Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T19:50:37.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The New Social Contract and the Struggle for Sovereignty in the Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Marinus R. R. Ossewaarde
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One of the recurring topics in the history of sovereign nation-states is the way in which national identity, and social and cultural differences are dealt with politically. In the Netherlands, that has always had a strong tradition of social citizenship, the government has recently responded to plural nationhood and its problems by turning to new concepts of citizenship. In this article, it is argued that notions of citizenship are, in the end, used to reinforce Dutch sovereignty by creating and maintaining national cohesion. The underlying assumption in public policy is that a strong sense of national citizenship that replaces the old model of social citizenship is the only way to reconcile differences and safeguard peace in contemporary post-industrial society. Three Dutch policy sectors – integration, welfare and child protection – are examined to see how these concepts have taken shape in public policy.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , 2007 , pp. 491 - 512
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Dutch Cabinet, Kabinetsvisie ‘Andere Overheid’, The Hague, 2003, p. 11.Google Scholar

2 See for instance Arend Lijphart, The Politics of Accommodation: Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1975; De Rooy, Piet, ‘Farewell to Pillarization’, Netherlands Journal of Social Sciences, 33 (1997), pp. 27–41.Google Scholar

3 Herman R. van Gunsteren, A Theory of Citizenship: Organising Plurality in Contemporary Democracies, Boulder, CO, Westview Press, 1998, p. 28.Google Scholar

4 Neil Gilbert, Transformation of the Welfare State: The Silent Surrender of Public Responsibility, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 3.Google Scholar

5 Mayntz, Renate and Scharpf, Fritz, ‘Politische Steuerung – Heute?’, Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 34 (2005), pp. 236–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mark Bevir and R. A. W. Rhodes, Governance Stories, London, Routledge, 2006.

6 Rogers Brubaker, Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the National Question, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996; Christian Joppke, Towards Assimilation and Citizenship: Immigrants in Liberal Nation-States, London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.Google Scholar

7 See, for example, a May 2006 report of the Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, available at www.nederlandineuropa.nl.Google Scholar

8 See, for example, Herman R. van Gunsteren and P. den Hoed (eds), Burgerschap in Praktijken, The Hague, Sdu, 1992; Council for Social Development, Aansprekend Burgerschap, The Hague, Sdu, 2002; Council for Social Development, Verschil Maken: Eigen Verantwoordelijkheid na de Verzorgingsstaat, Amsterdam, SWP, 2006; Ringo Ossewaarde, Eigen Verantwoordelijkheid: Bevrijding of Beheersing, RMO series, Amsterdam, SWP, 2006.Google Scholar

9 Ossewaarde, Marinus, ‘Is het Schrappen van Artikel 23 wel zo Liberaal?’, Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Rechtsfilosofie en Rechtstheorie, 34 (2005), pp. 262–82.Google Scholar

10 Dutch Cabinet, Kabinetsvisie ‘Andere Overheid’, p. 8.Google Scholar

11 Ibid., pp. 2–3.Google Scholar

12 Ibid., pp. 8–9.Google Scholar

13 Dutch Cabinet, Verkenning Burgerschap en Andere Overheid, The Hague, 2005, p. 13.Google Scholar

14 Ibid., p. 16.Google Scholar

15 David Marquand, Decline of the Public: The Hollowing Out of Citizenship, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2004, pp. 27, 53.Google Scholar

16 Leadbeater, Charles, ‘Creating the Public Good’, Political Quarterly, 75 (2004), pp. 88–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Dutch Cabinet, Verkenning Burgerschap en Andere Overheid, p. 10.Google Scholar

18 Marcel Hoogenboom, Standenstrijd en Zekerheid: Een Geschiedenis van Oude orde en Sociale Zorg in Nederland, Amsterdam, Boom, 2004; Ringo Ossewaarde, Maatschappelijke Organisaties: Een Sociologische Inleiding, Amsterdam, Boom, 2006.Google Scholar

19 Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA), ‘Beginselmanifest’, 2005.Google Scholar

20 Dutch Cabinet, Verkenning Burgerschap en Andere Overheid, p. 15.Google Scholar

21 Ibid., p. 17.Google Scholar

22 Ibid., p. 16.Google Scholar

23 Ibid., p. 5.Google Scholar

24 See Rose, Nikolas and Miller, Peter, ‘Political Power Beyond the State: Problematics of Government’, British Journal of Sociology, 43 (1992), p. 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25 Jos Becker, ‘Het burgerschap in de troonredes, 1945–2006’, in Paul Dekker and Joep de Hart (eds), De Goede Burger: Tien Beschouwingen over een Morele Categorie, The Hague, SCP, 2005, p. 67.Google Scholar

26 Onderwijsraad, Onderwijs en Burgerschap, September 2003; Gabriël van den Brink, Schets van een Beschavingsoffensief: Over Normen, Normaliteit en Normalisatie in Nederland, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press, 2004.Google Scholar

27 Bryan S. Turner, ‘Contemporary Problems in the Theory of Citizenship’, in Bryan S. Turner (ed.), Citizenship and Social Theory, London, Sage, 1993, pp. 1–18; Fred Twine, Citizenship and Social Rights: The Interdependence of Self and Society, London, Sage, 1994.Google Scholar

28 Roelof Hortulanus, ‘Burgerschap en Sociaal Beleid’, in R. P. Hortulanus and J. E. M. Machielse (eds), Modern Burgerschap: Het Sociaal Debat, The Hague, Elsevier, 2002, pp. 7–20.Google Scholar

29 Jos Becker, De Steun voor de Verzorgingsstaat in de Publieke Opinie, 1970–2002: Een Analyse van Trends in Meningen, The Hague, SCP, 2005; Wil Arts, Han Entzinger and Ruud Muffels (eds), Verzorgingsstaat Vaar Wel, Assen, Van Gorcum, 2004; Han Entzinger and Jelle van der Meer (eds), Grenzeloze Solidariteit: Naar een Migratiebestendige Verzorgingsstaat, Amsterdam, De Balie, 2004.Google Scholar

30 See also Hansen, Randall and Koehler, Jobst, ‘Issue Definition, Political Discourse and the Politics of Nationality Reform in France and Germany’, European Journal of Political Research, 44 (2005), pp. 623–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31 Dutch Cabinet, Verkenning Burgerschap en Andere Overheid, p. 5.Google Scholar

32 Evelien Tonkens, Mondige Burgers, Getemde Professionals, Utrecht, NIZW, 2003.Google Scholar

33 Strydom, Piet, ‘The Challenge of Responsibility for Sociology’, Current Sociology, 47 (1999), pp. 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 Wieviorka, Michel, ‘The Making of Differences’, International Sociology, 19 (2004), pp. 281–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35 Scheffer, Paul, ‘Het Multiculturele Drama’, NRC Handelsblad, 29 January 2000.Google Scholar

36 Dutch Cabinet, Kabinetsreactie op het rapport Bruggen Bouwen van de Tijdelijke Commissie Onderzoek Integratiebeleid, The Hague, 2004, p. 8.Google Scholar

37 Dutch Ministry of Justice, Jaarnota Integratiebeleid 2004, The Hague, 2004, p. 5.Google Scholar

38 Dutch Cabinet, Kabinetsreactie op het rapport Bruggen Bouwen van de Tijdelijke Commissie Onderzoek Integratiebeleid, p. 1.Google Scholar

39 Turner, Bryan S., ‘Classical Sociology and Cosmopolitanism: A Critical Defence of the Social’, British Journal of Sociology, 57 (2006), pp. 133–51CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; R. Ossewaarde, Maatschappelijke Organisaties.

40 The term allochtoon was introduced in the Dutch language in 1971. Dutch sociologist Hilda Verwey-Jonker coined this term as a replacement for the term ‘immigrant’ in immigration policy. Since the 1990s the word allochtoon is widely used in public opinion, as a replacement for ‘foreigner’, ‘alien’, ‘migrant’, ‘first, second- or third-generation migrant’, ‘immigrant’ or ‘ethnic minority’. Local governments, such as the local government of The Hague, increasingly refuse to employ the term allochtoon; they prefer to refer to ‘the people from The Hague’.Google Scholar

41 Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Regelingsbeleid, Dynamiek in Islamitisch Activisme: Aankopingspunten voor Democratisering en Mensenrechten, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press, 2006; Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Regelingsbeleid, Klassieke Sharia en Vernieuwing, Den Haag, available at www.wrrr.nl; Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Regelingsbeleid, Reformation of Islamic Thought, Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press, 2006. Eurobarometer, 64 (January 2006) reveals that 40 per cent of the Dutch population considers terrorism as one of the most important problems of Dutch society. This percentage is higher than in any other European country.Google Scholar

42 Dick Pels, De Geest van Pim: Het Gedachtegoed van een Politieke Dandy, Amsterdam, Anthos, 2003.Google Scholar

43 Dutch Ministry of Justice, Jaarnota Integratiebeleid 2004, The Hague, 2004, p. 5.Google Scholar

44 Dutch Cabinet, Kabinetsreactie op het rapport Bruggen Bouwen van de Tijdelijke Commissie Onderzoek Integratiebeleid, p. 21.Google Scholar

45 Municipality of Rotterdam, ‘Rotterdamse Burgerschapscode’, 17 January 2006, available at www.Rotterdam.nl.Google Scholar

46 Dutch Integration Minister, Rita Verdonk, has made it clear that she supports the local citizenship codes and would like to implement them on a national level.Google Scholar

47 Anno and IPP, Centrum voor Geschiedenis en Democratie, Projectbeschrijving version 9, 26 October 2005, p. 2.Google Scholar

48 Dutch Cabinet, Kabinetsreactie RMO advies ‘Lokalisering van maatschappelijke ondersteuning’, The Hague, 2005, p. 1.Google Scholar

49 Dutch Ministry of Health Care, Welfare and Sports, Op Weg naar een Bestendig Bestel voor Langdurige Zorg en Maatschappelijke Ondersteuning, The Hague, 2004, p. 10.Google Scholar

50 Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten (VNG), Burgerparticipatie in de Wmo: Handreiking voor Gemeenten, May 2005, p. 5.Google Scholar

51 Dutch Ministry of Health Care, Welfare and Sports, Wet op Jeugdzorg 2005, The Hague, 2005, p. 4.Google Scholar

52 Jeugdzorgbrigade, Eerste Voortgangsrapportage, The Hague, 2005.Google Scholar

53 Dutch Ministry of Health Care, Welfare and Sports, Wet op Jeugdzorg 2005, p. 10.Google Scholar

54 Operatie Jong, Plannen van Aanpak van de 12 Thema's van Operatie Jong, The Hague, 2004, p. 35.Google Scholar

55 When Hirsi Ali confessed in a Dutch television programme that she had actually hidden her real identity (her real name was Hirsi Magan) during her naturalization request in 1992, Verdonk concluded that her Dutch passport could not be valid, and, therefore, she had never been a Dutch citizen.Google Scholar

56 She was actually legally entitled to use the name Hirsi Ali, the name of her grandfather, according to Somalian law. Given this Somalian legal fact, Verdonk concluded that because Hirsi Ali had not lied after all, she could keep her Dutch passport.Google Scholar

57 Lister, Michael, ‘Marshall-ing Social and Political Citizenship: Towards a Unified Conception of Citizenship’, Government and Opposition, 40: 3 (2005), pp. 471–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar