# data[].attributes.body
An example of danish nationalism is their love for cake and how it relates to hygee, because Danes like to take a break from life's pressures and cherish moments with loved ones. It is part of their culture and overall sense of nationalism. - Ella and bridget

# data[].attributes.body
Each of us have attended a dinner at Folkehuset Absalon and felt this was a prime example of fostering belonging in a larger setting, well incorporated to the community, as a opposed to targeted to a specific group like DFunk and other refugee oriented community programs.

# data[].attributes.body
Many people demonstrate "being Danish" by displaying the national flag.

# data[].attributes.body
The speakers from DFunk helped encourage both doing and feeling belonging by developing shared experiences and a sense of community through shared interest within groups of young refugees in Denmark. The act of sports, creative expression and shared dinners helps to foster belonging in a productive way that would fit within Bennett's construct of belonging.

# data[].attributes.body
Rytter discusses the “host and guests” metaphor, where immigrants are expected to behave like guests in Denmark. How do these kinds of metaphors shape the way people think about who belongs in a society?

The idea of Danes as an “indigenous people” is used to justify stricter immigration policies. Have you encountered similar arguments in other countries? How do such claims affect immigration debates?

Can we ever have a neutral discussion about integration, or is the term inherently political? What would a depoliticized discussion on migration and belonging look like?

- Melisa

# data[].attributes.body
The image of Norrebro, Copenhagen, captures a lively and diverse neighborhood where people from various cultural backgrounds interact in a shared urban space. This scene reflects the themese discussed in Mikkel Rytter's article, which explores the complexities of intergration, national identity, and multicultalism in Denmark.

In the photograph, the blending of Danish symbols—such as architecture and signage—with international influences—like diverse shops, restaurants, and residents—illustrates the coexistence of different cultural narratives within Danish society. This aligns with Rytter’s argument about how integration is often framed in Denmark, where belonging is not merely about residency or legal status but also about cultural conformity and perceptions of ‘Danishness.’

The image also raises questions about the challenges and tensions surrounding multiculturalism. While it presents a seemingly harmonious coexistence, it also highlights the societal debates on who gets to belong and how minority communities navigate their identities in a predominantly Danish framework. The bustling nature of the scene suggests resilience and agency among minority groups, emphasizing how spaces like Nørrebro become sites of cultural negotiation and hybrid identities.

This photograph serves as a powerful visual representation of the ideas in Rytter’s work, illustrating both the opportunities and challenges that arise in Denmark’s approach to integration, race, and national belonging.

-Mia

# data[].attributes.body
"The status of integration as an open signifier with fuzzy qualities that simultaneously refers to both means and ends makes it all the more flexible and effective in Danish discourses when someone (from the majority) wants to do something to someone else (from the minority). (Rhytter 682)

"However, integration is not something immigrants in Denmark can choose or benefit from. The potential and possibilities identified by Brubaker and Sahlins with regard to 'Muslim' and 'culture' (and here I deliberately neglect all the problems they also identify and discuss) are not in evidence when it comes to integration. Integration is solely the vocabulary of power, a prerogative of the nation-state and the indigenous majority population that, intentionally or not, tends to objectify, stigmatist and exclude Muslim immigrants from the Danish social imaginary of the nation-state and its population." (Rytter 692)

These two quotes make me think about the meaning behind integration and the use of it itself. Integration is a fuzzy word that changes based on the context of the "other", and at the same time is already problematized for creating a binary. Writing against integration, similar to Abu-Lughod's writing against culture is an assertive way to emphasize the change that needs to occur when discussing integration and from a theoretical perspective.

-Swetha Kesavan

# data[].attributes.body
Question 1: If integration is a political tool rather than an objective process, should we abandon the concept altogether? What alternative frameworks could be used to address diversity and inclusion?

Question 2: How could the concepts of "welfare reciprocity", "host and guests", and "Danes as an indigenous people" shape public policies and attitudes toward immigrants in Denmark?

-Adalia Falvey

# data[].attributes.body
Benedict Anderson argues that "Imagined Communities" are key social constructs. For instance, many nations are "imagined" because people while maybe geographically somewhat close, never meet but feel as though they know one another due to some type of connection. These types of connections are defined as "limited" , "sovereign" and "community" based.

limited: borders/ reinforcing the us vs them narrative

sovereign: related to tradition and religious forms of autonomy

community: deep/horizontal comradery (ex: soldiers in war despite inequalities)

I personally see myself in these "imagined communities" as an Asian American from the Bay which is noticeable in my own day to day sense of belonging . This community exists wherever I go from college to studying abroad in Europe where I unconsciously seek out those with similar vibes just to find out that they're like minutes away from my hometown. It became so common, that I lost my shock factor, but have this underlying sense of "deep horizontal" camaraderie. We have similar lived experiences and therefore I feel like we understand one another even if we never really met before. For instance, growing up learning two languages, attending a mostly Asian competitive high school , or eating similar foods really contribute to this sense of belonging.

Reena

# data[].attributes.body
Anderson’s chapter is all about nationalism and how it is been made out of “imagination.” This delved into how nationalism and nation came about in an age of human evolution where humans were getting away from the age of “destroying” and “fighting” ideas of the church into a life of theoretical thinking. Anderson argues things about the nation are imagined as limited, sovereign, and communities because you realistically can not have any of these three in the complete sense of the world. A nation is limited because there will never be a time when everyone in the world or even on the same plot of land will fall into the same ideals. Leading to questions of whether you can have a national identity without everyone agreeing. Is it fair to have a national way of thinking while marginalizing people? These are things that Anderson tackles on why a nation is limited because humans tend not to agree on everything, leading to limiting those who fall into categories. Sovereignty, is there any place in the world where people are truly free? Anderson attacks the idea of nations being sovereign because it is about being free, yet nationalism is not a freeing thing. When thinking of nationalism, the people who fall into the group are expected to act, agree with, and live the ideals of the nation, so all people did was remove religion to have the ideas of a nation take its place. So sovereignty is an imagined thing in the sense that freedom does not exist in the context that sovereignty is “supposed” to do. Lastly, we have communities related to the nation being invisible because the issue arises of whether people are acting in such a way that communities would. It’s imagined as a community because everyone can’t know everyone, but people have to make up the idea that people have similar thoughts and beliefs when they think of a nation. Anderson addresses a lot of what he thinks nationalism is and how it came about. The imagined part of the chapter was to challenge the readers on the ideas we grow up with somewhat inherently and see that, in reality, these things are not so clear.

~ Alyssa Santiago

# data[].attributes.body
Mila Teshaieva's collection Imagined Communities captures moments of individuals navigating life during pivotal events in which the community or bond they belong to is being challenged or redefined. One subsection, "Promising Waters," explores the fall of the Soviet Union. In one anecdote, Teshaieva recalls a driver in Turkmenistan who couldn't read road signs because the alphabet had changed 20 years ago. She explains, "I want to tell about societies that have lost direction but try to find the way, despite not being able to read signs." Her work highlights the struggle of these societies as they try to find their way in a time of change. This link shows and explains several pieces from her collection, illustrating how people in these regions are personally navigating times of change, when their sense of belonging is being reimagined.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the browser console for more information).

# data[].attributes.body
Anderson analyzes nationalism to explore how a nation forms a semblance of community. He discusses how nations are defined by their "imagined" communities, where people have connections to these groups without having to have interpersonal relationships (Anderson, 6). There are limitations and sovereignty that people follow, but these 'rules' are socially constructed by a community that chooses to adhere to them. Making this decision then means that people are opting in to be a part of this 'in-group' (Anderson, 7). Anderson points out that while people in a community may never meet each other, they share a sense of connection and commonality that centers them into the same group.

"It is an imagined political community - and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign" (Anderson, 6).

"Communities are to be distinguished, not by their falsity/genuineness, but by the style in which they are imagined." (Anderson, 6).

# data[].attributes.body
Andersen explains the phenomenon within imagined communities where you feel a "deep, horizontal comradeship" (7)– one so powerful that millions die for the imagined nation and its ideals. Despite the fact that millions of citizens in a given nation will never meet each other, they are united under their imagined community.

When, whether consciously or unconsciously, have you felt this sense of connection and comradeship with your fellow citizens? What practices (on a micro or macro level) reinforce nationalistic feelings? Do you see any similarities or differences between your home country and Denmark?

-Tiana

# data[].attributes.body
Belonging is a multidimensional concept, but a basic human need. Bennett specifically defines belonging as a three dimensional idea: it has historical connections, which are tied to historical or imagined places; social connections, based on involved intersubjective communities; and geographical connections, which are the material aspects of a place. There are many definitions of belonging, but this is the interpretation of belonging Bennett used in her research. Outside of her research, Bennett notes the emotional weight of the idea of "belonging," and it's positive correlation with moral goodness. Bennett also notes that the action of belonging can occur without having the feeling of belonging.

What is a definition of belonging that makes the most sense to you? Is Bennett missing anything, from a non-research perspective, when she talks about belonging?

Kate Gregory

# data[].attributes.body
“Like gender, race and class, place is

the outcome of social processes – it is not fixed but is changeable and defined

relationally.” (Bennett, 52)

“I argue that belonging (or not) to/in place is a part of ‘who we are’, identity, in a

similar way to gender, race and class. I know who ‘I’ am, my identity, the group

with whom I identify, through having myself reflected back at me when I look

around me; where this does not happen I am ‘out of place’… If new people come into a place then the reflections the original inhabitants see will

change. The new people are likely to be identified as ‘other’ but over time some

‘ways of doing things’ will merge together. This is not a conscious exclusion of the

‘other’ but rather a way of securing my/our identity.” (Bennett, 54)

Bennett asserts that “place” is typically defined by what separates it from the other, however this does not mean that it cannot be changed and transformed. Our identities are tied to where we are from, but when new people move into our “place” we often adapt socially.

-Rhys Fricker

# data[].attributes.body
Question 1: Bennett states that belonging to a community comes from the intersectionality of "body, place, and action". She reveals that belonging is not simply a feeling or an action that constitutes belonging to a community. With this in mind, what are some experiences in your own life where you tried to fit into a community and do the actions that locals do, yet felt that you still did not belong in the place?

Question 2: What are some of the things that you think are the most important factors for belonging? Do you believe that a shared history amongst people is a very big part of belonging to a certain community?

-Katya Spajic

# data[].attributes.body
Jones argues that the term identity is too restrictive and fails to capture the complex intersectionality of our existence. Our sense of belonging is both singular and collective, constantly changing beyong fixed boundaries. Thus, if identity lacks the nuance to truly represent this complexity, how can we instead use notions of belonging to foster solidarity in a method that seeks both self and collective liberation?

- Victoria Veak

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Frida Kahlo, "Self Portrait Along the Boarder Line Between Mexico and the United States." (1932)

# data[].attributes.body
Kahlo wrestles with identity and belonging in this self-portrait, and she is pictured on the border of the two countries she spent much of her time in: Mexico and the US. On each side, she paints the representative objects and themes that reflect where she feels she belongs. Not only does this piece manifest Jones et al.'s point that identity is too simplistic, but it also shows that belonging is a layered struggle when experiencing migration or straddling two cultures.

Anya Kalucki

# data[].attributes.body
According to the text, the "theory of belonging" represents how identify is constructed through both internal and external forces. As the reading explains, "identities are constructed, both ‘internally’ – by us through our self (re)presentation and alignment with others – and externally – by the powerful ‘other’, such as
institutional gatekeepers who can set threshold criteria for entry to groups either through membership in a formal sense (such as with citizenship requirements, or in less formal or symbolic ‘everyday’ ways). (Jones, p. 44-45). I also included an image demonstrating the theory as represented on page 45. This theory of belonging is important in understanding the relationship between one's personal identity and their collective identity, as one's sense of belonging may not fit along the paradigm of their collective identity. I think the key terms embedded in the theory of belonging, personal and collective identity, are critical in understanding Jones' main argument.

Sam Pokorny

# data[].attributes.body
The author clarifies that the dismissal of identity is inappropriate. Understanding what identity means and how it develops is important when addressing the matter.

Jones identifies belonging as "the relationship between personal and a collective identity."

"Vitally then, belonging can be considered a process whereby an individual in some way feels some sense of association with a group, and as such represents a way to explain the relationship between a personalized identity and a collective one."

Identity is often seen as a fixed category.

Belonging is more fluid and dynamic.

Jack Smith

# data[].attributes.body
Jones emphasizes that identities are not "hermetically sealed," internally consistent entities which exclude other identities, and how viewing them as such is "crude and reductionist." The article notes how specifically, viewing the 'migrant' identity through this "undifferentiated" lens overshadows huge diversity within the community, and questions whether the overarching category/status of a "migrant is inherently...reductionist".

Do you agree with these statements? If so, what would be a better alternative way to encompass the experiences, complexity and diversity of migrant individuals into a descriptive term?

How could the flexibility and contextual nature of 'belonging' discussed in this article -- as opposed to undifferentiated 'identity' -- be incorporated into terms categorizing migrants?

Priya Natarajan

# data[].attributes.body
Question 1: The author says that both ethnic identification and nationalism are an everyday matter for people. What are some ways that you can see ethnic identification and nationalism in your daily life? Does one seem to play a larger role in your daily actions?

Question 2: How does identification both separate us as individuals and bring us together as collectives?

# data[].attributes.body
"It is identification on the basis of membership of collectivities that are differentiated from each other by shared 'ways of life' or 'culture'..." (Jenkins 3).

Jenkins elaborates that ethnicity acknowledges cultural differences like language, beliefs, and customs that characterize a specific group. These distinctions are important because physical identifiers like race can conflate the interests of people based on skin color despite people having unrelated backgrounds.

"Ethnic identification is simultaneously individual and collective" (Jenkins 4).

In other words, one's personal identity impacts their belonging to a certain ethnic group.

# data[].attributes.body
As an example, we practice "being Danish" all the time in our everyday lives here. Using the Netto to buy groceries and saying "tak" instead of "thank you" is one example. Another example is not j-walking because that is a very big thing in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.headline
What does the author mean by 'everyday life'? How does this concept influence our understanding of ethnicity?

# data[].attributes.subject
What does the author mean by 'everyday life'? How does this concept influence our understanding of ethnicity?

# data[].attributes.body
"Taken for granted worldviews, unruly emotions, personal and shared histories, experience of advantage and disadvantage, the formal categories and practices of government and bureaucracy, and the influences of ideology, these all contribute to how people, individually and collectively, define and understand who they are and what their interests are, and how they identify others and their interests" (Jenkins 10)

# data[].attributes.headline
How does ethnicity help to understand history and historical events? 

# data[].attributes.subject
How does ethnicity help to understand history and historical events? 

# data[].attributes.body
"Ethnicity locates people in time". An example of this is migration throughout history. As societies began to form identifying how certain people lived allowed for a timeline to be created. Creating an identity of people allowed for "a social map of relationships" that gave way to defining historical events.

# data[].attributes.body
"Identification is something that people do, rather than ‘have,’ and it is therefore not fixed” (p 10)

# data[].attributes.headline
What do you think when you hear the term ethnicity? (word association, definition, etc.)

# data[].attributes.subject
What do you think when you hear the term ethnicity? (word association, definition, etc.)

# data[].attributes.headline
Is being Danish, Swedish, American, etc. something we do? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Is being Danish, Swedish, American, etc. something we do? 