The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society

Preface Introduction: Traditions of Nationhood in France and Germany I. The Institution of Citizenship 1. Citizenship as Social Closure 2. The French Revolution and the Invention of National Citizenship 3. State, State-System, and Citizenship in Germany II. Defining The Citizenry: The Bounds of Belonging 4. Citizenship and Naturalization in France and Germany 5. Migrants into Citizens: The Crystallization of Jus Soli in Late-Nineteenth-Century France 6. The Citizenry as Community of Descent: The Nationalization of Citizenship in Wilhelmine Germany 7. \"Etre Francais, Cela se Merite\": Immigration and the Politics of Citizenship in France in the 1980s 8. Continuities in the German Politics of Citizenship Conclusion Notes Bibliography Index

Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany.

This article explores the social theory and consequent methodology that underpins studies of transnational migration. First, we propose a social field approach to the study of migration and distinguish between ways of being and ways of belonging in that field. Second, we argue that assimilation and enduring transnational ties are neither incompatible nor binary opposites. Third, we highlight social processes and institutions that are routinely obscured by traditional migration scholarship but that become clear when we use a transnational lens. Finally, we locate our approach to migration research within a larger intellectual project, taken up by scholars of transnational processes in many fields, to rethink and reformulate the concept of society such that it is no longer automatically equated with the boundaries of a single nationstate. Social scientists have long been interested in how immigrants are incorporated into new countries. In Germany and France, scholars’ expectations that foreigners will assimilate is a central piece of public policy. In the United States, immigration scholars initially argued that to move up the socioeconomic ladder, immigrants would have to abandon their unique customs, language, values, and homeland ties and identities. Even when remaining ethnic became more acceptable, most researchers assumed that the importance of homeland ties would eventually fade. To be Italian American or Irish American would ultimately reflect ethnic pride within a multicultural United States rather than enduring relations to an ancestral land. Now scholars increasingly recognize that some migrants and their descendants remain strongly influenced by their continuing ties to their home country or by social networks that stretch across national borders. They see

/pdf/conceptualizing-simultaneity-a-transnational-social-field-1g8zn87miw.pdf

Conceptualizing simultaneity: a transnational social field perspective on society

Assimilation theory has been subject to intensive critique for decades. Yet no other framework has provided the social science community with as deep a corpus of cumulative findings concerning the incorporation of immigrants and their descendants. We argue that assimilation theory has not lost its utility for the study of contemporary immigration to the United States. In making our case, we review critically the canonical account of assimilation provided by Milton Gordon and others ; we refer to Shibutani and Kwan's theory of ethnic stratification to suggest some directions to take in reformulating assimilation theory. We also examine some of the arguments frequently made to distinguish between the earlier mass immigration of Europeans and the immigration of the contemporary era and find them to be inconclusive. Finally, we sift through some of the evidence about the socioeconomic and residential assimilation of recent immigrant groups. Though the record is clearly mixed, we find evidence consistent with the view that assimilation is taking place, albeit unevenly

Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration.

Sociological studies sensitive to the issue of place are rarely labeled thus, and at the same time there are far too many of them to fit in this review. It may be a good thing that this research is seldom gathered up as a “sociology of place,” for that could ghettoize the subject as something of interest only to geographers, architects, or environmental historians. The point of this review is to indicate that sociologists have a stake in place no matter what they analyze, or how: The works cited below emplace inequality, difference, power, politics, interaction, community, social movements, deviance, crime, life course, science, identity, memory, history. After a prologue of definitions and methodological ruminations, I ask: How do places come to be the way they are, and how do places matter for social practices and historical change?

A Space for Place in Sociology

Caribbean New York: Black Immigrants and the Politics of Race

The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience

This article examines the debate between key theories of immigrant assimilation by exploring the effect of acculturation types – dissonant, consonant and selective – on socioeconomic outcomes in young adulthood. Drawing on survey data from the Immigrant Second Generation in Metropolitan New York, we show that, while all three types occur, dissonant acculturation is the exception, not the norm, among second-generation young adults. Our results also suggest that neither the type of acculturation nor the level of ethnic embeddedness can account for the variation in mobility patterns both across and within second-generation groups. These findings lead us to question assumptions about the protective effect of selective acculturation and the negative effect of dissonant acculturation.

/pdf/segmented-assimilation-revisited-types-of-acculturation-and-31aulwo0g7.pdf

Segmented Assimilation Revisited: Types of Acculturation and Socioeconomic Mobility in Young Adulthood.

Missing the Connection: Social Isolation and Employment on the

Much of the recent literature on poverty assumes that the social and spatial isolation of impoverished inner city neighborhoods contributes to the poor job prospects of their residents. In this case study we examine a neighborhood, the Red Hook section of Brooklyn, New York, in which there is a concentration of poor people living in close proximity to blue-collar jobs. However, few local residents hold local jobs in the private sector. A survey of local employers revealed that most Red Hook jobs were filled via social networks that exclude local residents. Local residents, particularly African Americans, often lacked the social capital — connections and references — needed to obtain these jobs. Further, many local employers considered Red Hook residents undesirable employees for a variety of reasons including “place discrimination” as well as racial discrimination. By contrast, public sector employers often preferred local residents, although their ability to hire them was limited by formal educational requirements. These findings lead us to question the efficacy of policies, such as “empowerment zones,” that assume that bringing jobs closer to where poor people live will necessarily improve their' employment opportunities.

Philip Kasinitz

Papers

Caribbean New York: Black Immigrants and the Politics of Race

The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience

Segmented Assimilation Revisited: Types of Acculturation and Socioeconomic Mobility in Young Adulthood.

Missing the Connection: Social Isolation and Employment on the

Missing the Connection: Social Isolation and Employment on the Brooklyn Waterfront