The language of political incorporation: Chinese migrants in Europe

Abstract

The Language of Political Incorporation is a remarkable book. In it, Amy H. Liu explores how migrant networks shape the political incorporation of migrant populations, ranging from engagement with local authorities to civic involvement. Liu studies this relationship using original data that she collected over five years in Chinese migrant communities in Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia and Croatia. While the scope of her fieldwork alone is impressive, Liu also shows that the arguments set forth in the book generalise beyond Central-Eastern Europe and its Chinese migrant communities. The literature that explores migrant inclusion tends to either focus on the individual (migrant) or the country (host or home). Liu breaks new ground by focusing on a different unit of analysis altogether: the migrant network. A migrant network consists of migrants and brokers who help migrants find lodging, secure jobs and navigate host country bureaucracy. Liu’s theory identifies two types of networks, defined by language: bridging and bonding. A bridging network is built around a lingua franca, like Mandarin. If a language that connects migrants is spoken by many diverse individuals – not only from different parts of the country but also, possibly, from communities in other countries that speak the same language – network entry barriers are lower and membership is more diverse. Brokers can therefore recruit clients from a large community and have less to lose reputationally when service provision falters. Members of bridging networks automatically interact with others who speak the lingua franca, but who might be from an outgroup. This regular contact, posits Liu, leads to building intergroup trust, which is then reinforced by the benefits that a member accrues from the network. Since intergroup trust is instrumental for political incorporation, Liu suggests that we should expect to find more incorporation in bridging networks. A bonding network is built around a language that is only spoken by a select group of migrants (e.g. Zhejiangese). Brokers who provide services to migrants in bonding networks are typically better at delivering services, partly because group homogeneity leads to a better understanding of members’ preferences and partly because brokers’ reputations are built on a small constituency that extends back to the home country. Because membership in a bonding network is language-dependent, such networks are both exclusionary and homogenous. As a result, members are more likely to interact with ingroup members on a daily basis, building less intergroup trust. Less intergroup trust, in turn, likely leads to less political incorporation. Liu then situates networks in the political space and studies their reactions to government policies that target migrants – directly or indirectly. Bonding networks produce stronger relationships and are better able to withstand shocks. Bridging networks, however, are more diverse and thus more sensitive to shocks. In a diverse community, it is easier to point fingers at outgroup members when something goes wrong. And when brokers serve a larger community, their reputation suffers less when they are unable to help during a crisis.