The Social Psychology of Ethnic Identity

Maykel Verkuyten

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781351613323
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Psychologie
• Subtopic: Geschichte & Theorie in der Psychologie

In contrast to other disciplines, social psychology has been slow in responding to the questions posed by the issue of ethnicity. The Social Psychology of Ethnic Identity, Second Edition, demonstrates the important and diverse contribution that social psychology can make.

Comprehensively updated to include the latest research on dual and multiple identities, mutual links between sense of ethnic identity and social contexts, and the development of ethnic identity in adolescence, this new edition now also features research from non-European cultural contexts, including Turkey, Mauritius and Myanmar. The book shows, on the one hand, that social psychology can be used to develop a better understanding of ethnicity and, on the other hand, that increased attention to ethnicity can benefit social psychology. By filling in theoretical and empirical gaps, Maykel Verkuyten brings an original approach to subjects such as:

• 
  
  

• ethnic minority identity – place, space and time;
• hyphenated identities and duality; and
• self-descriptions and the ethnic self.

Featuring the latest theoretical ideas and research, the combination of diverse approaches to this burgeoning field make this book invaluable reading for students of psychology and related disciplines, as well as researchers and professionals.

p.15

1

ETHNIC IDENTITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

At a neighbourhood centre somewhere in an old part of a city, six locals are having a friendly chat about their neighbourhood. They are discussing the primary schools located in the area. Gradually, their discussion moves to family affairs and how difficult it is to raise children in the present society. At some point in the discussion, one of the neighbours says that, ‘among us’, women are in charge of the house. ‘Among us’ points to the Hindu background of these neighbours. The pleasant, relaxed atmosphere of the conversation changes into a fierce discussion about what is typically Hindu and what is not. Numerous characterizations enter the stage, but are challenged again by the others. All neighbours agree that their Hindu background is very important, but they do not agree on what this background actually means.

A municipal anti-discrimination centre has organized a festive get-together with various activities such as people talking about each other’s experiences. Guests from various backgrounds are present. One of them is a young Turkish woman wearing a headscarf. She explains that people often look at her in a special way. Because she is wearing a headscarf, people categorize her and expect certain things of her. She feels that she constantly has to justify herself, which results in her paying less attention to the things that she herself thinks are important. Sometimes, she likes getting the opportunity to explain her headscarf, but the fact remains that there is something to explain. For some people, a headscarf is not so self-evident.

In a team meeting at a multi-ethnic secondary school, teachers are discussing the relationships between students. One of them states that, in the higher classes, students form groups along ethnic lines. He talks about segregation within the school and feels that something needs to be done about this, both within the school and also with respect to the development of an ethnically diverse society. A discussion arises about the feasibility and desirability of taking action and how they should go about it. Some teachers point out that interaction with others from the same ethnic background is also important for students, in that it provides support, trust and recognition. Others propose that ethnic group formation leads to conflicts between groups. The teachers decide they need first to think carefully about whether something should and can be done about this situation before returning to it at a later date.

p.16

Farouk is a 39-year-old Iranian refugee who has been living in the Netherlands for more than 15 years. He has great difficulty in living the life that he wants, involving family, work and leisure. He has many social and practical problems, and he does not feel at home in the Netherlands. He explains that he is insecure and confused about what his Iranian background means to him. He thinks a lot about his former life in Iran, and he struggles to find an acceptable and fulfilling idea about himself. He also feels not really accepted by the Dutch and has the impression that it is always he who has to adapt and that he can never be himself. He lacks confidence, often feels depressed and finds it very difficult to commit himself to anything.

The former National Institute for Multicultural Development (FORUM) asks researchers to investigate ethnic identity among young South Moluccans in the Netherlands. The published final report is presented at a conference. In light of the results of the project, FORUM decides to organize some discussion evenings with South Moluccan young people. Both authors of the report are present to explain the results. Soon, however, a problem arises: both authors are ethnically Dutch persons and are consequently subjected to much criticism. How could they know what preoccupies the South Moluccans? What do they know about the problems of the young people? And why did South Moluccans not carry out the project themselves? The ethnic background of the researchers appears to be sufficient reason for dismissing the report.

In all of these examples, taken from our own research in the Netherlands, ethnic group membership plays a role. Who and what people are is established and discussed, is interpreted and justified, is explained and serves as an explanation, structures situations and relationships, and affects well-being and mental health. In short, it has meaning and consequences in many different ways. Although these examples can be painful for those involved, they relate to relatively innocent events. Nevertheless and depending on circumstances, belonging to one group or another can also have far-reaching consequences. It could mean having the right to social security provisions and getting a residence permit rather than being deported. It could also make the difference between life and death, as in the case of ethnic cleansings or of suicides committed by desperate asylum seekers. These sorts of group distinctions play a role in everyday life and in politics in all sorts of ways. They are accompanied by and determine rights, duties, chances, expectations, forms of solidarity and social cohesion, social exclusion and conflict, and feelings of pride and belonging, but also insecurity and uncertainty, and fear about, for example, stigmatization, discrimination and deportation.

In our globalizing world, there is not only the movement of people, but also of goods and services, ways of life, cultural lifestyles, beliefs, ideas and practices. Through the arrival of migrants and through travel, the Internet and social media people have access to many alternative realities. Events happening on the other side of the world can influence local events and self-understandings. Indirect or direct forms of contact with people who look different, believe different things and practise different things raises the question not only of who they are, but also of what I am and who we are. Diversity and increased contact often lead to an emphasis on differences and identity. Other people show where they come from, with whom they belong, to whom they feel connected, and how they perceive and judge the world. This raises questions about who you are, where you yourself come from and what you stand for. One’s own identity is no longer self-evident. The sheer number of alternatives also implies that people living in the same context tend to share the same experiences less and less, and that they develop worldviews that become more and more varied. This makes it difficult to maintain shared local communities.

p.17

Moreover, there is the incredible speed with which technological, social, cultural and other related changes come about. In many spheres of life, there are numerous, sometimes quite drastic, new developments that can have a profound impact on everyday life. It is not easy to keep track of all this, let alone to successfully adapt to all these changes. The corresponding psychological adjustments in ways of thinking, feeling and acting need time to take root.

There is a constant flow not only of new and alternative information, but also of opinions, attitudes and judgements. In the Western world, but increasingly also elsewhere, the individual is considered the source of meaning. The emphasis is on personal autonomy, choice and authenticity, whereby individual experiences and feelings predominate and provide meaning for social and political processes. The way people feel about themselves has increasingly become the measure of all things. Everyone is expected to have an opinion on everything and everyone claims the right to express their opinion. In addition, everyone feels they have the right to challenge the other to speak up, to explain themselves, or simply to offend those with whom one does not agree. A guiding and representative central body that provides a shared normative and moral compass is increasingly lacking. And not everyone is able to sail by their own compass in these matters.

These global and ideological developments are challenging and lay the ground for new initiatives, renewal and creativity. They offer unprecedented chances and opportunities for economic growth, innovation and personal development. But they also generate threats and uncertainties. Many people feel lost, insecure and alienated. There are clear trends that go against immigration, globalization and individualization. In many cases, globalization and cultural mixture go together with an emphasis on descent and origin and strivings for homogeneity and purity. There is an increasing focus on the importance of city, region, ethnicity and country. People search for direction, a sense of security and something to hold on to, which they find in cultural, religious or local communities that they can relatively easily identify with and be proud of. Or they turn to specific political movements and nationalistic ideologies, with their promises of ‘taking back control’, closing the borders and deporting those that are considered not to belong. In Europe, for example, there is an increase in Islamophobia and anti-immigrant movements such as PEGIDA (Patriotische Europäer gegen die Islamisierung des Abendlandes) and the nativist Bloc Identitaire and Génération Identitaire. And there are political parties with slogans such as ‘Heimatliebe statt Marokkaner-Diebe’ (in Austria). ‘Our own people first’ (in Flanders) and ‘True Fins first’ (in Finland) that have the democratic support of substantial parts of the population, making them a significant political factor in many countries.

p.18

There is, in most countries, a heated political and public debate about national identity – about what it means to be a national and the need to express the proper sentiments and feelings of pride, loyalty and solidarity. National identity has increasingly become a question that requires a response – preferably one that is as clear and distinctive as possible. This is considered necessary for a sense of unity and social cohesion and also for the integration of newcomers. Without clarity, one cannot expect immigrants to integrate, because it is not clear what they should integrate into. It is argued that respect from newcomers can be expected only if you yourself have respect for your own culture and identity. And politicians and the media sometimes claim that many immigrants have divided loyalties and a lack of attachment to their host country and therefore undermine a cohesive society. In many countries, there is a renewed emphasis on traditional national values and immigrants are scrutinized – Muslims in particular – for their acceptance of a set of ‘core values’, their loyalty to the host nation and their personal efforts to integrate.

Others disagree with these pleas and claims and advocate a plural or cosmopolitan position with a weak and more open vision of identities. Rather than using words such as ‘stability’, ‘unity’, ‘certainty’ and ‘essence’ to describe identity phenomena, they argue for ‘variability’, ‘multiple’, ‘fragmentation’, ‘uncertainty’ and ‘ambivalence’. They view questions of identity as the result of a continuing process of construction, choice and negotiation. In this process, cultural meanings are used creatively to (re)define differences and similarities. The focus is on the situational, flexible and ambivalent ways in which people define themselves in relation to others. Since this is happening in a constantly changing and globalizing world, identity is an always unfinished project and a temporary state. In this line of argument, questions that focus on more enduring and stable aspects of identity are ignored or disqualified by branding them as examples of essentialism and primordialism. Critics of this perspective respond, for example, by arguing that these descriptions refer mainly to a small elite of cosmopolitans or to styles among groups of young people and do not correspond with the everyday lives of ordinary people. Further, these descriptions are said to fit mainly Western individualistic cultures in which personal choice and self-responsibility are emphasized. People living in cultures with a more group-oriented collective character in which obligation and duty are the basis for self-definition would, it is argued, have more stable and clear identities.

Worries are voiced not only about national identity, but also about the identity of immigrants and ethnic and racial minorities. There are various social movements involved in forms of identity politics in which minorities claim recognition, acceptance and respect for their minority identity (for example Migrants Rights, Black Lives Matter). These movements argue and fight for equality and the right to be different – that is, to publicly express their identity and to feel proud about it. And the integration of newcomers and the psychological and social well-being of minority group members has also increasingly become a question of identity. Identity confusion, conflict, threat and a spoiled identity are seen as responsible for a wide range of problematic outcomes, such as poor mental and physical health, poor school performance, drop-out rates, vandalism, crime and radicalization.

p.19

Questions of minority identity are extensively discussed, not the least in Internet forums, on blogs and in the social media. Furthermore, in community centres, municipalities, newspapers, and on the radio and television, people express their views about what it means to be a Muslim in the Western world, a Mexican in the United States or a Pakistani in the United Kingdom, about how Kurds are different from Turks, about what it means to be both Algerian and a French citizen, about whether one can simultaneously be a Muslim and a German, and about how one can integrate without losing one’s identity. These views are expressed in debates that are organized around subjects such as ‘Identity or Loyalty’, ‘Identity and Citizenship’, ‘Muslims and Identities’, and ‘The Search for Identity’. People are drawn to identity issues, and minority members are confronted with the question of just what their ethnic background entails and how they should act not only towards members of their own group, but also towards the majority and other minorities. The consequences of that diversity and the choices made by ethnic minorities constitute a rich source for reflection and debate. Especially young people from ethnic minority groups try to give their own meaning to their ethnic background. The world of their parents often does not correspond to their position and future in the country in which they live, and acceptance by the majority group tends to be conditional or partial at best.

The ethnic identity of members from the majority group is typically more self-evident, since it is linked to their dominant societal position. Members of this group often do not have to think about their ethnicity and what it consists of. They constitute the implicit norm against which others are measured. However, ‘whiteness’ and the sense of belonging to an ethnic majority group has become increasingly less a given and more of a question. Cultural diversity and continuing immigration has changed the situation in such a way that one’s own ethnic majority background is no longer invisible or taken for granted. What it means to be ‘white’ or ‘just English, French, German, or Dutch’ is something that is challenged and problematized, for example in relation to structural privileges and dominance. The multicultural situation confronts people directly with the question of boundary construction and with the value and meaning of what is considered typical of one’s majority group.

The topic of identity

In the social sciences, many authors have argued that questions of identity have become more urgent and profound in our global era. Economic and cultural changes, the disappearance of dominant political ideologies and of traditional symbols, the extremely rapid exchange of information, the large mobility of goods, services and people, the increasing cultural diversity, and the large number of national and international conflicts are all seen as responsible for the growing importance of identity issues.

p.20

In the past decades, the number of writings and empirical studies on (ethnic) identity has increased enormously. One important reason for this is that identity is the key word for conceptualizing the relationship between the individual and society: identity is ‘the best device I know for bringing together “public issues” and “private troubles” ’ (Jenkins, 1997, p. 3). The concept tells us something about how people, as individuals or as a group, position themselves and are positioned by others in their social environment, and how such positions get personal meaning and value. The concept refers to the way in which we see ourselves and others and how we would like to be seen by others. This makes it understandable that, in a period of important societal changes, issues of identity are in the spotlight and that concepts such as identity crisis and the search for one’s own identity are frequently brought up. Political, economic, cultural and demographic transformations go together with changes in the relationship between the individual and society, placing issues of identity at the forefront. However, the popularity of the term ‘identity’ has also led to quite different understandings and related conceptual confusion. The following quotation from Gleason (1983, p. 910, emphasis original) expresses the state of affairs very well and remains very relevant:

Today we could hardly do without the word identity in talking about immigration and ethnicity. Those who write on these matters use it casually; they assume the reader will know what they mean. And readers seem to feel that they do—at least there has been no clamor for clarification of the term. But if pinned down, most of us would find it difficult to explain just what we do mean by identity. Its very obviousness seems to defy elucidation: identity is what a thing is! How is one supposed to go beyond that in explaining it? But adding a modifier complicates matters, for how are we to understand identity in such expressions as ‘ethnic identity’, ‘Jewish identity’ or ‘American identity’? This is a question to which the existing writings on ethnicity do not provide a satisfactory answer.

The field of identity studies is large and diverse (see Wetherell & Mohanty, 2010) and the concept of ethnicity is used in different ways. This means that it is important to be clear about how one understands ‘ethnicity’ (see Chapter 2) and uses the identity concept (see Chapter 3). It also is important to be clear about one’s approach and perspective for examining questions of ethnic identity.

Social psychology and ethnic identity

Social psychology can offer a valuable and important contribution to the understanding of the complexities of questions related to ethnic identity. For example, in social psychology, there is a long tradition of studying categorization, social identity processes, status differences in perception, and stereotypes, prejudice and racism. Numerous studies have been conducted on these issues and basic cognitive, emotional and neurological underpinnings have been identified. Important theories have been developed and solutions for group conflicts have been p...