Spectrums of belonging

Forced migration and asylum have been at the centre of political and public debate in the past years. Also in secular societies such as the Netherlands and Australia concerns about migration and refugees are increasingly expressed, though often implicitly, in terms of religion and religious differences between ‘the Dutch’ or ‘the Australian’ and the newcomer. This PhD thesis argues that a newcomer’s cultural and religious similarity to ‘the Dutch’ or ‘the Australian’ for a significant part determines whether someone is welcomed and seen to belong in Australia or the Netherlands. Parliamentary debates in both national contexts on refugees and asylum show a clear differentiation between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ refugees, closely connected to assumptions about ‘good’ citizenship that focus on the importance of being hardworking, law-abiding citizens who respect national, progressive and ‘Judeo-Christian’ values. According to the analysis of the debates, ‘good’ refugees are further those who are likely to integrate succesfully and are of economic value to the receiving society. In both national contexts this categorical differentiation of refugees is based on a history of migration in which fear of the Other has defined migration politics. 

Additional to the parliamentary debates, lived experiences of refugees have a crucial role in this research. These life stories demonstrate that a sense of belonging, inclusion and exclusion can be impacted by political debates and assumptions on religion, yet are subject to other factors as well, such as the presence of family and friends, a job, and feeling safe.

Dissertation: https://hdl.handle.net/11370/da3183af-f425-40ff-8ae2-d05ef220c4f0