Migration, integration and integration policies are hot items. Since the 1990s all over Europe political parties have developped integration policies and integration discourses as a response to new patterns of migration. In the same timeframe that superdiversity is the new reality, we see that these integration policies are trying to reconstruct the nation.
Across Europe, there is an ongoing trend for individual nation states to use their national language to determine what it means to be integrated into the society.
When theoretical concepts become politicized, they are re-interpreted to fit political strategies. A prime example is the term “integration”. In Denmark it functions as a normative tool to adjust behavior, rather than creating new unities.
There is an ongoing trend for European nation states to use their own nationãl language to determine what it means to be "one of us". A close look at relevant policies can reveal what a "language threshold" really means.
'When politicians publicly divide citizens and stigmatize certain groups, this has long-lasting influence on children and adolescents, who embody the knowledge about the stereotypes in their everyday life', says Janus Spindler Møller.
The Dutch integration test looks a lot more like a language test according to Max Spotti, who investigates the question why in this column.
Racism is nothing new in sports, let alone in international associated football. Can humour and wit be appropriate measures in combatting racism, or will they serve as a force that normalizes racism in society?
"Integration" as a static and monolithic doctrine clashes with the empirical facts of contemporary diasporic life, in which we see that people remain "integrated" in different social system at once by means of new technology.
