Throughout anti-establishment rhetoric, found a place among the

Throughout
Europe xenophobic and cultural racist acts have become one of the most critical
challenges facing Western European countries. Hostility towards immigrants has
been contentiously formed in the entire spectrum of politics.  Specifically, after 2001, September 11th, the
upheaval of xenophobic violence became widespread over Western Europe.  Meanwhile, in the Netherlands there were a
number of attacks against foreigners of that year. In the aftermath of the 9/11
attacks, in Netherlands waves of xenophobic violence rapidly spread out (Braun
2011).  While, the eastern and western
European xenophobia concluded to be at its highest rate. Western European
people have become more worried about their burgeoning immigrant communities in
the meantime the eastern European public  have tended to focus on the ethnic, religious,
and regional squabbles of the past (Taras 2009).  Additionally, the Madrid and London bombings
led Western European countries to challenge more with illegal immigrants. This
is certainly true in the Netherlands, which recently appears obsessed with
preserving the indigenous against the foreign. The September 11 events
resurrected political party of Pim Fortuyn in Netherlands. He was known with
his populist anti-Islam and anti-establishment rhetoric, found a place among
the Dutch electorate. However, how did in the Netherlands the xenophobic
discourses gained popularity in the last two decades? What is the propulsive
force behind of rising xenophobia and racism in the Netherlands in post 2000s?
To understand the nature of Xenophobic and racist movements occurring in
Netherlands, firstly, article summarizes the theories that are generally explaining
the origins of xenophobia and racism and analyzes the extreme violence in
Western Europe. Then, the paper will shift into driving engines of xenophobia
and racism in Dutch society in the recent years. These are main points around
which the discussion has recently evolved.

The
threat of an ever-growing xenophobia which can turn into hostility towards
foreigners and into right-wing extremism is becoming more and more obvious not
only in the Netherlands but also in other European countries like Germany,
France and Hungary. According to Winkler’s
(1994) findings, the fundamental adjustments within the innovative thrusts led
to a lack of orientation and to a state of uncertainty of people in Europe
which is consequently cause the rise of xenophobia. Young people are influenced
by a loss of personal ties and a lack of ethical orientation along with a lack
of perspective for the future. Specifically, this has driven young people to
resort to violence against immigrants. Commonly, it is either thought that the
increase in xenophobia is originated by rising unemployment or by the worsening
economic and social position of people. More broadly, young people’s fear of
not finding a job or fear of not having an opportunity to be successful and
receive  a certain status in society have
led to significantly negative effects for the foreigners. Young people are
scared of being failures in their jobs and at the same time they project this
fear onto foreigners. Therefore, immigrants seen a vital obstacle for development
and most of times, they become victims of the right wing extremists who
withstand with fear of social come down and accuse the foreigners. On the
contrary to this, author also argues that political deficit is another
important element which consolidates xenophobia, as many politicians argue the
wishes of the marginal group of right-wing voters must be met (Winkler 1994).

Differently
from aforementioned assumptions, Schuster’s essay focused on refugees and
xenophobia in which the major stress on asylum-seekers, mostly in the United
Kingdom, but also in France and Ireland. According to her research, European
liberal democracies share a common commitment to granting asylum to those in
need of protection, a commitment made legally binding by signing the 1951
Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.  Moreover, they share a commitment to principles
of equality and non-discrimination. Nevertheless, in recent years European
states have embraced practices that allow discrimination against and unequal
treatment of asylum-seekers, and there can be seen some threats from government
proposals to the 1951 Convention itself. Schuster interrogates some of the
underlying assumptions of asylum policies in the United Kingdom specifically,
yet in addition with reference to other European states, contending that
common-sense assertions of the ‘need for control’, which underlie the
differential treatment of asylum-seekers especially, are articulations of a
racism at the core of European states. Author additionally argues that, at the
border, racism converges in a complex and shifting way with class and gender,
creating a hierarchy of the excluded. Subsequently to discussion of racism and
these different modalities of exclusion, Schuster examines practices through
which this racism is explained (Shuster 2010). On the other hand, Clay and
Cole’s paper argues for an acknowledgement of the ascent in Euro racism, which
is a combination of post-colonial racism, anti-Semitism and fascism as well as
highlight the notion of ‘Euro-culture’. By examining Euro racism, an escalating
phenomenon, it is stated that this undermines to overwhelm the entire
continent. And there is an urgent need for a counter-offensive, for a mass
anti-racist or supremacist movement connected Europe wide. He states that one
method of promoting anti-racism in the European countries is can be achieved
via education. In the light of the expanding threat of Euro racism, the
anti-racist networks in education, like the Anti-Racist Teacher Education
Network (ARTEN) need to build up links Europe-wide and that the Association for
Teacher Education in Europe (ATEE) ought to likewise broaden its brief to go up
against issues of racism. Paper draws conclusion by placing anti-racist
education in an extensive movement for the development towards equality and
social justice.  In this regard, teacher
education must go beyond the rhetoric of empowerment, since this is trivial
without a reasonable comprehension of the types of oppression and of ways to
combat it. Strengthening that revolves around on ‘anti-oppression’ is about
true democracy and the antidote to rampant individualism and nationalism, and
to racism and Euro racism (Clay and Cole, 2006).

 

Theories
of xenophobia and racism

Nevertheless,
in Raymond Taras’s (2009) article implies that xenophobes are thought to be
those people who harbor negative states to mind of non-natives. A broad writing
concentrate the mental premise of xenophobia has indicated how outside dangers
increment group solidarity and ethnocentrism while, advancing narrow mindedness
and close-mindedness. Correspondingly, foreigners are viewed as bearers of an
alternate culture with the possibility to undermine the integrity of one’s own
country. Since every culture comprises of an extraordinary blend of introductions,
non-natives inevitably undermine to change the residential culture through the
presentation of new introductions. The outcome is that a common perspective of
foreigners as diminishing these societies may make transnational xenophobia (Taras
2009).

Hence,
on the other hand, Andreas Wimmer’s (1997) paper attempts to explain predictors
of rising xenophobia and racism through these theories; rational theory,
functionalism, discourse theory and phenomenology.

According
to Rational choice theory, xenophobia and racism originate from an intensive
competition between migrants and local groups over working opportunities and
inexpensive residential housing particularly, in times of economic crisis.  On one hand, it appears to be more likely that
ethnic clashes and also xenophobic developments are pursued over aggregate
products. Also, it is contended that negative attitudes against outsiders
outperform among individuals who unemployed are extended period of time or who fear
the loss of their job or who really work with non-natives.

In
contrast, functionalism claims that the social uniqueness of the foreigners is
made in charge of contentions with the local. The foreigners are seen unable to
integrate as they come for the most part from agrarian and semi primitive
social orders which have not encountered the Reformation and Enlightenment.
Likewise, lack of ability of migrants to coordinate into the class structure of
the host society, led to marginalization or exclusion from locals as being
culturally or even racially distinctive. In the functionalist prospect, the
failure of specific minorities to coordinate into the structure and culture of
the host society drives the larger part of locals to xenophobic dismissal.

According
to discourse theory, rejection of immigrants from social group is caused by
failure to assimilate and social distinction which is shaping the essential
components of an idea of ‘otherness’. Most importantly, it is the authority or semi-official
power holders who promote discourses like immigrant rejection or
self-strengthening in order regulate it in multicultural social work or in
migration approaches. Along these lines the results of governmental issues are
made imperceptible on the grounds that the social distinction of the workers
bears the fault for avoidance and impoverishment, while xenophobia can be
clarified as social clash. According to final analyses, mass media coverage
held the ‘racism of the media’ accountable for intensified defensiveness
towards ethnic ‘others’ and rising attacks on foreigners.

Moreover,
for a phenomenological approach, xenophobia and racism are projected as methods
of reassuring the national self and its boundaries, as attempts at making sense
of the world in times of crisis. With arr?val of immigrants the social compact
breaks up and the balance of forces among distinctive groups changes in terms
of economic and political developments, as the consequence, the institutional
arrangement that is related with nationalistic self-image run into a crisis.
The others become the ones who break up communal harmony. In the Wimmer’s view,
xenophobic and racist discourses serves not only to reassure identity of a
national group when nationalistic self-images run into crisis but yet, it is a
fundamental component of a political struggle about who merits the privilege to
be administered by the state and society, it is a competition for the collective
goods of the modern state (Wimmer 1997).

Xenophobia
and racism in Netherlands

Clearly,
dislike of the multicultural society has grown in in recent years that are also
true for the Netherlands. According to Robert Braun (2001), national as well as
international developments, such as the 9/11 attacks, the killing of Pim
Fortuyn, a Muslim insurgency against Dutch troops in Iraq, tend to have an
effect on the eruption of xenophobic violence in the Netherlands (Braun 2011). Also,
islamphobia has been increased throughout country since the 11 September
attacks of 2001 while racism can be rooted Netherlands old colonial order.

During
the colonial period, Netherland established hierarchy of citizenship, in which
gender, race, class and sexuality intersected.  The white European men were privileged citizen
both in the motherland as well as the colonies. The citizenship of white European
women along with the Dutch citizens from the former colonies of Suriname and
the Dutch East Indies was meant to be secondary citizens. However, nowadays,
these Dutch citizens from the former colonies of Suriname and ‘the Dutch East
Indies’ are more or less accepted members of Dutch society and are sometimes
represented as models of successful integration into Dutch society. The
political actors reinvented them as ‘integrated’ to present Dutch citizens of
Muslim background as ultimate others. Thus, gave legitimacy to the right-wing
Dutch populists to attack especially ‘Muslims’ and cause rise of xenophobic
hatreds among Dutch population (Jones 2016).

Moving
on contemporary reasons of increasing xenophobia and racism in Netherlands,
Sniderman and Hagendoorn (2004) paper reveals that the threats to economic
well-being and cultural identity is considered to be major driving negative
evaluation towards immigrants. A threat to a group’s identity and way of life
inherently is a collective threat whilst threats to economic interests may be
perceived by individuals as threats to their own economic well-being or as
threats to the economic wellbeing of their entire group. Additionally,
immigrants correlated to problems of crime at a popular level. Overall, threats
to an individual or society as whole can be concluded in threats to cultural identity
and to economic well-being.

The
economic concern of immigrants is the driving powers to come to Netherlands over
the last decade. The Netherlands has been among the best of the best of the OECD
countries with GDP increasing and thus encourages more migrants which later on
will end up posing a major threat to economic life of Dutch people. Secondly,
despite of economic concern, the impact of concerns about national identity is
contingent on the prominence of contrasts between groups. In particular, Dutch
people mainly concern over group identity. Because many of the immigrant
minorities in the Netherlands stand out due to darker skin color, dress, absence
of fluency in Dutch, and  due to educational
and labor market handicaps. Ironically, these concerns about either economic
well-being or cultural identity influence citizen responses to immigrant
minorities and issues of immigration. As a consequence, perceived threats of
violence and vandalism lead to correlation to hostility to refugees. Particularly,
these perceived threats linked only to hostility to Moroccans and refugees.
Whereas, in terms of economic threat, Surinamese, refugees and asylum seekers
are perceived the ones, from this comes major threat. And the analyses of
economic interest fall in between threats to safety and threats to cultural
identity (Sniderman and Hagendoorn 2004).

Perceived
threats to economic well-being at both the personal and the national level are
vital predictors of hostility for every minority group. Realistic conflict is
one of the most strenuously developed explanations of intergroup conflict.
According to the result of research, concerns about economic well-being are
actually a major source of hostility to immigrants and immigration. More
broadly, the clash of economic interests matters at two different levels.
Initially, perceived threats to individual and subsequently to national
economic interests arouse to oppose immigrants. And threats to economic
interest matter mainly for those who are not prosperous economically. However, it
is still argued that calculations of economic advantage are a basis of
reactions towards immigrants and immigration (Sniderman and Hagendoorn 2004).
Similarly, according to Robert Braun’s (2011), first and foremost, the struggles
over scarce resources such as over jobs were viewed one of the most essential
determinants ethnic protests. Primarily, these ethnic protests concentrated on
ethnic rivalry or competition, in which, the struggle occur between ethnic
groups immigrants.  Some ethnic
competition theorists argue that, ethnic groups mobilize against the immigrants
when they start to experience decrease of their economic well-being and they
directly accuse new-comers of being the reason of economic shrinkage. This for
the most part happens when both immigration rates and unemployment are getting
higher. Additionally, the Deprivation scholars set forward that people who are
the most in deprive in the public arena, engage in collective violence against
outsiders. When their living conditions are bad or have been experiencing bad
times, individuals scapegoat foreigners for their issues. This theory was has
been important in clarifying the rising extreme violence in Western Europe
(Braun 2011).

And
on the other side, perceived threat to the Dutch culture is the strongest
factor of hostility to minorities rather the economic threat in Dutch society.
In short, most obviously, perceiving a threat to Dutch culture has by far the
largest impact in provoking hostility toward minority groups. That is true for
every group-Turks, Moroccans, Surinamese, and refugees and asylum seekers in
case of Netherlands. Two kinds of analyses were conducted in which people
responded by saying that they are more felt threatened in terms of cultural
identity. However, beyond the threat of their cultural identity claim, indeed
people are likely concerned about protecting their own economic well-being. In
this respect, study of Sniderman and Hagendoorn (2004) give countenance to a
hypothesis of culture conflict in which a perception that Dutch culture is
threatened is the dominant factor in causes a strong negative reaction to
immigrant minorities. A perception of threat to cultural values surpasses the
perception of threat over economic well- being. Because locals deeply feel
differences in a set of values and belief between their and minorities or new
comers, and solely perceive them incompetent to assimilation. The notion of
being incompetent in cultural integration accordingly urges tension, yet
sometimes leads to exertion of violence over immigration in Western European
democracies are rooted in a genuine conflict of values (Sniderman and
Hagendoorn 2004).

Further,
Robert Braun’s (2011) article makes use of a unique dataset and diffusion
models, meanwhile examine the geographical and temporal growth of waves of
racist violence in the Netherlands during the bitter period 2001-2003. It was
the years when Netherland lost its reputation as a multicultural paradise. The
author contends that once violence starts, with spread of information about former
uprisings in other regions of state lead to intenseness of the legitimacy of
xenophobic violence as an instrument to express dissatisfaction with immigration
politics. Accordingly, as a result of wide- ranging information mentioned
above, it is more conceivably that tolerant areas can transform into xenophobic
place. In accordance with these findings, international comparative research
argues that the radical right is likely to transform to violent forms of
mobilization in countries where right-wing political parties are powerless due
to the absence of anti- immigrant sentiments in parliament decreased down the
success chances of less troublesome strategies.

According
to his findings, racist violence evolves in two steps.  Firstly, it originates in large populous
regions. The initial riots bestow legitimacy on violent forms of mobilization
and secondly, information about riots on antipathy to immigrants spreads to
other regions through mass media, turning violence from local case into a
supra-local phenomenon. Briefly, the outcome of research provides evidence for
the fact that former riots increase the legitimacy of violence in different
places. Nevertheless, author disagrees with the former research on mobilization
which suggests that proxies for ethnic competition, deprivation and political
opportunity structures are not necessarily related to the outbreak of violence.
Accordingly, only population size can determine where violence starts. Together
these findings suggest that waves of xenophobia starts in big cities and subsequently
spread to neighboring places and through mass media sweeps to more distant
places, encouraging more people to mobilize against foreigners (Braun 2011).

In
conclusion, few explanations of xenophobia and racism reviewed to understand
real motives of people extorting violence against foreigners in their own
country. As aforementioned before, fight for scarce jobs or housing is one
factor of rising xenophobia and on the other hand, cultural clash that is
triggered by migratory movements across countries and continents is seen
another essential element behind the increasing xenophobia in Europe and as
well as in Netherlands. Foreigners are seen as carriers of a different culture
with the great potential to threaten the integrity of one nation. Additionally,
they will change the domestic culture through the introduction of new
orientations. Moreover, it will not be incorrect to say that xenophobia and
racism is a product of political and administrative elites in order to seek
political power. In case of Netherlands, racism has a lengthy history in its culture
and became part of political legacy. Hence, xenophobic discourse serves to
reassure identity when nationalistic self-images enter into crisis. My
hypothesis goes along with phenomenology theory in explaining rise of
xenophobia in Dutch society. When there happened sudden increase of immigrants
in Netherlands, the social order and communal harmony breaks up and as a
consequence of these changes nationalistic self-image run into a crisis. Correspondingly,
Sniderman and Hagendoorn (2004) study, results showed that in Netherlands the
considerations of national identity dominate economic advantage in provoking exclusionary
reactions to immigrant.