Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to formulate a number of critical reflections about the way in which the Dutch ethnolinguistic identification problem is currently approached. That approach gradually claims the authority of self-evidence, so that fewer questions are asked as to the presuppositions and mental frames which are often unconsciously adopted. Not only does this seem disadvantageous to a better understanding of the problem, but it can also exert a detrimental influence on the possibility of solving similar problems, since alternative policies are hampered, right from the start by a stereotype approach. Attention is paid primarily to the way in which Dutch-speaking cultural identification is formulated in the course of the political discourse. Conspicious are, apart from the frequent use of concepts such as the Flemish "nature", the Flemish "identity" or the Flemish "character", the static and over-simplified opposition of the conscious to the unconscious Fleming and the strong accent on the importance of the assigned linguistic - ethnical group. Such political statements share the view of a structurally determined image of the active individual. It is striking however, that the scarce sociological thinking on the Dutch speaking linguistic - ethnical identification process suffers from the same disease. From a short discription of L. Huyse’s and A. Roosens' work it becomes evident that neither the paradigm of "pacification-democracy" (in the broad sense) nor the paradigm of "class-analyses" conclusively answers the fundamental question of how the ethnical dimension is experienced by the population itself. An alternative and new approach to ethnolinguistic problems thus imposes itself. The last part of this report offers a number of elements that could contribute to the start of such an alternative approach. To this end, an extensive use of the most recent sociological literature in the fields of ethnic relations was made. The final result does not only aim at a broader discussion of the Belgian "community" problem but it also asks some pressing questions about the role of sociology in that discussions.

How to Cite:

Louckx, F., (1981) “De culturele identificatieproblematiek in het nederlandstalig politiek en wetenschappelijk discours: sociologische analyse van een reductionistisch vertoog”, Tijdschrift voor Sociologie 2(3-4), 159–198. doi: https://doi.org/10.21825/sociologos.85795