Il razzismo della prosperità nell’Europa contemporanea - Riflessioni a margine del pensiero antirazzista di Walter Lorenz

Recent publishing on the migration phenomena in the communitarian and globalized Europe, puts in evidence a fundamental racism which is capable of making cultural processes grow and feed both chaos and social disorder. As a matter of fact we are approaching the ending debates on multicultural citizenship as well as on solidary integration and antiracism. Since the appearing of these phenomena, namely the huge post colonial migration in the nineteen-eighties, by which the colonized countries became almost “emigrant nurseries”, one could expect their stabilization. On the contrary, globalization and migration (twin subjects) everywhere still produce, at various levels, social disturbances together with some chauvinistic limitations as an ultimate kind of western prosperity defense. The peculiar European features of this new racism, less than ideological (superiority, homogeneity and civilizing mission), are confined to the concepts of patriotism, inequality and exclusion. In these terms one can understand why the new economic expansionism and the quest for new world markets makes European policies unstable, which remain undecided between conservatism, liberalism and extreme right. All this explains at least two things: the existing ambiguities of some European policies aiming to enhance particular forms of protectionism, and the difficulties in which the antiracist thought seems to be embedded. Indeed, according to what Walter Lorenz has already made clear, by using a well founded methodology, which prevents any fruitless protestations, it is impossible to contrast racism and nationalism. In such context, the educational field should try to use an operative epistemology. In other words the antiracist thought should dispose of competences and skills and, especially, personal and reflective capabilities. All this in order to avoid that which, in different historical scenes, permit the revival of the sense of moral opprobrium could not be identified with the political alibi to maintain privileges as well as advantages for the exclusive benefit of wealthy countries.

Walter Lorenz – Wegbegleiter und Orientierungspunkt in der interkulturellen Sozialen Arbeit

First meeting, common interests and ways together The European Centre for Social Welfare, Training and Research situated in Vienna, was our first meeting place. W. Lorenz was interested in the international comparison of the different concepts and perspectives of social welfare problems in the European countries and the different developments in the training of social professions in Europe. The challenge of intercultural, antiracist social work in the context of Erasmus-Intensive Seminars To organize an intensive seminar with the aim to train students and colleagues for intercultural and antiracist competence in social professions, we formed an European network of European universities and schools of s.w. in Vienna (VIENNET), with the support of ECCE (European Centre of Community Education) in Koblenz. “The group discovered that working on these issues in an international context raises issues of ‘difference’ with renewed acuteness”(cit. W. Lorenz). We learned to cope with a variety of differences: biographical, language, theoretical and institutional backgrounds and discourse traditions. A Venue for an Intensive Seminar In choosing a venue for an Intensive Seminar we were relatively free. We locked for a place, “one dream about”, to support in the best way our seminar aims, to promote a base built on knowledge, skills and values particularly in the area of inner/outer borders, disadvantage, ignorance, minorities, majorities, vulnerable groups, racism and xenophobia. In a small village in Burgenland (Austria), very close to the Hungarian border, we thought to have found it. Future Prospect Are we only representatives of our background institutions or did we act and exposed ourselves as persons with a very specific biography and training experience. Can we sustain this created network, as a network of experts and friends in the field of intercultural, antiracist social work? This question is still open.

Social Work in an Ethnically Diverse Europe: The Shifting Challenges of Difference

This article addresses the inherently politicised context of social work practice located within the contested logics and values of national social policy and professional values and identities. Noting the key role of social work in delivering the state’s promise of social citizenship, it is argued that the increasing neo-nationalist sentiments and politics in European states generate significant pressures upon the universalist, inclusive, values of social work in a multiethnic Europe. The academic and policy debate around social cohesion is explored to illustrate how an assimilationist drift in multicultural state policies undermines the capacity of social work services to deliver appropriate, ethnically sensitive, services. It is further argued that the pervasive spread of populist counter-narratives to multiculturalism erode support for anti-racist and transcultural social work practice. In this context it is argued that social work must acknowledge its compromised situation and explicitly develop a political agenda committed to guaranteeing substantive equality in service delivery.

Educational and Anthropological Perspectives: An Italian View on Migration in Multi-cultural Urban Spaces

In contemporary societies there are different ways to perceive the relation between identity and alterity and to describe the difference between “us” and “them”, residents and foreigners. Anthropologist Sandra Wallman sustains that in multi-cultural urban spaces the frontiers of diversity are not only burdensome markers of identity, but rather they could also represent new chances to define “identity” and “alterity”. These frontiers, in fact, can work like interfaces through which to build time after time, in a creative way, a relationship with the other. From this point of view, the concept of boundary can offer many opportunities to creatively define the relation with the other and to sign new options for cognitive and physical movement. On the other side, in many cases we have a plenty of mechanisms of exclusion that transforms a purely empirical distinction between “us” and “them” in an ontological contrast, as in the case when the immigrant undergoes hostilities through discriminatory language. Even though these forms of racism are undoubtedly objectionable from a theoretical point of view, they are anyway socially “real”, in the sense that they are perpetually reaffirmed and strengthened in public opinion. They are in fact implicit “truths”, realities that are considered objective, common opinions that are part of day-to-day existence. That is the reason why an anthropological prospective including the study of “common sense” should be adopted in our present day studies on migration, as pointed out by American anthropologist Michael Herzfeld. My primary goal is to analyze with such a critical approach same pre-conditions of racism and exclusion in contemporary multi-cultural urban spaces. On the other hand, this essay would also investigate positive strategies of comparing, interchanging, and negotiating alterity in social work. I suggest that this approach can offer positive solutions in coping with “diversity” and in working out policies for recognizing a common identity which, at the same time, do not throw away the relevance of political and economic power.

Transformations in French Anti-Semitism?

The increase in the number of anti-Semitic acts since the start of the Second Intifada has sparked off a broad debate on the return of anti-Semitism in France. This article focuses on the question whether this anti-Semitism is still based on the alleged superiority of the Aryan race as in the time of Nazism, or if it represents the birth of a “new Judeophobia” that is more based on anti-Zionism and the polemical mixing of “Jews,” “Israelis,” and “Zionists.” One supposed effect of this transformation is that anti-Semitism is in the process of changing camps and migrating from the extreme right to the extreme left of the political arena, to the “altermondialistes,” the communists, and the “neo-Trotskyists.” The article provides answers to the following questions: Are anti-Jewish views on the increase in France today? Do these opinions correlate with negative opinions of other minorities, notably Maghrebians and Muslims? Do they tend to develop among voters and sympathizers with the extreme right or on the extreme left of the political spectrum? And how are they related to opinions concerning Zionism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? My evaluation of the transformations in French anti-Semitism relies on two types of data. The first is police and gendarmerie statistics published by the National Consultative Committee on Human Rights (CNCDH), which is charged with presenting the prime minister with an annual report on the struggle against racism and xenophobia in France. The other is data from surveys, notably surveys commissioned by CNCDH for its annual report and surveys conducted at the Center for Political Research (CEVIPOF) at Sciences Po (Paris Institute for Political Research). The data show that anti-Semitic opinions follow a different logic from acts, that the social, cultural, and political profile of anti-Semites remains very close to that of other types of racists, and that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism do not overlap exactly.