Тема: Этническая самоидентификация второго поколения мигрантов в Германии

During the second half of the 20th century, the immigration level in Europe increased dramatically. The collapse of the Soviet block and the emergence of new countries led to a rearrangement of world perception in the minds of individuals. With the end of the opposition between ideologies, a new system with increasing interconnection between countries appeared. Citizens of the new states were engaged in the international market system. Moreover, the process of people’s resettlement from the territories of former European colonies in Africa and Asia by that time has already formed a multiethnic society in Western Europe. With the growing number of immigrants, the issues of multiculturalism, assimilation, and integration have entered the public and political agenda. At the same time, the process of migration did not stop with the end of the millennium: it is still there and gains momentum. Currently, the main masses of migrants are asylum seekers from the Middle East and Africa, as well as labor migrants from the countries characterized by lower living standards. In this regard, the European society faces continuous growth of multicultural population and the concept of ethnic self-identification gains its importance. Immigrant’s ethnic identity is a composition of concepts, which are continuously influenced and reshaped by the host society in daily interaction. This process may change immigrant’s self-perception as a member of a certain social group, shift their inner beliefs, attitudes and values. With the resettling to the host community, international migrants face the necessity to reevaluate their habits, ways of life and connections to the homeland.
Meanwhile, the first generation immigrants, who moved to Europe in late 20th century, have settled in the new territory, set up homes and settled down to married life. By now, most of them have their families and kids, who were born in the host country. In the year 2008, there were more than four million persons born in EU member-states, whose parents immigrated to Europe. In Germany there were about 1,8 million native-born children of immigrants and the state was marked as the one with the largest proportion of second-generation migrants with a foreign background among 27 EU states . This statistics illustrates the main objective to take Germany as a ground for our research.
From my perspective, these children of immigrants, known as the second-generation immigrants, find themselves at the crossroads of two identities: the one of their parent’s motherland and the other surrounding them from the first years of their lives. Moreover, in a multicultural society with dispersed common concepts, customs, mentality, and attitudes, identity is going through constant changes. This precarity between the two cultures creates an intriguing and outstanding structure for the formation of individual’s ethnic identity. In this research, we are looking into the mechanisms, strategies, and motivations, involved into the self-identification process of the second-generation immigrants.
Having studied a number of immigrants of different origin in Germany, two groups of immigrants were chosen for the research. They are the descents of Turkish and Russian origins. It is reasonable to study the descendants of the Russian and Turkish immigrants together, because of the comparability in the scale of immigration, as well as the similar age group of the second-generation. The group with Turkish origin was chosen mainly because of its predominance and continuous period of settlement on the territory of Germany. In the case of Russian descendants, we refer to several reasons, which are:
the contrast between Slavic and Muslim cultures enables the attainment of maximum variety between two cases;
the complex history of migration movements between Russia and Germany, which formed the community of Russian people with German roots (Russian-Germans);
the connection with this immigrant group on the basis of shared nationality, which causes a special interest in the destiny of this group.
This type of study is necessary and topical because ethnic self-identity has important implications for people’s study and career achievement as well as psychological well-being. Moreover, children of immigrants grow in number and form a reasonable part of the German population, which means that to some extend they will influence and form the future of the state. That is why the question of whether children of immigrants identify themselves as a part of the society and by what means do they shape and practice their identity worth considering.
The aim of this research is to study the variations of ethnic self-identification among second-generation Turkish and Russian immigrants.
The problem in the sphere of my research is gnoseological and aims to fill the gap in the study of the subjective processes of the ways of expressing and maintaining ethnic identities of the immigrant descendants. Although much study is done both in the field of ethnic identities and about second-generation immigrants, most of the works are concentrated on the causes and effects of immigrant identities on the macro level. This research looks at the micro level of people’s actions and interactions.
Current research may also serve a practical significance because it provides a better understanding of SGIs’ feelings, attitudes and actions and may be of particular interest for the following parties:
• individuals and organizations working with ethnic and cultural minorities
• politicians and researchers who are aimed at tracing the deficiencies of integration and assimilation policies at the micro level
• those who are involved into the work on the preservation of the culture of ethnic minorities
The tasks of the empirical research are the following:
• to develop a theoretical and methodological approach to the study of ethnic identity of SGIs
• to explore the history of migration from the former USSR and Turkey
• to identify the strategies of language practice of SGIs
• to study various types of self-identification among SGIs;
• to learn how do SGIs identify and represent themselves in different settings
• To examine the ways of social categorization and comparison performed by the SGIs
• to expose and describe the mechanisms of negotiation and adaptation of multiple ethnicities to each other
All tasks identified above implicate comparative perspective, meaning the comparison of the two cases of Turkish and Russian second-generation immigrants in the German setting.
The research question is based on its aim. What are the mechanisms of ethnic self-identification of second-generation immigrants in Germany?
Although there are many components of ethnic identity45, this study focuses on ethnic self-identification, which is the label, chosen by an individual to define the belonging to a certain ethnic group. For example, second-generation immigrants may define themselves as Germans while the first generation may identify with their national origins. This study goes further than defining a range of labels, used by the SGIs, because it aims to examine the very process of identification and looks further at the representation of chosen identity in practice.
The first Chapter of the paper summarizes the theoretical ground of the research and discusses the key concepts of identity, ethnicity and immigrant generations. The following Chapter provides the introduction to the emigration patterns from Russia and CIS, and Turkey as
4 Phinney, J. The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with adolescents and young adults from diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 1992, pp. 156-176.
5 Cohen E.H. The Components of Ethnic Identity: A Cross-Cultural Theory and Case Study of Jewish Student Activists. Keterpress, Jerusalem, Israel 2009, 48 pp.
well as German immigration policy. Chapter 3 presents the used methods, hypotheses, the data and the empirical results. The final section summarizes and concludes.

Купить

Current research aimed at investigation of the process of ethnic identification of second generation Russian and Turkish immigrants in Germany. The main aim of this research was to study the variations of their ethnic self-identification, as well as examine the mechanisms, strategies, and motivations, involved in this process. In order to accomplish the task, the following steps were undertaken: a theoretical and methodological approach to the study of ethnic identity of SGIs was developed based on a critical analysis of identity theories; the history of migration from the former USSR and Turkey was explored both on the macro (history and tendencies of mass migration) and micro (family biographies of the interviewees) levels; various types of self-identification among SGIs were studied; the strategies of language practice of SGIs in various settings were identified; the forms of identification and representation themselves in different settings; the processes of social categorization and comparison performed by the SGIs were examined; the mechanisms of negotiation and adaptation of multiple ethnicities to each other were described. The results of present study are presented according to the structure of the research.
This paper acknowledges the whole complexity of individual’s ethnic identity, and following the cognitive perspective to ethnicity, explores the concept in the framework of 3 cognitive processes of identification, which are: social categorization, social identification and social comparison. The aspect of self-representation as the member of particular ethnic group is studied through the individual practices of deconstruction and reconstruction of ethnicity among second-generation immigrants.
The differences in German migration policy as well as contrasting relations with the two countries of origin had a direct impact on the migration patterns and the life courses of the interviewees. The economic necessity of the productive postwar period caused the arrival of the major part of Turkish immigrants. Hence, Turkish family migration has more lasting and complex history, which started with SGI’s grandfathers’ temporary labor migration. Meanwhile, the German political strategy aimed at the reunion of the German nation caused a big influx of Russian Germans from the former USSR at the late 1980-s - 1990-s. Due to the fact, that migration from Russia and the countries of the communist block boomed right after German reunification and peaked following the collapse of the USSR. Yet, the children of Russian Germans acknowledge the beginning of their family’s migration with the period of Catherine the Great, when their ancestors moved from Germany to Kazakhstan or Volga region.
In the families in everyday interaction, there are different strategies of language usage, which mostly depends on the proficiency of the family members in a certain language. A certain variation in communication strategies with every family member is also evidenced in the families under study. Second-generation immigrants tend to adjust to the communication practices of their parents and relatives. SGIs’ parents may also follow the strategies aimed to bring up a child in a monolingual family, which causes the deficit of skills viewed by SGIs as necessary for association with the parental ethnic identity. The young people mostly refer to the German language as their mother tongue. Yet, for the SGIs with a stronger natal ethnic identity, the native language of the parents is viewed as native.
Social categorization and comparison represent the ways the SGIs recognize and evaluate the in- and out-groups. The feeling of being “different” is traced in all interviews and is irrelevant to the label that an individual ascribes to themselves. Even the person, who claims to have one ethnic identity of German may have a certain level of attachment to the other ethnicity. There is a tendency among SGIs to explicitly associate themselves with a relatively small group of friends and relatives, or people with similar family history, while after some considerations they find differences of their ethnic identity and their parents’ ethnicity or German ethnicity. The in-group of the SGIs is composed of people of migration background, no matter where they come from. SGIs tend to extend their multiple identity to other members of the shaped group and generalize their life experience. The comparison of the behavior, communication and actions gains momentum among children of immigrants earlier than among native population. Having markedly different strategies of behavior, children of immigrants start noticing and comparing their actions with the others at the early stages of socialization with the native population.
The affiliations of the second-generation immigrants take the form of multiple identity, which does not provoke a conflict, but entail both identities, which a person refers to in various settings individually or simultaneously. It is also possible that second-generation immigrant would claim one ethnic identity. It can be either German or the one of their parents’. Yet, the presence of secondary, more latent identity may be evidenced in certain settings. To justify their belonging to a certain ethnic group, individuals may refer to personal characteristics and sources, which were both inherited and achieved in the process of socialization. The predetermined characteristics, which a second-generation immigrant may articulate with, are: their or their parents’ place of birth and/or settlement; parents’ ethnicity; relatives living in the country of origin or settlement; appearance, whereas language proficiency, shared values and beliefs, religion, and friend circle may be marked as achieved instruments and characteristics. There is a tendency among interviewees to objectify the importance of having dual citizenship: both of their parents’ homeland and current place of residence. By this means they might want to legitimize their dual identity and not to be constrained to only one citizenship. It seems important to have an opportunity not to choose between the two states, because this is inaccurate to ask a person with multiple identity to choose one of its parts.
The mechanisms used by the SGIs to identify and represent themselves as Turkish, Russians or Germans may be allocated to the deconstruction or reconstruction of linguistic and cultural specificities of the ethnic groups they refer to. They differ depending on the ethnicity concerned. The mechanisms of Turkish or Russian identity construction are the following:
• The mechanism of acquiring specific skills refers to a conscious decision of an individual to fill the gap of knowledge or the deficiency of the skill, which will further enable them to act as a part of the group they identify with.
• The mechanism of reproduction of the settings aimed at supporting the culture (be it art, music, food.) of a certain ethnicity, and strive for interaction and communication with people of the ethnic group. Latter helps to consolidate the group and reconstruct the structure of the home community in the host society.
• The mechanism of ethnicity reproduction is referred to the endogamous partnership strategies, which display the aim to preserve and reproduce certain ethnic identity and may be evidenced in the preferences when SGIs choose their partners.
• The mechanism of bonding with the country of origin aims at strengthening transnational ties as well as taking part in constructing the future of the country. This mechanism might be activated in a stronger form, along with the actualization of ethnic affiliations, by political crises, national tragedies or natural disasters.
• The mechanism of folkways reconstruction is bounded up with customs, traditions and other cultural elements of ethnic groups. In other words, it involves reproduction of the activities, which evolved throughout centuries of the ethnicity existence. It has been evidenced that there is a tendency of stratified intensity of the reconstruction of various aspects of ethnic culture.
• The mechanism of consumption of mass media refers to the measures, which an individual might undertake to get an access to the mass media produced in the country of origin. Depending on the willingness and the necessary amount of sources, individuals might opt for one or several measures to be able to get the access to the local media.
Mechanisms of self-identification as Germans may be achieved through the deconstruction of the immigrant ethnic identity among the second generation Russians and Turks, as well as reconstruction of particular elements of German identity.
• The mechanism of visual assimilation, aimed at concealing the differences between the individual and the majority group, and simultaneously helping to look closer to the German identity.
• The mechanism of cultural adoption is the example of the reconstruction of German identity, which may not to deconstruct or infringe the other part of multiple identity (in our
case Turkish or Russian).
• The mechanism of in-group shaping reflects on the people’s decisions to meet and make friends with the members of a particular ethnic group. The reasons for this selection may lie in the wish to become a part of a certain group, but it may also be seen by the children of immigrants as an access to the culture codes of German identity.
Code-switching is the most evident mechanism of maintaining multiple ethnic identity among SGIs. It is evident that one identity can prevail over the other in different settings.
The mechanism of blending may refer to any aspect of ethnicity, which can be subjected to merging with a similar aspect of the other ethnicity. It may be an extreme example of multiple identity maintenances. The strategies involved in this process are aimed at, if it is possible to say so, the creation of the new, original aspects of ethnicity, although they are based on the two or more existing cultures.
All mechanisms of maintaining of certain ethnicity presented in this paper may simultaneously serve as a stimulus for ethnic identification. This process seems very similar to the structure-agency relations. By reproducing traditions, language, behavior, sharing certain values (agency), individuals construct an ethnic structure around them, which further motivates them to evaluate their position as a part of this structure or to identify themselves as belonging to this group.
Limitations and further research
One of the main limitations of this study lies in the dispersed ethnic origins of the second- generation Russian immigrants, which contrasted the case of the second generation Turkish immigrants. The investigation concerned mostly the three identities, which are Russian, Turkish and German. Consequently, the exploration of say, Jewish and ethnic German identities, was left underdeveloped, which is a big omission in the study. This is why it would be more reasonable for this study to select the interviewees with a singular identity of the SGI’s parents, be it Russian-Germans; Russians; or Jews from the former USSR. It would make the data more organic and steady. Yet, the variations in ethnic origins of the second-generation Russian immigrants introduced the original multiplicity in ethnic identities of these immigrants. Due to the fact, that the empirical research was conducted based on the limited sample, the results presented in the paper are of limited conclusiveness and may serve as suggested ways of ethnic identification and representation of the SGIs. Yet, the mechanisms developed in this study may serve as a ground for its further exploration and development on a bigger sample. The research, in general, may also serve as a ground for the further study of the ways of influencing or amending identity construction among second-generation immigrants.

Купить