Constructions of National Identity and Attitudes to Immigration

Defenders of liberal nationalism hold that immigration might undermine the specific identification relationship between co-nationals, which acts as a basis for the democratic welfare state. This article argues that the potential threat immigration poses to a cohesive shared identity may be a construct of the meanings of that identity and that different forms of identification relationships between compatriots can result in more open attitudes towards immigration. Such identities may be based on either common institutions or on a contributory principle. This argument is pursued by discussing the findings of a qualitative study on Swedish and British understandings of identity, belonging and exclusion. 46 in-depth interviews with non-elite respondent were conducted and resulted in three distinct categories of identity, belonging and exclusion. These were nationalism, institutionalism and contribution. Amongst respondents expressing the two new forms of identification relationships, where belonging is based on common institutions or contributions rather than a nation, attitudes to immigration were more positive than amongst those with a nationalist understanding of their common political identity. Hence, this article contributes with empirical evidence to a debate dominated by normative analysis, yet which relies extensively on empirical assumptions about the relation between identity, the sources of motivations to cooperate in modern welfare states and attitudes to newcomers. It provides evidence for how concerns about immigration can be reduced by focusing on the identification relationships undergirding the democratic welfare state. Furthermore, the findings suggest in what institutional setting differently inclusive identification relationships are likely to be fostered, by for example highlighting the difference between liberal and social-democratic, insurance-based welfare states in this regard.