Finotelli, Claudia, and Ines Michalowski. "The Hueristic Potential of Models of Citizenship and Immigrant Integration Reviewed". Journal of Immigrant and Refugee Studies, Vol.10, No.3 (2012): 231-240.
- Max Weber claims that the goal of the social sciences is to replicate reality in theory by creating systems of permanent and universally valid classification through which all aspects of society and culture can be understood (231).
- The first attempts by social scientists to categories different approaches to integrating immigrations and establishing conceptions of citizenship took place without regard to nationally-specific models. Over the course of the 1990s, the field established several national 'ideal' models, usually listed as the French Republican model, the German Exclusionary model, and the Dutch Multicultural model (233).
- These models have been sharply criticized for being too static -- especially regarding transformations in the German citizenship and immigration regime -- being too simplistic regarding mixed approaches to immigration in these countries, and being artificial constructed designed without a basis in actual state practice (234-235).
- Some scholars, like Veit Bader, argue that despite these issues, national models remain the best possible way to compare and categorize immigration and citizenship regimes. This view seems to be prominent, since most scholars have only paid lip-service to abandoning national models (235).
- The purpose of models is to have useful conceptual tools for analyzing citizenship policy, so they should be adjusted to reflecting changing state practices, not assumed to be static or permanent categories. National models should also be separated into national models for different policy areas; separate models for religion, ethnic diversity, citizenship, and immigration (237).
No comments:
Post a Comment