Department of Sociology, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
Br J Sociol. 2010 Dec;61(4):696-715. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-4446.2010.01337.x.
In this article the recent transformations of citizenship in the Netherlands are analysed in relation to a developing form of governmentality. We regard citizenship as a state regulated technique of in- and exclusion and a crucial instrument in the management of populations. Taking the Dutch contexts of immigration and integration as our case, we argue that cultural assimilationism and neo-liberalism appear in a double helix: they combine to form a new governmental strategy we call neo-liberal communitarianism. Neo-liberal communitarianism is the underlying rationale of a population management that operates both in an individualizing (citizenship as individual participation and responsibility) and a de-individualizing way ('community' at various aggregate and localized levels as frame of 'integration'). It thus combines a communitarian care of a Dutch culturally grounded national community - conceived as traditionally'enlightened' and 'liberal'- with a neo-liberal emphasis on the individual's responsibility to achieve membership of that community. 'Community' is thereby selectively seen as mobilized and present (when immigrant integration is concerned) or as latently present and still in need of mobilization (when indigenous Dutch are concerned). Concomitantly, a repressive responsibilization and a facilitative responsibilization are aimed at these two governmentally differentiated populations.
本文分析了荷兰公民身份的最新转变与不断发展的治理形式之间的关系。我们将公民身份视为一种国家监管的包容和排斥手段，以及人口管理的关键工具。以荷兰的移民和融合背景为案例，我们认为文化同化主义和新自由主义以双重螺旋的形式出现：它们结合在一起，形成了我们称之为新自由主义社群主义的新治理策略。新自由主义社群主义是一种人口管理的基本原理，它以个体化（公民身份作为个人的参与和责任）和去个体化（各种聚合和本地化层面的“社区”作为“融合”的框架）的方式运作。因此，它将荷兰文化基础的民族社区的社群关怀——被认为是传统上的“开明”和“自由”——与新自由主义对个人实现社区成员资格的责任的强调结合起来。“社区”因此被选择性地视为动员和存在的（当涉及移民融合时），或者是潜在存在的，仍需要动员（当涉及土生土长的荷兰人时）。相应地，针对这两个在治理上有区别的群体，采取了压制性的责任化和促进性的责任化措施。
