Integration, Not Assimilation
Last Friday's interview with me in Birta has triggered a very positive response of people offering their help and support, and wishing me luck. For this I'm very grateful. But I'm also grateful for the question one friend of mine asked regarding the headline of the interview, "Aðlögun, jafnrétti og samstaða" - a translation of FNÍ's slogan, "Integration, Equality and Unity".
To many, "aðlögun" can mean either "assimilation" or "integration". My friend wanted to know which of the two I meant. As is reflected in our slogan, I meant integration, but I feel it's important to distinguish the difference between assimilation and integration, and why we support the latter but not the former.
Assimilation, to me, means to completely surrender your identity in order to "be one with" the group. You let go of everything that makes you who you are, and adopt a whole new identity; one barely distinguishable from anyone else in the country. Integration, on the other hand, means that you are fully a member of society - with the same rights and privileges as anyone else - without having to surrender your identity.
Assimilation is morally reprehensible. You cannot ask people to give up the most fundamental parts of what makes them who they are - their culture, their religion, even their name - nor does it make for a more harmonious society. On the contrary: any country that has attempted assimilation has sparked great social unrest. In the end, attempting an assimilation program achieves the opposite of what it intends.
Integration, by contrast, is simply asking that all members of society are provided equal rights and protection under the law, and that new arrivals are thoroughly educated as to what these rights and privileges are. This is why FNÍ has stressed that immigrants be informed of not only their labour rights, but also that Icelandic language classes include teaching the basic principles of Icelandic society and government. In this way, new arrivals can gain a better understanding of the country they live in, the way it works, what they're entitled to and that we live in a democracy.
Such knowledge benefits both immigrants and Icelanders alike.
In other news, praise must be given to Davíð Þór Jónsson, for the column he wrote in last Sunday's Fréttablaðið entitled "Gyðingahatur", wherein he not only praises Jewish people for the contributions they've made to the world, but also stresses the important distinction that needs to be made between Jewish people and the policies of the Israeli government - a distinction not too often made in Iceland. Thank you, Mr. Jónsson!
To many, "aðlögun" can mean either "assimilation" or "integration". My friend wanted to know which of the two I meant. As is reflected in our slogan, I meant integration, but I feel it's important to distinguish the difference between assimilation and integration, and why we support the latter but not the former.
Assimilation, to me, means to completely surrender your identity in order to "be one with" the group. You let go of everything that makes you who you are, and adopt a whole new identity; one barely distinguishable from anyone else in the country. Integration, on the other hand, means that you are fully a member of society - with the same rights and privileges as anyone else - without having to surrender your identity.
Assimilation is morally reprehensible. You cannot ask people to give up the most fundamental parts of what makes them who they are - their culture, their religion, even their name - nor does it make for a more harmonious society. On the contrary: any country that has attempted assimilation has sparked great social unrest. In the end, attempting an assimilation program achieves the opposite of what it intends.
Integration, by contrast, is simply asking that all members of society are provided equal rights and protection under the law, and that new arrivals are thoroughly educated as to what these rights and privileges are. This is why FNÍ has stressed that immigrants be informed of not only their labour rights, but also that Icelandic language classes include teaching the basic principles of Icelandic society and government. In this way, new arrivals can gain a better understanding of the country they live in, the way it works, what they're entitled to and that we live in a democracy.
Such knowledge benefits both immigrants and Icelanders alike.
In other news, praise must be given to Davíð Þór Jónsson, for the column he wrote in last Sunday's Fréttablaðið entitled "Gyðingahatur", wherein he not only praises Jewish people for the contributions they've made to the world, but also stresses the important distinction that needs to be made between Jewish people and the policies of the Israeli government - a distinction not too often made in Iceland. Thank you, Mr. Jónsson!
posted by Paul F Nikolov at 3:11 PM
2 Comments:
Comments on where Davíð Þór Jónsson stresses the important distinction that needs to be made between Jewish people and the policies of the Israeli government
A distinction not too often made in Iceland, you then said. I don´t think the distinction is more unclear in the minds of Icelanders than other nations and I don´t think, at least I hope not, that is what you meant. But it is true the distinction is often not made unclear.
But I also I think it is fair to say that the U.S. and the Israel government constantly seek to "write off" criticism on Israel foreign policy and label it as anti-semitism instead of rightful criticism. So distinction between Israel and Jews is not only made unclear by those who dislike Jews but also by those who, let´s say, favor them.
In fact this has come to be a very common excuse for taking criticism serously. For example when France was against the war in Iraq, all of the sudden Frenchmen were considered anti-americans in the States instead of just against the war it self. Allthough it is truly an overstatement to say there is much love between the to nations and it seems now that the world splits into: either you like the Americans or you like the French. Either you are with us or you are against us. Not very intelligent course taken there in my oppinion.
I don´t think the distinction is more unclear in the minds of Icelanders than other nations and I don´t think, at least I hope not, that is what you meant. But it is true the distinction is often not made unclear.
While I agree that the Likud Party has accused its critics of anti-Semitism, and that the "for us or against us" ultimatum isn't intelligent, I can tell you this: I have been called a Jew (and had it meant as an insult) more times in my seven years in Iceland than in my 28 years previous in America. In America, I never encountered anyone apart from far-right nutjobs making the assertion that the Jewish people control world banks, the global media, the entertainment industry, have orhcestrated 9-11 and are trying to take over there world - until I moved to Iceland. Here, I've heard allegedly intelligent people very casually express such opinions in person or in print as if this were a matter of fact. All of which is ironic, considering that Iceland's Jewish population is in the single digits. Where is all this hatred coming from?
Which is why Davíð Þór Jónsson's column was so refreshing to read. It also underlines the old dictum that reasonable people need to speak up more. It is my belief that most Icelanders really do make the distinction between Likud and the Jewish people, and hopefully, more people will speak up and say something when bigots make noise.
Post a Comment
<< Home