Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
http://etn.sagepub.com/
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 183
ARTICLE
Copyright 2003 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi)
Vol 3(2): 183213 [1468-7968(200306)3:2;183213;032947]
www.sagepublications.com
INTRODUCTION
In all European countries, including the Netherlands and France, ethnic
minorities, immigrants and/or multicultural society have become issues
high on the public and political agendas. Since the 1980s, we have witnessed
the intensified and largely unchallenged politicization of these topics
(Barats-Malbrel, 1998; Quaderni, 1998). As a result, in almost all spheres
of life, these issues have become major themes of discussion, indeed of
polarized debates, whether in private conversations or in written texts and
public debates such as in the arena of politics and public policies. There is
no doubt that politics in general and extreme right parties in particular have
184
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 184
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 185
discourse of its own (van der Valk, 2000). This outcome has resulted in this
follow-up project.
The cases of the Netherlands and France are interesting to compare
because they have a comparable background. Both countries are members
of the European Union (EU) and have strong civil societies. Both the
Netherlands and France were colonial powers in the past. They suffered in
a comparable way under the fascist dictatorship of Nazi Germany. After the
Second World War, the Netherlands and France both experienced significant immigration in the context of decolonization and as compensation for
shortages in the labour market. Often the same groups (labour migrants,
ex-colonials and political refugees) from the same region (a majority originate from the Mediterranean) have been involved. Immigrants in both
countries occupy similar class positions. Relevant national policies,
however, such as immigrant integration policies and citizenship laws vary
in accordance with historically determined national differences in political
culture; France being characterized by a universalistic, egalitarian republicanism and the Netherlands by a so-called pillarization system that favours
an identity-based and inclusion-orientated approach to integration
(Ireland, 2000). In France, extreme right, politically organized racism
significantly increased in the period under study (CNCDH, 1996). In the
Netherlands, this form of racism gradually declined after the electoral
success of the extreme right in 1994, with 7 percent of the votes. It is sometimes presupposed that this difference between the Netherlands and France
is related to the presence or absence of a so-called cordon sanitaire around
the extreme right (van Donselaar, 1995). In France, it is said, the right and
the extreme right lack discursive distance; in the Netherlands, it is said, the
reactions of mainstream politics towards the extreme right are predominantly characterized by boycott and distanciation strategies. To date, no
comprehensive study has been carried out to support these arguments.
For this study, data from various discourse genres were used such as
interviews, articles, public speeches and parliamentary debates. For each
party that was investigated, one leading and influential politician was
selected. To avoid the impression that the main focus was on the discourse
of individual politicians, some discourse fragments of other members of the
parties were also analysed as well as more general (anonymous) discursive
materials of the parties, such as party programmes.
185
186
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 186
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
CURRENT RESEARCH
Policy-orientated social science studies
Most of the research on minorities and immigrants that has been done over
the past 30 years by Dutch scholars in the social sciences has focused on
ethnic minorities and their characteristics from a policy-orientated perspective; that is, the social problems experienced or allegedly caused by these
minorities have been the central topics of these studies. Systematic studies
of discrimination and racism, as expressions of ethnic dominance and
exclusion, and of their impact on ethnic minorities have remained relatively
scarce. The bibliographies Onderzoek Etnische Minderheden (ACOM, 1992)
reveal that, by 1998, only 6 percent of research publications by Dutch
scholars on ethnic issues had discrimination and racism as a central theme
(Borghuis, 1988; ACOM, 1992; LISWO, 1996, 1998). Most of these studies
are written from a legal or social science perspective and/or have the
extreme right as their object of reference. Only a few of these publications
deal with racism in social institutions such as schools, welfare institutions or
the workplace. In general, mainstream Dutch academia shows little interest
in racism as a social phenomenon, let alone as a discursive one or as a theoretical concept. In Europe, between the two world wars, racial science prospered, ultimately sustaining the political excesses of the Nazi regime that
culminated in genocide during the Second World War. As a result, the
concept of race has become a problematic category in Western European
continental thought, in particular in academic research. Frequently, race and
racism are defined away from academic and sociopolitical life. In dominant
Dutch academic (minority) discourse, race and racism only have to do with
biological characteristics. It is argued that contemporary ideological and
practical forms of exclusion and domination of (ethnic) others that refer to
culture or religion cannot be explained by this conceptual framework (see,
for example, Rath, 1991). The lack of conceptual clarity and the undertheorization of racisms in their sociohistorical contexts in many cases leads to
a situation in which racism is defined away. Consequently, whereas many
international studies are available in which race and racism are studied in
their social and historical context, development and effects, Dutch studies
in these fields are relatively rare. The following studies may however be
mentioned: Bouw and Nelissen, 1988; de Rooy, 1991, 1998; Eickhoff et al.,
2000; Essed, 1984, 1991; Hisschemller, 1988; Mok, 1999, 2000; Reedijk,
2000; van Arkel et al., 1990; van Dijk, 1984, 1987, 1991, 1993; Verkuyten,
1995. Moreover, the valuable work of researchers from the Foundation of
Historical Racism Studies should also be mentioned. Researchers at the
Foundation use the stigmatization perspective developed by van Arkel as a
general explanatory model to explain the historically constituted negative
representation of, among others, travellers (Cottaar, 1996; see also van der
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 187
Valk, 1997) and gypsies (Lucassen, 1990; Willems, 1995; see also Diederiks
and Quispel, 1987; van Arkel et al., 1990).
Sociopsychological studies on ethnocentrist attitudes include: Hagendoorn, 2001; Hagendoorn and Hraba, 1987; Hagendoorn and Janssen, 1983;
Kleinpenning, 1993; Scheepers and Coenders, 1996; Scheepers et al., 1990,
1994, 2001; Verberk, 1999. Since 1997, the University of Leiden has
published studies monitoring racism, focusing mainly on the politically
organized racism of the extreme right (van Donselaar, 1997, 2000; van
Donselaar et al., 1998; van Donselaar and Rodrigues 2001).
For research on racism in France, see: de Fontette, 1985; Guillaumin,
1972, 1995; Lvi-Strauss, 1952; Memmi, 1994; Sibony, 1997; Taguieff, 1988,
1991; Todorov, 1989; Wieviorka, 1991, 1992, 1993; for elaborated reports on
racist violence in France, see the annual reports of the CNCDH; for an
overview of racist and antisemitic violence from 199094 in France, see van
Donselaar, 1995: 251.
Compared to the large number of studies of minority experiences and
activities, little research has been done on majority discourse about minorities, its general or specific properties, its evolution and cross-time or crosscountry comparative similarities and/or differences. Recently, however,
following a more general trend of increased interest in the role of the
discursive in politics and policy (see Kuitenbrouwer, 1994; van Zoonen and
Holtz-Bacha, 2000), there has occurred a slight growth in academic interest
in Dutch minority discourse (Fermin, 1997; Jacobs, 1998; Prins, 2000;
Schuster, 1999; Suurmond, 1995). These studies, however, focus primarily
on the content of discursive productions on ethnic issues on what is said
but fail to analyse how this is done. This sort of fine-grained, detailed
analysis may be considered the specialized approach to discourse analysis
as it is attempted in this article.
187
188
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 188
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 189
189
190
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 190
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
common values and group welfare. The principle of reciprocity implies that
people are not supposed to take more than they give with respect to social
goods; the principle of trust implies that people will not cheat and betray
others; with respect to common values, people are supposed to support and
not to undermine them, just as they are supposed to contribute to group
welfare. Stigmatization occurs, they argue, when these basic principles of
effective and efficient group functioning are (supposedly) violated.
Crandall (2000) has identified two ideological mechanisms that justify
stigmatization. The first is attributional; attributions of causality, responsibility and blame serve as justifications for stigmatizing. The second resides
in hierarchical thinking; relations of superiority and inferiority are
represented as natural, good and even unavoidable. Neuberg et al. also
suggest ways for reducing stigmatization: once the threat or the perception
of the threat or, indeed, the representation of the threat posed by individuals or groups to group functioning is eliminated, the stigmatization of
targeted individuals and groups should decrease (2000: 52). This points to
the importance of language and more broadly the politics of representation
to reduce stigmatization and favour peaceful interethnic relations. These
mechanisms and justifications for stigmatization may be deconstructed in
the discourse on stigmatized out-groups. In order to do this for the present
study in particular, some global strategies and local text features that are
relevant for the study of racism and characteristic of the prejudiced
language used regarding immigrants, as they have been identified in earlier
studies, are examined (Reeves, 1983; van Dijk, 1987, 1991, 1993). Major
global discursive strategies, such as referential strategies of positive selfpresentation and negative other presentation and strategies of delegitimation, are also examined. The mechanism of positive self-presentation and
negative other presentation is crucial for research on discursive racism. On
a cognitive level, us/them thinking in terms of religion and/or ethnicity is an
important condition for the development of a prejudiced frame of interpretation, particularly if positive traits are related to us and negative features
to them. Another focus were local text characteristics of rhetorics
(metaphors, irony, repetition, euphemisms, hyperboles) and style (lexicon).
Semantic moves that were investigated and are reported in this article are
comparison, forms of implicitness and contrast. Reactive strategies to
accusations of racism such as denial and reversal are equally investigated.
Due to lack of space, it is unfortunately impossible to illustrate with
discourse fragments all the identified linguistic properties of the examined
party discourses. Given examples are chosen on the basis of representativeness and/or typicality.
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 191
THE DATA
Few discursive data for the Dutch extreme right CD party are available.
This is because the party is excluded from mainstream politics, boycotted
by the media, the object of intensely negative public opinion and subject to
repressive governmental policies (Schikhof, 1998). Having been ostracized
from public life since its creation, the party has had only limited access to
the public. Consequently, no data derived from public speeches exist for the
period under study, nor are any reports available of the speeches held by
chairman Janmaat in private general meetings. Janmaat is rarely quoted in
news reports and seldom interviewed by newspaper, radio or television
journalists. Thus, from 199097, Janmaat was only interviewed nine times
by mainstream daily and weekly newspapers. The most important medium
employed by the CD for influencing public opinion are radio and television
broadcasts. Janmaat is generally the CD spokesman on radio and TV spots.
Eighty-eight transcribed speeches (72 TV and 16 radio interviews) and nine
press interviews in the period under study are used as data for this research.
Analysis of the discourse of a spokesman for the conservative liberal
party VVD concerns one of the Netherlands most important and wellknown political leaders, chairman of the party during the period under
study, Frits Bolkestein. The data consist of seven newspaper articles of one
page each, 15 press interviews, 12 transcribed radio and 10 TV interviews
with Bolkestein in the period 199097, as well as the introduction to his
booklet Moslim in de polder (1997).
My investigation into the discourse of the FN examines the theme
foreigners or immigration in the discourse of le Pen. Fifty-eight speeches,
interviews and articles from the period 199097 were selected from the
archives of La Documentation Franaise. Several speeches that were given
at mass meetings were downloaded from the Internet, as was general information such as the party programme. Altogether this corpus consists of 264
pages of printed text. The criterion for selecting texts was thematic. Only
those documents that contained the keyword immigration in the thematic
description of La Documentation Franaise were selected.
For an analysis of the discourse on immigration of the French mainstream right parties Groupe de lUnion pour la Democratie Franaise
(UDF) and Groupe du Rassemblement pour la Rpublique (RPR), data
from parliamentary debates on immigration and nationality from 199697
were used. These debates on the Debr draft bill on immigration, the
Guigou draft bill on nationality and the Chevnement draft bill on immigration consisted of 1237 pages.
191
192
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 192
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 193
Positive self-presentation
The positive self-presentation of the CD is primarily related to the party
itself and to the Dutch working class, both of which are portrayed as
victims. Victimization is an important characteristic of the referential
strategy that is applied when speaking of Dutch people. The Dutch are
represented as victims of minorities, or at least of minority policies. The
Dutch, most of the speeches assert, are discriminated against. The CD itself
is also characterized as a victim; that is, as victimized by dictatorial political
policies. At the same time, the CD represents itself as the only party
defending the interests of the ordinary Dutch, in favour of Dutch norms
and values, in favour of reconstituting Dutch culture and more generally
fighting to save the Netherlands from decline. Positive self-presentation and
negative other presentation are facilitated by the mechanism of differential
differentiation. The in-group, who is primarily referred to as we, the
193
194
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 194
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 195
Delegitimation
Bolkestein expresses his standpoints and opinions on ethnic minority issues
predominantly in the context of a public debate (the minority debate) in
the media, in the context of an argumentative discussion with other politicians and opinion makers and, more indirectly, with public opinion. The
central issue in this debate is the definition of the ethnic situation and the
policies concerning the admission of immigrants and the integration of
legally accepted foreigners in the Netherlands.
Part of the intended consequence of introducing a new definition of the
current situation is the delegitimation of those who previously defined the
situation. The new right defends a liberal market economy with minimal
interference, but also a strong state, emphasizing the responsibility of
citizens and the transformation of the welfare state into a so-called guarantee state. This concept is contradictory to the welfare state thinking of social
democracy. Several discursive references are orientated towards the delegitimation of welfare ideology (and thus of the social democratic parties
that supposedly support that ideology). This is reinforced by a strategy of
backgrounding and downplaying the sociopolitical phenomena of discrimination and racism, which are contradictory to the ideological mechanisms
of a positive self-presentation and a negative other presentation. Delegitimation is an important feature in CD discourse as well. On a global level,
Janmaats discourse combines a populist strategy in which the victimization
of the CD and of ones own population plays an important role within a
strategy orientated towards the enhancement of his own credibility, the
negative presentation of the other and the delegitimation of his political
opponents, especially the social democratic party PvdA. The core of the
argument, made repeatedly in every broadcast, is as follows. From an
economic point of view, things are not going well in the Netherlands. The
government, political parties and politicians, especially the PvdA, defend
wrong policies. The government equally makes a mess of the implementation of policies. Mainstream parties and politicians only want to spend
money on asylum seekers, minority policies and the multicultural society.
This is why the Dutch have to give in more and more. The Dutch are
discriminated against. The CD is the only party that defends the ordinary
Dutch.
After having signalled commonalities as well as some secondary variations, it is important to emphasize some of the major differences between
the discourses of the right and the extreme right in the Netherlands. The
form and style of CD language and the repetitive use of identical items
indicate that the main orientation of this party is towards the Dutch
working class. Although the slogan simplify and exaggerate is sometimes
used to characterize the discourse of Bolkestein, his texts are much more
subtle, sophisticated and academically informed than those of the CD.
195
196
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 196
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
Bolkestein obviously speaks for the educated elite rather than for a workingclass audience. There is no indication of banal nationalism (Billig, 1995) as
it is expressed by the CD through its frequent and systematic use of typically
Dutch expressions. The discourse of the CD is characterized by a large
number of idiomatic constructions, in particular old-fashioned, typically
Dutch sayings, expressions, proverbs and puns, which are employed as
frequently as more popular contemporary ones. It is known that proverbs
have the function of reinforcing the arguments of the speaker, who fades
away, enabling a powerful and cultural utterance that reflects shared knowledge and is difficult to counter (Arnaud and Moon, 1993: 324). Proverbs
and sayings are not only expressed in their canonical form, they are sometimes used as the basic element for word games. Striking is the racialization
achieved through the introduction of changes or additions, such as occurs in
the following example: De Nederlandse regering wikt, de buitenlander
beschikt (the Dutch governments proposes, the immigrant disposes). The
subject of this proverb which is used in various languages, De mens wikt,
God beschikt (man proposes, God disposes), is here transformed in order to
convey a racist message: immigrants in the Netherlands have more power
than the Dutch government. This message may be better stored in and
retrieved from memory because it is packed in an instance of shared knowledge, a proverb. Similarly, the titles of the CD election programmes Oost
West, Thuis Best (East West, Home Best) and Trouw aan Rood-Wit-Blauw
(True to Red-White-Blue) reflect the same kinds of lexical habits. This is
underscored in CD leaflets by the use of colours; red and blue on white
paper, together representing the national flag (for an analysis of everyday
nationalist symbols, see Billig, 1995).
The word own has a central position in the lexical repertoire of the CD:
our own Dutch youth, our own population, the own Dutch, our own
problems and our own security of existence. Own is one of those inconspicuous words that Billig (1995) has shown routinely contributes to the
daily confirmation and reproduction of nationalist ideological repertoires.
Another important difference between Dutch rightwing parties
pertains to racism. While racism as a systematic form of ethnic domination
is not acknowledged, but rather denied, by the CD (even as they claim to
be one of its victims), the VVD (Vereniging voor Vrijheid en Democratie [Peoples Party for Freedom and Democracy]) recognizes the importance of this social phenomenon by declaring the struggle against it to be
one of the pillars of its immigration and integration programme. Nevertheless, discrimination and racism are backgrounded and subtly played
down as marginal phenomena in the discourse of the VVD leader. We
should also mention the fact that the CD more frequently, and more
explicitly and consciously than rightwing politicians, makes use of instruments of implicit language use. This strategy is strongly related to the
mechanism of theatrical role-switching that is used by the CD. The CD
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 197
197
198
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 198
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
FINDINGS: FRANCE
Comparison of the FN and the UDF/RPR coalition discourses on
immigration
For 20 years, the issue of immigration in France has been subject to a
constant process of politicization expressed, among other means, in frequent
changes in legislation. The FN, which has steadily been on the rise since the
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 199
beginning of the 1980s, largely determined the terms of the debate with
other parties (in particular the political right), taking over many of the principal themes, associations and standard arguments. This section describes
the discursive properties of the commonalities and differences between the
discourses of the French right and the extreme right.
The political discourse of both the right and the extreme right on immigration is highly rhetorical. Repetition, rhetorical questions, hyperbole and
instances of irony occur frequently in the discourse of the mainstream right.
Metaphors are employed to symbolize threat and danger and the risk of loss
of control or the lack of restrictions on immigration and to symbolize the
ease with which immigrants succeed in obtaining permits. Metaphors are
also used to symbolize the threat of racism and right extremism. Immigrants
in the discourse of the FN are the object of a negative other presentation by
means, among others, of suggestive metaphors. Metaphors that are
frequently used when speaking of immigrants are, most systematically, those
of war and of water. These metaphors, depicting unending flows of people
entering Europe and the resulting aggression and struggle, create fear and
thereby motivate people to support restrictive or anti-immigration policies.
In other instances, immigrants are not only derogated they are implicitly
threatened. Both the right and the extreme right use strategies of positive
self-presentation and negative other presentation, associate immigrants with
problematic social phenomena and express fears about the decline of the
French civilization. The discourse of the right, however, is not only less
explicit, it is also in itself more contradictory, as the variation between the
various MPs is greater. The discourse of the FN, however, is strongly and
consistently rooted in a social Darwinist ideology in which attributions are
traced back to the natural order of things, which is itself assumed to be
governed by biological laws. If we believe the discourse of le Pen, France is
in decline, threatened by invasion and on the verge of disappearing. Its
civilization is doomed. This is primarily due to a cosmopolitan plot,
concealed by modern politics which strive for European unification and
globalization, and institutionalized by an anti-racist lobby that systematically
privileges foreigners and oppresses the French. It is in this broader context
that the immigration theme is instrumental to the strategy of the FN.
199
200
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 200
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 201
may all be found in France, it must be considered a role model for all the
nations of the world. It has a universal vocation. This strategy is underpinned by diverse linguistic realizations, of which the most remarkable are
the heavily rhetorical nature of speeches about nationality, which reflects
the strong affect with which the subject is invested, instances of personification of the republic and the nation, the frequent use of the pronoun we
(the French) and toponymical (la France) and ethnonymical (Franais)
characterizations.
Positive self-presentation
For the FN too, the negative evaluation of immigration and immigrants is
in sharp contrast to the positive evaluation of us in this case, the French
nation, its (presumed) political representative and future rescuer, the FN,
and the father of the fatherland, Jean-Marie le Pen. Multiple cognitive
resources are used to construct extreme right nationalistic ideology, derived
both from the intellectual domain (history, literature and philosophy) and
the sociopolitical domain (working-class discourse, nationalistic discourse
and a discourse of anti-fascist resistance). Historical comparisons,
biological metaphors and a poetical style, along with other rhetorical instruments, are used to construct a romantic version of France, to naturalize the
idea of the (French) ethnic nation and thus to legitimate defending it
against foreign intruders in a united, altruistic and heroic struggle, guided
by le Pen, the heir of the heroes of the past.
Discrimination is normalized and naturalized in the discourse of le Pen,
and an ideology of racism without race is developed and legitimated
whereby causal attributions are primarily traced back to the natural order
of things. This natural order is a core element of extreme right ideology.
Le Pen normalizes a racist ideology and legitimizes discriminatory practices, while referring to nature and biology. It is natural, he argues, to prefer
ones family to another, ones nation to another, and so on. This kind of
argumentation, typical of the FN leader, conveys how he resorts to
commonsense reasoning that is based on false analogies which themselves
do not require explanation. This explanation, in terms of nature, instinct
and inheritance, strongly recalls the once closely related, classificatory principle of race. This is especially the case where homogeneity and the dangers
of intermingling are accentuated, for example by representing the national
community as a physical body that is injected with immigrant communities in order to produce offspring. It is a fundamental biological rule,
according to le Pen, that cultural homogeneity leads to high performance.
Note how this straightforward racist argumentation is here circumvented
by introducing a cultural detour.
The nation is represented as a self-evident fact, as is the division of
homogeneous populations into nations through a natural process of
201
202
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 202
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 203
equality of opportunities, the FN is orientated not only towards the normalization of a racist discourse, but also to the institutionalization of practices
of discrimination via its policy of national preference. The straightforward
discriminatory character of the FN programme comes to the fore in this
euphemistically formulated policy which envisions the institutionalized
exclusion of immigrants. A euphemistic style not only characterizes the
concept of national preference, but the sentences detailing this policy are
likewise formulated in a euphemistic way. For example, it is not specified
that immigrants will no longer receive family allocations, merely that family
allocations will be reserved for the French.
Justification for national preference is achieved by the frequent use of
comparisons that originate in commonsense logic and act as legitimating
devices for these policies and by the use of stereotypical commonplace
arguments and contrasts. Racism as a property of FN politics is strongly
denied by the party. Le Pen strongly refutes the accusation of racism, which
he obviously considers the most significant hurdle blocking his acceptance
into mainstream politics. A whole range of linguistic tools is used to achieve
this aim: denial, disclaimers and counteraccusations; they are not discriminated against, but we are! This reversal is also applied to anti-racist legislation which is considered oppressive to the freedom of expression.
Denial, reversal and victimization allow le Pen to represent the FN as a
natural representative of the French people and himself as its potential
saviour in the face of foreign occupation and repression. Yet, le Pen has
repeatedly asserted the inequality of the races. Reversal is also achieved
through the systematic use of false analogies and comparisons whereby the
struggle of the FN is compared to the anti-fascist struggle of the Second
World War and le Pen himself is compared to Churchill; that is, he implicitly portrays himself as the national liberator of France. Reversal statements are employed to present the FN as a victim and, more broadly, to
complete a vicious discursive circle portraying ethnic French people as the
true victims of racism who need to be rescued; we are not racist, we are
patriots!
Delegitimation
Although the right worries about the threat of racism and right extremism,
its sociopolitical discursive practices are, however, much more orientated
towards delegitimizing the left than towards delegitimizing the extreme
right. Proposals of the left are often distorted, simplified or exaggerated to
facilitate critical comments and verbal aggression. The motives, credibility,
integrity and consistency of the left and its policy proposals are called into
question. Fraud and abuse have a predominant position too in the reciprocal accusations of political opponents. The rightwing parties accuse the left
of being too lax; their concept of society is said to be too idealistic; they are
203
204
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 204
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 205
205
206
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 206
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
Acknowledgement
The research reported here was supported in part by a research grant from the
Netherlands Scientific Organisation (NWO).
References
ACOM (Adviescommissie Onderzoek Minderheden) (1992) Onderzoek Etnische
Minderheden (Research on Ethnic Minorities). s-Gravenhage: Ministerie van
Binnenlandse Zaken.
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 207
Arnaud, P.J.L. and R. Moon (1993) Frquence et emploi des proverbes anglais et
franais (Frequency and Use of English and French Proverbs), in C. Plantin
(ed.) Lieux communs, topo, strotypes, clichs (Commonplaces: Topoi, Stereotypes and Clichs), pp. 32342. Paris: ditions Kim.
Barats-Malbrel, C. (1998) Politisation de limmigration en France: Logiques politiques et enjeux discursifs (The Politicization of Immigration in France: Political
Logics and Discursive Stakes), Quaderni 36: 6981.
Barker, M. (1981) The New Racism. London: Junction Books.
Barker, M. (1984) Het nieuwe racisme (The New Racism), in A. Bleich and
P. Schumacher (eds) Nederlands Racisme (Dutch Racism), pp. 6285.
Amsterdam: Van Gennep.
Betz, H.G. (1994) Radical Right-wing Populism in Western Europe. London:
Macmillan.
Billig, M. (1995) Banal Nationalism. London: Sage.
Birenbaum, G. (1992) Le Front national en politique (The National Front in
Politics). Paris: ditions Ballard.
Bolkestein, F. (1997) Moslem in de Polder. Amsterdam: Contact.
Bonnafous, S. (1991) Limmigration prise aux mots: Les immigrs dans la presse au
tournant des annes 80. Paris: Editions Kim.
Bonnafous, S. (1998) Les argumentations de Jean-Marie Le Pen (The Arguments
of Jean-Marie Le Pen), Revue politique et parlementaire 995 (7/8): 2739.
Borghuis, M., ed. (1988) Etnische minderheden in Nederland: een geselecteerde bibliografie van sociaal-wetenschappelijke publikaties (19451986) (Ethnic Minorities
in the Netherlands: A Selected Bibliography of Social Science Publications
[19451986]). Muiderberg: Coutinho.
Bouw, C. and C. Nelissen (1988) Gevoelige kwesties. Ervaringen van migranten met
discriminatie (Sensitive Questions: Experiences of Immigrants with Discrimination). Leiden: Rijksuniversiteit Leiden.
Bowser, B.P. (1995) Racism and Anti-racism in World Perspective. London: Sage.
Camus, J. (1992) Political Cultures within the Front National: The Emergence of a
Counter Ideology on the French Far-right, Patterns of Prejudice 26(1/2): 516.
CNCDH (Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de lHomme) (1996) La
Lutte contre le racisme et la xenophobie (The Struggle Against Racism and
Xenophobia). Paris: La Documentation Franaise.
Cottaar, A. (1996) Kooplui, kermisklanten en andere Woonwagenbewoners,
groepsvorming en beleid 18701945 (Merchants, Showmen and other Travellers:
Group Formation and Policy 18701945). Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
Crandall, C.S. (2000) Ideology and Lay Theories of Stigma: The Justification of
Stigmatization, in T.F. Heatherton, R.E. Kleck, M.R. Hebl and J.G. Hull The
Social Psychology of Stigma, pp. 12650. New York and London: Guilford Press.
Cuminal, I., M. Souchard, S. Wahnich and V. Wathier (1997) Le Pen, les mots;
analyse dun discours dextrme droite (Le Pen, the Words; Analysis of Extreme
Right Discourse). Paris: Le Monde.
de Fontette, F. (1985) Le Racisme. Paris: Presse Universitaire de France.
de Rooy, P. (1991) Bouleren met de Evolutie: over de samenhang tussen apen,
negers en proletariaat (Playing with Evolution: On the Relation between Apes,
Negroes and Proletarians), De Gids 154(5/6): 34366.
de Rooy, P. (1998) De Wetenschap van het Ras (The Science of Race), in M.
207
208
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 208
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 209
209
210
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 210
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 211
211
212
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 212
ETHNICITIES 3(2)
2/5/03
1:45 pm
Page 213
Politics: The Case of the Talk Show, Journal of the European Institute for
Communication and Culture 7: 4557.
Vander Velpen, J. (1992) Daar komen ze aangemarcheerd (Here They Come amarching!). Leuven: Van Halewijck.
Vander Velpen, J. (1995) Zwarte Horizonten, radicaal rechts in Europa (Black
Horizons: The Radical Right in Europe). Leuven: Van Halewijck.
Verberk, G.T.M. (1999) Attitudes towards Ethnic Minorities, Conceptualizations,
Measurements and Models. Amsterdam: Thela Thesis.
Verkuyten, M. (1995) Alledaagse Betekenissen van Racisme en Discriminatie
(Everyday Meanings of Racism and Discrimination ), Migrantenstudies
11(3): 181202.
Wieviorka, M. (1991) LEspace du racisme (The Realm of Racism). Paris: ditions
du Seuil.
Wieviorka, M., ed. (1992) La France raciste (Racist France). Paris: ditions du Seuil.
Wieviorka, M., ed. (1993) Racisme et modernit (Racism and Modernity). Paris: La
Dcouverte.
Willems, W. (1995) Op zoek naar de ware zigeuner, zigeuners als studieobject tijdens
de Verlichting, de Romantiek en het Nazisme (Looking for the Real Gypsy:
Gypsies as Object of Study during the Enlightment, Romanticism and Nazism).
Utrecht: Jan van Arkel.
Winock, M. (1990) Histoire de lextrme droite en France (History of the Extreme
Right in France). Paris: ditions du Seuil.
Witte, R. (1996) Racist Violence and the State: A Comparative Analysis of Britain,
France and the Netherlands. London: Addison-Wesley-Longman.
Wodak, R. and T.A. van Dijk, eds (2000) Racism at the Top. Vienna: Drava Verlag.
213