Bright vs. blurred boundaries: Second-generation assimilation and exclusion in France, Germany, and the United States

TLDR

Immigration societies impose a social distinction between immigrant/second-generation groups and natives, creating a complex fault line. By comparing second-generation Mexicans, North Africans, and Turks, the study argues that bright versus blurred boundaries best explain assimilation and exclusion outcomes. Boundaries are institutionalized across citizenship, religion, language, and race. Blurred boundaries characterize U.S.

Abstract

In all immigration societies, a social distinction between immigrant and second generations, on the one hand, and natives, on the other, is imposed by the ethnic majority and becomes a sociologically complex fault line. Building on a comparison of second-generation Mexicans in the U.S., North Africans in France, and Turks in Germany, this article argues that the concepts associated with boundary processes offer the best opportunity to understand the ramifications of this distinction. The difference between bright boundaries, which involve no ambiguity about membership, and blurred ones, which do, is hypothesized to be associated with the prospects and processes of assimilation and exclusion. The institutionalization of boundaries is examined in the key domains of citizenship, religion, language, and race. The analysis leads to the specific conclusion that blurred boundaries generally characterize the situation of Mexicans in the U.S., with race the great, albeit not well understood, exception, while bright boundaries characterize the European context for Muslim groups.