3. MIGRATION LITERATURE – SOCIAL, LITERARY AND EDUCATIONAL ASPECTS
3.2 Issues of integration
In his article ‟Doppelsprachige Analphabeten: Junge Migranten ohne Schulabschluss und Berufsausbildung‟, Mavromati (2003) explains:
Jetzt rächt es sich, dass Deutschland zur Deckung eines kurzfristigen Bedarfs an Arbeitskräften Millionen von „Gastarbeitern“ ins Land holte und sich nicht um deren Weiterbildung kümmerte. Und dass auch die Migranten selbst sich nicht darum kümmerten. [...] Die „Gäste“ fragten sich nicht ohne Grund, warum sie sich in eine Gesellschaft einordnen sollten, wo sie doch ohnehin bald in ihre Heimat zurückkehren würden. Aber sie blieben. Die Kinder der Migranten bezahlen heute die Zeche. Sie werden eingeschult, ohne richtig Deutsch sprechen zu können. Und da die meisten von ihnen in Stadtteilen wie Neukölln, Kreuzberg oder in Wedding wohnen, kommen sie in Grundschulklassen, in denen deutsche Schüler kaum anzutreffen sind. So bleiben sie noch immer unter sich. (Mavromati 2003: 45)
As a result, only one in ten second or third generation immigrant graduates from school with Abitur (A-level) (compared to one in four Germans). Hauptschule (responsible for basic education in the German three tiered system) remains the only option for most of these students, and 20 per cent do not even graduate here. Two out of five students under 30 with migration backgrounds remain without vocational training. Professional qualifications are, however, one of the main prerequisites for successful integration. (Mavromati 2003: 45)
Lack of education and training, lack of job opportunities and lack of a sense of belonging manifest themselves in low-income housing projects and the accompanying problems of unemployment and crime. Associated with this set of problems are also fundamentalist tendencies. Köstlin (2000: 373) explains that it is the loss of ideals at the core of one‟s cultural identity that leads to the formation of fundamentalist groups, such as the right-winged German NPD (Nationale Partei Deutschland) or political Islamists. Reducing one‟s worldview to what is perceived as cultural essentials usually signifies a lost sense of security and confidence. Group identity of some kind is then chosen as a way to regain a sense of belonging. While the German right-wing appears to be struggling not only with unemployment, lack of qualifications and a perceived lack of social acceptance, but also with a generally increasing social
complexity, many foreign immigrants have the additional problem of being officially (in the legal sense) sidelined.
It may partly be due to the Germans‟ lack of a sense of a national self that makes it so difficult for them to become a self assured partner in dialogue: “It is characteristic of the Germans that the question “what is German?” never dies out among them,” wrote Friedrich Nietzsche in 1886. (Nietzsche 2003: 174) Whilst doubting oneself may be an integral part of defining oneself, the Germans owe it to those they invited in times of economic need to treat them as human beings.
Doch bis heute sind sich die Bundesbürger nicht sicher, was sie von ihren ausländischen Mitbürgern verlangen dürfen. Sie tun sich schwer damit, Anforderungen zu formulieren oder auch nur Erwartungen zu äußern. Sie wollen sich nicht den Vorwurf einhandeln, intolerant zu sein. [...] Und was ist eigentlich deutsch? Wenn die Deutschen es denn selber wüssten. Auch das zeigt ja der Streit über die Einbürgerung: So unsicher die Bundesbürger im Umgang mit den Fremden in ihrer Mitte sind, so unklar ist ihr Selbstbild.
(Fleischhauer and Hujer 2006: 22-23)
German-Turkish writer Feridun Zaimoglu (2007) echoes these sentiments as he comments on the uncritical attitude of German tourists when confronted with foreign cultural phenomena: “Ach ihr, meine lieben Landsleute, ihr Deutschen, wenn ihr nur lernen könntet, etwas mehr Selbstvertrauen aufzubringen: Ihr seid einfach viel zu nett.” (Zaimoglu 2007: 134) Encouraging people to be critical without being judgmental and accepting without being indifferent reflects the discussion on the requirements of successful dialogue in the previous chapter. Living in the “practical actuality of freedom” means that previously oppressed voices (including those inhibited by collective German guilt regarding the past) regain a sense of free cultural self-realization and are thus put in a position to enter into dialogue as equal and self- confident partners. German liberalism seems so far to have missed this opportunity to engage. Its position in dialogue has offered little more than a rejection of inappropriate patriotism and a concept of tolerance that encouraged multicultural co- existence. Some may warn that any kind of national pride in Germany is a dangerous
notion; at the same time, the 2006 soccer world cup has been hailed as a way of combining cultural confidence and intercultural engagement.
Managing diversity without displaying any form of domination is a challenge. It means, among other things, creating equal opportunities while leaving cultural identities intact, as well as recognizing otherness in a positive sense and expecting to benefit from its input. People need a chance at integration, not as nondescript entities but in recognition of their intercultural competence, as Mavromati (2003) put it:
“Ernsthaftere Überlegungen richteten sich auch darauf, endlich die interkulturelle Komptenz junger Migranten anzuerkennen.“ (Mavromati 2003: 46)19
Moving from a social to the individual level, Dayıoglu (2004) describes integrity as wholeness resulting from the integration of the various parts of an individual‟s identity: “Integrität beschreibt den Zustand der Ganzheit, der in Folge der Integration von Teilen eintritt.“ (Dayıoglu 2004: 105) She further suggests that it is not important to determine who you are, but to be able to integrate parts of your identity in such a way that whilst interacting with different groups, you always remain and act as one and the same person: „Es geht also nicht darum, festzulegen, wer man ist, sondern Teilidentitäten so zu integrieren, daß man sich in Interaktion mit verschiedendsten Guppen noch als dieselbe Person begreift.“ (Dayıoglu 2004: 109) Migration can lead to a fragmentation of one‟s identity and it is thus up to the individual to work out a coherent and self-determined autonomy. This interpretation of individual integrity forms the basis for understanding the often fragmentary and hybrid character of protagonists in migration literature.
In my view, the need to build a (hybrid) identity from fragments and to retain one‟s autonomy at the same time is a difficult task. Hybrid identities are new identities that are often without concrete role models. At the same time, such identities will participate in shaping the future of society. The complex task of shaping one‟s identity by integrating various life experiences (through time and space) into a coherent whole as well as integrating into wider society, can easily result in an identity crisis. The state is required to foster „new‟ individuals, not demand that
19 One such initiative can be followed on www.vielfalt-als-chance.de
aspects of anyone‟s identity be relinquished. At the same time, integration into wider society is crucial. One of the most poignant examples of what happens when we give up on the demand to integrate in order to „allow the stranger to remain a stranger‟ is that of honour killings and forced marriages. Such incidences cannot simply remain a
„Turkish issue‟ within a constitutional state. Chapter 5 discusses some of these problems as part of women‟s issues in migration literature.