This entry began as a thank you note to my absentee housemate P.dot for his kind thought of forwarding me an article from one of the most popular newspapers here in the Netherlands called the NRC. This article is entitled ‘Absence of ethnic violence in the Netherlands explained’ and as promised, this article tries to explain why the rise in immigration and tensions accompanying it, hasn’t led to an explosion between different 'ethnic' groups here in the Netherlands. The author uses research undertaken by teachers with the public order and threat control at the Apeldoorn police academy to support its claims. The result of the research and the conclusion of the article is that the police are actually to thank for the absence of 'ethnic' riots here in the Netherlands.
I began to look at the Netherlands as a potential site for research because in general, the portrayal of interactions between individuals of different backgrounds (this word is problematic and very quickly, and in an unsatisfactory way, I understand 'background' to be a term that incorporates one's ascribed and assumed identities) by the media was very negative. For example, allochtonens (people who are foreign) have one set of ideas and act a certain way while autotochonen think and do another (also very problematic terms – read Geschiere). Further, if there is interaction, discussion or meetings between these groups it is often mismatched and hard to come by. However, during my time here in the neighbourhoods of Rotterdam, I have learned that this perceived disconnection is not always the case and I have also learned that while Dutch society is not devoid of racism, it is much more complex than any large media corporate could possibly convey in any one article.
Thus, just for fun, let's look at a most recent example (today) of how different ethnic groups are portrayed as being (forever) different and apart. The article P.dot sent me today discusses research done concerning why there has not been an 'ethnic’ riot as there was in the Banlieues of Paris in 2005. To start with, in my learning as an anthropological student, labelling people according to 'ethnic' groups is not productive. One's ethnic trait becomes a genetic trait, which also has the connotation that this particular attribute, behaviour, or way of thinking can never be changed...but I digress, let's get past the title.
Although I've gone through the article and selected only a few quotes, I believe them to be representative of the overall feeling created by the article. I’ll start with the bolded summary sentence placed under a photo of the police taking away a rioting Moroccan youth in Amsterdam, “While other Western countries have been the scene of ethnic riots, the Netherlands remained quiet. According to one new study, the Dutch have their police to thank for it.” From this we can ascertain that the Netherlands represents ‘Western’ countries and their way of life and that those whom they’re having problems with are from ‘The East’. There is no go-between each of these categories but instead they’re displayed as being separate entities. This of course does not happen in real life. It also leaves each category wide open to ascribing certain identities and stereotypes to particular groups – describing them and packaging them off as you’d like e.g. Netherlanders-good, Others-bad.
The author goes on to explain that there is an “...importance of knowing what lies behind the absence of ethnic riots in the Netherlands (...) because some have warned they could happen at any moment” (my emphasis). This sentence does a good job of creating fear about The Other. At ANY MOMENT we could have an ethnic riot!!! My goodness! Run for the hills there are going to be riots in the streets! The article goes on to say: “‘With reason’, Adang (the researcher) said about this alarm. ‘In a heavily polarised society, riots can easily break out’." the author does not explain what this reason is in addition to assuming that everyone will understand why it is that people are not able to get along (understood from the polarised society); I also think that you can surmise a bit of vindication within this sentence. After all, the polarization between groups is ‘with reason’.
The author goes on to explain how tensions are a historical fact here in the Netherlands: "In Amsterdam's Slotervaart neighbourhood, emotions ran high after a Moroccan-Dutch man was shot and killed by a police officer in the same year after he had stabbed both her and a colleague. Earlier this year, confrontations between youths of Moroccan and Moluccan descent rocked the rural town of Culemborg. The list of ethnic incidents goes on." People of Moroccan heritage living in the Netherlands are mentioned twice in this particular paragraph and although Moluccans are only mentioned here once, there is another reference to their troubles back in the 1970s…please read up – google: Moluccans, Netherlands, train.
The author continues to describe why it is that the Netherlands has staved off the almost inevitable attack from within (Eek!). How you ask? By the police’s good relationships with the community: "Officers invest time and effort in their contacts with local residents and social organisations. They get in touch with mosques and social workers; they know the local priest and participate in neighbourhood meetings occasionally (says me: good on the author for not just mentioning mosques as the only religious body of concern to the police). In this model, police officers also uphold the law, but only through targeted action (says me: are we talking about preventative searches now? See previous entry for more about the treatment of certain groups of individuals about the police or if you’d prefer a more ‘objective’ voice via the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance please click here…and the quote resumes). Police officers are familiar with the peculiarities of ethnic groups, allowing police to respond adequately to problems." This approach is in addition to a “repressive” model which I suppose is the bad cop style versus the earlier mentioned good cop method. I also want to raise just one small question at this point that I think every reader should be asking themselves, is no one else looking at the fact that researchers who conducted this study are connected to the police!?! So is it really a surprise that the heroes of this very sensitive topic in Dutch society end up being the police of all people?
***Please note that although my writing may have adopted a bit of a sarcastic tone, I do not want to insinuate that the police are not doing well at their job to keep the peace within the Rotterdam (as it is what I know) community. I’m sure that this is the case and I want to acknowledge that my position as a leftist, bleeding heart is placed conveniently of to the side of the realities of policing in everyday life. I am however interested in how relationships within Dutch society are portrayed to the general public and how the researcher and author have portrayed the results of the study (science is always very convincing isn’t it?).
Nearing the end of the article there were a few more scare quotes thrown in: "Some experts he (the researcher) interviewed said they could not rule out ethnic riots from taking place in the Netherlands in the future." From this you might start to think that an eruption between communities (note she does not write ‘among communities’ which is very important, this kind of language separates one group from another and leaves little room for access across these boundaries) is very near. But do not worry, the author fights for a more balanced perspective in the very last paragraph (which has unfortunately been considerably outweighed by the rest of the article that comes before it): “But addressing people based on their group-membership instead of their behaviour doesn't work well. A police officer busy writing tickets and meeting targets can only spend part of this time maintaining relationships. The sense of balance is lost." The problem here, Adang said, is that there is no direct pay-off. "Connections only become valuable when trouble arises." So, did this last ditch effort work for you? Not me personally, the trouble arises sentence reminds me that certain people…Moroccans according to their high rate of occurrence throughout the article…are likely to remain a problem for the police and greater society for a while yet to come.
Hmmm. It could be that I’m reading way too much into this piece or not fairly portraying what the author intended; on the other hand, maybe I’m not so far off. I hope I have been able to highlight some of what I believe to be the underlying assumptions by the author and the ammunition that one can gather from such writing that can or may not bias an audience toward certain narrow perspectives of whole ‘ethnic’ groups living in and amongst one another in Dutch society today. I apologise if any of this is not coherent but I believe one biased piece deserved another.
No comments:
Post a Comment