Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 June 2025
Introduction
In recent years, certain Danish politicians, comprising populists, liberals, and even social democrats, amplified by their voter constituencies, portrayed inhabitants as refugees and migrants as an alien group of people whose preoccupation with the construction of identity-based parallel societies might undermine Danish society culturally as well as its identity of national homogeneity. Populists have added that such migrant subversive societies emphasize their own specific culture and ethnicity, thereby establishing their own specific traditions and norms. In return, increasingly, it is not just segregating and isolating diverse ethnic communities from mainstream Danish society. Some even suggest that reluctant migrant societies could evolve into positions in which they could pose a national cultural threat to the well-being of society.
Similar cases from studies on Dutch politicians and how they portray migrants in demanding top-down cultural assimilation, Suvarierol (2012) identifies a relational process in which a kind of “nation-freezing” emerges:
The concept of nation freezing best fits the Dutch case. Not only does citizenship material assume a unitary national identity, but it also does not offer any space for divergent practices and, at times, strongly qualifies these practices as unacceptable. The message given to the migrant is that he or she is expected to adjust to the “liberal” Dutch societal norms as defined by the state in its integration material. Not only is the Dutch national identity pictured as a monolithic entity, the migrant and his or her “culture” is also addressed throughout as being traditional and in need of adjustment to Dutch norms.
Even though the contents of the national imagery used in the citizenship packages vary, there is also a major point of convergence: the frozen national imaginary presented to the newcomers is a “liberal” one. This is paradoxical in and of itself because liberalism as an ideology stresses individual freedom in the choice of personal values and behavior. (Suvarierol, 2012)
Although societies have debated the dynamics of cultural belonging or not belonging for centuries, in recent times, following Huntington's well-known thesis of cultural and civilization clash following the end of the Cold War, diverse forms of political identity assertions, formations, and struggles have emerged. In relation to the specific debates on ethnic cultural formation and consolidation—particularly where and with whom migrants belong—the concept of cultural belonging and related images have since attained greater significance and priority in mainstream discourse, including in society.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.