Book Review: "Why Don’t They Hate Us More? Book Review: Beyond Dutch Borders. Transnational Politics among Colonial Migrants, Guest Workers and the Second Generation" by Liza Mügge
{"title":"Book Review: \"Why Don’t They Hate Us More? Book Review: Beyond Dutch Borders. Transnational Politics among Colonial Migrants, Guest Workers and the Second Generation\" by Liza Mügge","authors":"S. Magala","doi":"10.18778/1733-8077.7.3.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The book in question has been published within the series edited by the IMISCOE program (International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion in Europe), which had been established in 2004 as a Network of Excellence and became “an independent, self-funding endeavour open to qualified researchers and research institutes worldwide” in 2009. Liza Mügge is a political scientist from Amsterdam and she has focused on three groups of migrants in the contemporary Netherlands: the Surinamese, Turkish and Kurdish ones. Her research questions are concerned with the emergence of transnational migrant politics, the evolution of political participation of migrants over time (especially the “coming of age” of a second generation, which grew up entirely or almost entirely in the country of settlement and, well, the third question is unintelligible because of poor English and minimalist editing effort (see p. 22) third bulleted point, but we may guess that she is interested in cross-influences between the social response to migrants‟ political activism and their willingness to continue transnational politics. The author mentions all relevant literature, including Kearney, Vertovec, Granovetter and an Erasmus University colleague, Engbersen, or a Surinamese colleague of mine from Tilburg University, Gowricharn, but her strength is in empirical studies of three selected minorities in the contemporary Kingdom of the Netherlands. The topic is not entirely of a theoretical and methodological interest to me. I share some of the dilemmas with the subjects of her study. As a Polish migrant to the Netherlands, I participate in both Dutch and Polish national politics, by voting in respective national elections, though I have to choose between the two on those days when elections to the European Parliament are held (I usually vote for the Polish representatives with my wife and my children vote for the Dutch ones). What did the author find out? First, that there were significant differences between the three groups of migrants. The Surinamese went mostly for the homeland-directed activities (they were the only group of migrants, who came from the former Dutch colony, with a painful record of corrupt deals between the postcolonial Surinamese and Dutch political elites). The Turks and the Kurds shared their focus on transplanted homeland politics (revived in a foreign setting), but they differed in that the Turks","PeriodicalId":53708,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Sociology Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Sociology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.7.3.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The book in question has been published within the series edited by the IMISCOE program (International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion in Europe), which had been established in 2004 as a Network of Excellence and became “an independent, self-funding endeavour open to qualified researchers and research institutes worldwide” in 2009. Liza Mügge is a political scientist from Amsterdam and she has focused on three groups of migrants in the contemporary Netherlands: the Surinamese, Turkish and Kurdish ones. Her research questions are concerned with the emergence of transnational migrant politics, the evolution of political participation of migrants over time (especially the “coming of age” of a second generation, which grew up entirely or almost entirely in the country of settlement and, well, the third question is unintelligible because of poor English and minimalist editing effort (see p. 22) third bulleted point, but we may guess that she is interested in cross-influences between the social response to migrants‟ political activism and their willingness to continue transnational politics. The author mentions all relevant literature, including Kearney, Vertovec, Granovetter and an Erasmus University colleague, Engbersen, or a Surinamese colleague of mine from Tilburg University, Gowricharn, but her strength is in empirical studies of three selected minorities in the contemporary Kingdom of the Netherlands. The topic is not entirely of a theoretical and methodological interest to me. I share some of the dilemmas with the subjects of her study. As a Polish migrant to the Netherlands, I participate in both Dutch and Polish national politics, by voting in respective national elections, though I have to choose between the two on those days when elections to the European Parliament are held (I usually vote for the Polish representatives with my wife and my children vote for the Dutch ones). What did the author find out? First, that there were significant differences between the three groups of migrants. The Surinamese went mostly for the homeland-directed activities (they were the only group of migrants, who came from the former Dutch colony, with a painful record of corrupt deals between the postcolonial Surinamese and Dutch political elites). The Turks and the Kurds shared their focus on transplanted homeland politics (revived in a foreign setting), but they differed in that the Turks
书评:《为什么他们不更恨我们?》书评:超越荷兰边界。《殖民地移民、客工与第二代的跨国政治》,作者:Liza m gge
这本书是在欧洲国际移民、融合和社会凝聚力方案(IMISCOE)编辑的丛书中出版的,该方案于2004年成立,是一个卓越网络,并于2009年成为“向全世界合格的研究人员和研究机构开放的独立、自筹资金的努力”。Liza m gge是来自阿姆斯特丹的政治学家,她关注当代荷兰的三个移民群体:苏里南人、土耳其人和库尔德人。她的研究问题涉及跨国移民政治的出现,随着时间的推移,移民政治参与的演变(特别是第二代的“成年”,他们完全或几乎完全在定居的国家长大,好吧,第三个问题是难以理解的,因为糟糕的英语和极简的编辑努力(见第22页)第三点,但我们可以猜测,她感兴趣的是社会对移民政治激进主义的反应与他们继续跨国政治的意愿之间的交叉影响。作者提到了所有相关文献,包括Kearney, Vertovec, Granovetter和Erasmus大学的同事Engbersen,或我在Tilburg大学的苏里南同事Gowricharn,但她的优势在于对当代荷兰王国三个选定的少数民族的实证研究。这个话题对我来说不完全是理论和方法论上的兴趣。我和她的研究对象有一些共同的困境。作为一名移民到荷兰的波兰人,我通过在各自的国家选举中投票来参与荷兰和波兰的国家政治,尽管在欧洲议会选举的日子里,我必须在两者之间做出选择(我通常投票给波兰代表,而我的妻子和孩子投票给荷兰代表)。作者发现了什么?首先,三组移民之间存在显著差异。苏里南人大多参加了本国的活动(他们是唯一的移民群体,他们来自前荷兰殖民地,有着后殖民时期苏里南人和荷兰政治精英之间腐败交易的痛苦记录)。土耳其人和库尔德人都专注于移植的本土政治(在外国环境中复活),但他们的不同之处在于土耳其人
期刊介绍:
For a long time, we have observed an increased interest in qualitative sociology, and the use of an interpretive frame to understand human actions, social processes, meanings and definitions, and new social theory generally. In order to enable a free flow of information and to integrate the community of qualitative sociologists, we have decided to create an open-access, international scientific journal. Qualitative Sociology Review publishes empirical, theoretical and methodological articles applicable to all fields and specializations within sociology.