as categories may touch deep emotions. For example,
questions about violence or drug abuse in the family may be personally
upsetting. In some cases it may be necessary to drop or adjust some of
the attributes on the list that are thought to be inappropriate in the
context.
Procedure
●Ask the participants to stand in one line, holding each others
hands (a setting that requires lots of space.)
●Tell them that you will read different attributes and that they
have to make a step forward or backward, according to
instructions. They should, where possible, keep hold of their
neighbour’s hand.
●Importantly, make it clear to participants that they have the
right to remain where they are; that they are not under pressure
to reveal anything that they do not wish to.
●Then read the following attributes:
An Inclusive Europe 11

An Inclusive Europe12
Attributes One step . . .
Personal, Origin
you are woman backward
You are man forward
born in Slovenia*/Europe (*land in which the training is conducted) forward
parents were born in Slovenia*/Europe forward
grandparents were born in Slovenia*/Europe forward
first language is Slovenian*/European language forward
first language is non - European language backward
Family
your family consists of more than three children backward
you had many books in your parents house forward
at least one of your parents finished high school forward
at least one of your parents has a university degree forward
you are Christian forward
You are Jewish backward
you are Muslim backward
you are Buddhist backward
your parents are divorced backward
alcohol or drug abuse in the family backward
suicide in the family backward
any kind of violence in the family backward
Actual situation
Married forward
divorced backward
you have children backward
you are heterosexual forward
you are gay, lesbian backward
you have any kind of disability or illness backward
problems with alcohol or drugs backward backward
you are or have been at least once unemployed backward
Education
high school degree forward
university degree forward
learned a profession forward
you know a second language forward
you know more than two languages forward

13An Inclusive Europe
Ask the participants to look around and see who is standing in the
front positions or in the back positions. For emphasis you may ask
them to race to the wall in front of them.
Some questions for final discussion:
-How did you feel standing far in the front or in the back?
-How did you feel, when it was no longer possible to hold hands?
-Did anyone learn something new about her-/himself?
-What was difficult about the activity?
-What are the common characteristics of the attributes?
-Was it really me who just invented these attributes or were they
taken from a real experiences of society?
-Do you think that you were always sent in the right direction?
4.4 Multiculturalism or “plural monoculturalism”?
The demand for multiculturalism today is present in most multi-
ethnic countries; however, as Amartya Sen (2006) argues it is
important to define what form of multiculturalism should be taken.
Namely, the vocal defence of multiculturalism is very often merely a
plea for “plural monoculturalism”, understood as cultures co-existing
side by side. To him the distinction between interaction and isolation
is of central importance; multiculturalism is not merely a tolerance
but an interaction between diverse living modes and of varying
cultural priorities.
Sen sees a hope of harmony in the contemporary world in
understanding of the pluralities of human identity and stresses the
importance of seeing ourselves as members of a variety of groups, to
which we simultaneously belong, all of them giving us particular
identity. Given our inescapably plural identities, we have to decide on
the relative importance of our different associations and affiliations
in any particular context. Central to leading a human life, therefore,
are the responsibilities of choice and reasoning.
Exercise 2 helps participants in understanding the importance of co-
existence of identities. In the photo 2 we see a Muslim woman
(most likely an immigrant) demonstrating against racism in
København. She is holding the Danish flag as well as a plastic bag
from a well-known Danish supermarket chain (“Fotex”). She does
this in a way that seems to be very natural to her showing that she
is identifying with a Danish nation. The message of the exercise it
that is important for minority people to identify with the nation, and
participate in civil society. As Sen (2006: 164 - 165) points out, civil
society has a very important role to play in the lives immigrants. He
sees a future of multiethnic society in recognizing, supporting, and

helping to advance the many different ways in which citizens with
distinct politics, linguistic heritage, and social priorities (along with
different ethnicities and religions) can interact with each other in
their different capacities, including as citizens.
Exercise 2: SYMBOLS OF BELONGING
Objective
To gain insight into the construction of national identity and to help
the participants with understanding that the flag as a symbol is
usually associated with the majority.
Reflecting on an issue of minority religious identity of the woman on
the picture- to ask how it is compatible with national identity.
To endorse a critical consciousness by discovering that national
identity is a construction and a narrative that can be told in different
ways
Preparation
The teacher finds two pictures. One represents a majority group who
makes use of a national flag. In a Danish context the picture from
football matches is an example (photo 1).ii
Photo 1
Another picture represents a person from a minority group who
makes use of a national flag.
In a Danish context the picture from a demonstration against racism
in Denmark, have been used (photo 2).iii
14 An Inclusive Europe

Photo 2
Procedure
The two pictures are presented to the students. They have 5 minutes
for individual brainstorms; then each writes on a piece of paper what
the two pictures make him/her think of. They are asked to pose one
question which the pictures made her/him think of.
Plenary: the questions are written on a board. Everybody takes part
in dividing the questions into groups according to topics (i.e.
thematicising the questions).Students are asked to look for possible
connections, similarities, and differences. Than the students are
encouraged to express arguments for why exactly these topics arose.
Options
Questions for small group discussions:
-When do we use flags? What is the historical background of the
flag? Does the flag have different meanings in different contexts?
How other Danes would perceive this person’s way of being and
behaving Danish.
-Do you have a homeland? Which one (more than one?)? What
does it take to feel at home in a place?
Are some people more “real” members of a nation than other
people? How do you become a ”real” member of a nation? Do you
have to adapt to special customs, a language, or a religion? Do
you have to be born in the nation in order to be a “real” member?
Do you have to speak (one of) the official language(s) of the
nation as your first language? Do you have to live inside the
nation’s territory? Or is it enough to have the citizenship?
-Is it enough to feel that you are a member of the nation? Do you
have to be acknowledged as such by others?
An Inclusive Europe 15

An Inclusive Europe16
Religious identity as one of the many identities
Research shows that religion continues to be an important identity
marker for new immigrants and influences their integration.
Immigrant groups differ in the ways they integrate religious and
ethnic identities and the emphasis they place on each. Immigrant
newcomers who bring values that depart or appear to depart very
substantially from those of the host society may lead to the creation
of social boundaries that are difficult to transcend. The question is
whether certain religious minorities have values, beliefs or practices
that are difficult to integrate into society because they clash with
ideas about gender equality or secularism in public institutions.
Ethno-religious diversity may affect commonalities of values,
commitments, and social relations among individuals and groups of
individual and thereby promote social integration of immigrant
groups.
Religious minorities may be subject to discrimination and prejudice,
especially when the religious differences are interconnected with
ethnic differences. Religious minorities are stigmatized and
experience discrimination based on religion, and on a perception of
religious minorities as a racialized ‘other.’ In many immigrant
receiving countries particularly in Europe, it has been the religious
character of minority groups rather than their racial origins which
has been considered most problematic for social integration.
The role of religion in social inclusion or exclusion of religious or
ethnic communities was highlighted by terrorism.
As Sen points out, a major source of potential conflict in the
contemporary world is the presumption that people can be uniquely
categorized based on religion and culture. In addition, the politics of
global confrontation is frequently seen as a “clash of civilizations”.
Underlying this line of thinking is the odd presumption that the
people of the world can be uniquely categorized according to some
singular and overarching system of partitioning. Civilizational or
religious partitioning of the world population yields a “solitarist”
approach to human identity, which sees human beings as members
of exactly one group (defined by civilization or religion, in contrast
with earlier reliance on nationalities and classes). An aolitarist
approach is giving automatic priority to inherited religion or tradition
over reflection and choice. Sen (2006: 164-165) argues against
society seen, explicitly or by implications, as a federation of religious
ethnicities; He adds, that our shared humanity gets savagely
challenged when the manifold divisions in the world are unified into
one allegedly dominant system of classification – in terms of
religion, or community, or culture, or nation, or civilization. He argues
against nations being seen as a collection (federation) of ethnic and
religious communities with citizens being assigned places in
predetermined segments.

17An Inclusive Europe
Exercise 3 is an example of a workshop aimed at combating
‘islamophobia’ and promoting interfaith dialogue in a Greek context.
The example has been used in the Greek context because it touches
the particular religious situation of the country. It can also be
adapted for other country religious situation or conflicts.
Exercise 3: FACING INTOLERANCE AND DISCRIMINATION
TOWARDS MUSLIMS: A GREEK EXAMPLE
Objectives
To make the students aware of problems related to violent actions
and conflicts between different religious beliefs.
To understand and analyze discrimination, racism and ‘islamophobia’.
Preparation
Ask the participants to find information in newspapers or other mass
media illustrating a religious conflict. In Greece we have used an
event described in newspaper. It concerns the defacement of one
Iraqi migrant’s copy of the Koran by a Greek police officer during an
identity check. In front of the eyes of many Muslims the policeman
tried to destroy it and step on it. This incident triggered angry
demonstrations by hundreds of Muslim immigrants. Some time later
around 1000 Muslims and members of anti-immigrant organizations
demonstrated in the streets and ended up in Constitution Square in
front of Parliament. The demonstration was mostly peaceful but
some demonstrators collided with the Police forces causing extensive
damage, burning cars and smashing windows of nearby shops. The
scenes that unfolded in central Athens was unprecedented, it was the
first of its kind and the demonstrators fell on the shields of the
police men, regardless of the danger of injury or arrest. Other, larger
group were holding the Koran and prayer to Allah and cursing
enemies of Islam.
Procedure
Students are invited to comment on texts/articles from the press
about this subject. The leader provides different articles from the
press which develop different reactions towards this incident and
consequences from several religious conflicts. (Optional: students are
also invited to find articles).
The following “reactions” are taken from the media in Greece:
1. The ‘Koran incident’ reignited the debate around illegal
immigration and raised questions over the cultural division
between Greeks and a growing population of Muslim migrants
and asylum seekers in Greece, a homogeneous and largely
Christian Orthodox nation.
2. While most Muslim immigrants agree they have to take
responsibility for how they are perceived by the Greek public,

they were quick to denounce the policeman’s alleged
mishandling of the Koran.
3. “The matter could have been immediately resolved if the police
had simply apologised,” said the president of the Muslim Union
of Greece. “That would have been the end of it. But it seems to
me there is some sort of political plot to make Greeks hate
immigrants by forcing Muslims to pour out onto the streets.
4. In Athens, thousands of Muslim immigrants and asylum seekers
from Arab nations, Africa and the Indian subcontinent are in a
state of desperation. Inner-city Muslims say a large portion of its
community is marginalised with near-zero chances of securing
legal residency and stable employment. Many are homeless. Even
those who have managed to put down roots in Greece feel
disenchanted. Athens remains the only capital city in Europe
without an official mosque. The city’s Muslims are still waiting
for ruling the Government to construct a mosque, on the
outskirts of Athens.
5. According to Mehmet Imam, president of the Greece’s Muslim
Federation Filotita, there is no evidence that young and
desperate Muslim migrants in Greece are turning to extremism.
He does, however, believe that “some people” are trying to
exploit those Muslim immigrants alienated from society and who
are thus most vulnerable to radicalisation.
6. “Islam does not promote violence,” said Imam, a Greek Muslim
born in Xanthi, northeastern Greece. “If there is violence, then
there is certainly an outside instigator.”
7. “We want the officer or officers involved to be prosecuted, and
the government to issue an apology,” protester Manala
Mohammed, a Syrian national, told The Associated Press. “We
want people to show us respect.”
Students are asked to discuss these different reactions, to try to
understand the motives of the different parties and classify their
opinions/beliefs . The following questions could be given for the
small-group discussions.
- What is your impression about this incident, what happened that
day in Athens?
- What are the different reactions towards this incident? What are the
motives of different reactions? Do you think that they are
controversial?
- Do you think that newspaper texts can help you reconstruct the
real events?
- Do you think that demonstrations help the whole society
understand the problem?
- Do you think that violent reactions can help dissolve stereotyping
Muslims and counter racist behaviours and ideas?
18 An Inclusive Europe

Optional: The leader invite the participants to role-play “pro” and
“contra” situation; to choose one belief statement (press reaction)
which he/she (or the whole group) agree with, then they have to
provide argumentation for it. The other group can provide contra
argumentation. Students are asked to find some other incidents
concerning religious conflicts and islamophobia. Then the leader can
ask students to write down their opinions, create a small article (as
journalists) in which they could describe the whole situation and
comment on different and controversial points of islamophobia.
Conclusion: cultural freedom in the context of cultural diversity
As Sen points out (2006: 103) while there is no doubt that culture
does matter, the real question is “How does culture matter?” He sees
multicultural societies as “diversely diverse”, and stresses the
importance of a close link between cultural freedom and cultural
diversity. He argues against culture conservation, which has become
a big issue in the rhetoric of multiculturalism, often providing
support for the continuation of traditional lifestyles by new
immigrants in the West, and advocates for cultural freedom in the
context of promoting cultural diversity. Cultural diversity is enhanced
if individuals are allowed and encouraged to live as they would value
living, instead of being restrained by ongoing tradition. For example,
the freedom to pursue ethnically diverse lifestyles, for example, in
food habits or in music, can make a society more culturally diverse
precisely as a result of the exercise of cultural liberty. Diversity can
also play a positive role in enhancing the freedom even of those who
are not directly involved. Culturally diverse society can bring benefits
to others in the form of the ample variety of experiences which they
are, as a consequence, in a position of enjoy. Rich tradition of
immigrant cultures can expand the cultural options of all people and
enriched the cultural landscape of Europe (Sen, 2006: 113 - 115).
If we could see “the Other” more as an opportunity, we might
change the perspective, and perhaps be more efficient in facing real
problems.
An Inclusive Europe 19

References
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of
Nationalism. London: Verso.
Baubock, R., Heller, A., Zolberg, A. (Eds.) (1996). The Challenge of Diversity: Integration
and Pluralism in Societies of Immigration, Avebury: Aldershott.
Beyer, P. (2005). ‘Religious Identity And Educational Attainment Among Recent
Immigrants To Canada: Gender, Age, and 2nd Generation’, Journal Of
International Migration And Integration, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 177-199.
Bramadat, P. and Seljak, D. (Eds) (2005). Religion and Ethnicity in Canada, Toronto:
Pearson Longman.
EURYDICE (2004) Integrating Immigrant Children into Schools in Europe. Brussels:
Eurydice.
EURYDICE (2009) Tackling Social and Cultural Inequalities through Early Childhood
Education and Care in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice. Available online:
http://www.eurydice.org
Giddens, A. (1996). Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern
Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gosselin, T. (2001). Minority media in Hungary and Slovenia: a comparative
assessment, Research Paper Prepared for the Peace Institute Fellowship Program
2002. Ljubljana: The Peace Institute.
Fenggang Y. and Ebaugh, H. R. (2001). Religion and Ethnicity among New Immigrants:
The Impact of Majority/Minority Status in Home and Host Countries, Journal
for the scientific study of religion , vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 367-378.
Huntington, S. (1993). ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3, pp.
22-49.
Hutnik, N. (1991). Ethnic Minority Identity. A Social Pshychological Perspective. Oxford:
Universoty Press.
Jovanovi , T. (2007). The Importance and Challenge on the definition of the term
Mayaudon, C. (2007). Role and place of Minorities in EuroMed ontext: Ethnic,
linguistic and religious. Salto-Youth EuroMed Youth Educational Report.
Available online:
http://issuu.com/caroline.mayaudon/docs/role_and_place_final_web/22
Miller, D. (2000). Citizenship and National Identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Minority in a Multicultural Europe Political and Legal definitions of the citizens: the
dynamics of inclusion and exclusion. Masters Program in Euroculture Uppsala
Universitet. Available online:
http://www.euroculturemaster.org/pdf/groep2_2/Jovanovic.pdf
Minority Protection, 494-547. Budapest: Open Society Institute. Available online:
www.eumap.org
OECD (2007). Trends in migration. Available online:
http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/show/1004869
20 An Inclusive Europe

OSI (2001). Minority Protection in Slovenia. In Monitoring the EU Accession Process:
Reitz J. G., Banerjee, R. Phan, M. Thompson, J. (2008). Race, Religion, and the Social
Integration of New Immigrant Minorities in Canada, Toronto: University of
Tor ont o.
Schiindllauer, D. (2006). Strengthening the National Institutional Structure for the Fight
Against Discrimination, Manual for Trainers Workshops to Counteract
Discrimination. Conducted in the framework of the Twinning Project
Slovenia/Austria -
Seljak, D. (2007). Religion and Multiculturalism in Canada: The Challenge of Religious
Intolerance and Discrimination, Waterloo, A Report Prepared for Canadian
Heritage.
Sen, A. (2006). Identity and Violence. London: Penguin Books.
June 2006 (in press). Zara – Ziiviillcourage und Anttii-Rassiismus-Arbeiitt.
iPoland is the only OECD country among the countries showing negative net migration
on a systematic basis.
ii http://images.google.dk/imgres?imgurl=http://mgg.dk/roligan/pic_roligan.jpg&imgrefur
l=http://mgg.dk/roligan/roligan.htm&usg=__0D8SbE1SnhqQdM-
FMKwevzItpiA=&h=205&w=320&sz=58&hl=da&start=1&tbnid=yHx4XJicUJx5IM:&tbn
h=76&tbnw=118&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddannebrog%2Bfodboldkamp%2Broligans%26
gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D21%26hl%3Dda%26sa%3DN
iii http://www.american-pictures.com/gallery/denmark/pages/dk-minority-muslim-
004.htm

The Children's Identity and Citizenship in Europe (CiCe) Thematic Network links
28 European states and some 80 universities and college departments which are
engaged in educating students about how children and young people learn about
and understand their society, their identity and citizenship.
A cross-disciplinary group, we include lecturers in social psychology, pedagogy,
psychology, sociology and curriculum studies, and those who educate various
professions such as teachers, social pedagogues, psychologists, early childhood
workers and youth workers.
An Inclusive Europe: New Minorities in Europe
ISBN: XXXXXXXX
CiCe Guidelines: ISSN 1741-6353
Published by the CiCe Thematic Network Project
Institute for Policy Studies in Education, London Metropolitan University