A Comparative Perspective on Similarities and Differences in Patterns of National Identity

Recent experiences of increased migration have revived discussions concerning integration, belonging and membership and have challenged national societies in their self-perception. Policy makers are faced with questions of membership boundaries, issues of access to state territory, education system, social and political participation, labor market, and social welfare. In particular the tension between liberalized citizenship policies emphasizing civic elements and parties stressing ethnically based politics of immigration, which are gaining support (Trittler 2017b: 367), show how contested these perceptions are. How individuals draw the line between compatriots and ´others´ plays a substantial role in those debates. Thus, to investigate national identity helps to understand anti-immigrant attitudes, preferences concerning globalization and phenomena like nativism and right-wing populism. This research comparatively analyzes national identities on the individual level and within their national contexts. Besides policies of cultural recognition (multiculturalism) and government redistribution (social welfare), citizenship policies play a substantial role in those debates (cf. Wright 2011: 601f.). Citizenship policies regulate full membership status and serve as stable and distinct institutional frames of nationhood (Koopmans et al. 2005). Even though these policies contain shared notions of nationhood (Brubaker 1992), on the individual level national identity is expected to be much more diverse. As subtle facet of the individuals´ identity, it is placed between socialization processes, personal experiences, public debates and institutional frames. Citizenship policies and national identities are recognized as being mutually influential, thus this research rejects a unidirectional relation of legal arrangements and individual perceptions. The analysis is led by the puzzle of processes simultaneously suggesting national homogeneity and individual heterogeneity of national identities. By following an explorative approach using Latent Class Analysis, this research identifies patterns of national identity on the individual level separately for different nation states. The analysis focusses on the normative content dimension of nationhood (Citrin et al. 2001). This method allows for national identities beyond ethnic and civic conceptions (cf. Meinecke 1963, Kohn 1944, Smith 1991 etc.). In the following, country specific results will be contrasted with each other. Lastly, citizenship policy data serves as blueprint when bringing results together and comparing cases. Data stems from the ONBound-project (Old and new boundaries: national and religious identity), which offers compiled and harmonized survey and macro-level data on national identity and citizenship policies. Preliminary results suggest that understandings of nationhood differ within national communities. Their perceptions of nationhood do not distinguish individuals through either ethnic or civic conceptions, but indicate the existence of an exclusionary and law conformist type instead. The latter displays notions of nationhood coinciding with the legal provisions of nationhood. Moreover, the majority of countries are much more similar than expected. Data suggests relatively stable classes of exclusionists and legalists, even though these classes vary dramatically in size, suggesting further country specific processes at work.