Every time I hear or read the expression “® immigrants Second generación” makes me want to take the suitcase and run away. How will my mood today, after reading the Valencian Generalitat prepares a plan 3G against xenophobia. 3G, mean 3 generations of immigrants. Parents, hij niet @ s and @ s. Desolate, so am.

First things first: immigration is not genetics, ni is fungible, not a position or a title: can not inherit.In fact, not even a state, not a quality of the person: is a process. It starts when a person raises their future in a different place that is born,persists during the move and ends when that person's life migrated is not determined by this process, when the process is no longer central, but a circumstance more in their life history. So my recommendation is always talking about “person in the migration process” (“migration processes persons”) during the time of the process, and citizen / a after completion. Citizens and citizen, irrespective of place of birth, color, of religion…

For the process to be given by closed three factors are needed: the person want close the process and not remain anchored in the shifting identity; the person can close, has the resources to do psychosocial, and the host society will allows close.

When we call someone for life immigrant ® we are enclosing a self-perpetuating process. When we call their descendants immigrants ®, hij niet @ s and @ s! we are denying them full citizenship to people born, grown and educated in the country that discriminates. It is more, we're forced to identify more with family past with a present social (Do you sound the cars burned in the French suburbs?).

Create plans against xenophobia towards a third generation is absurd pasmante: xenophobic just that someone needs to consider 6 Surname “pure” to be considered full-fledged national.

And there are still two outstanding issues: the first, These expressions eliminate the pairs map “de Pasaport different” (also called the “mixed pairs”). The second, this idea is in the myth of national identity invariable, eternal and, likely, unsurpassable. An identity that is neither feed nor anyone else is food: dead and useless, Without going any further.

Delighted to throw these threads in future posts, but there is an urgent issue that gnaws at me: conditions labor the pizza delivery now go down the street in town is prohibited by law jar.

PD: For if you know little, I leave an article linked above, also on citizenship of dubious quality (here).

(c) The Guardian - Alamy

In response to recent posts Immigration, my friendEduardo Retamero sent us this delightful: a Guardian article that makes clear that the British community resident in Spain has no intention of joining.

To move forward we should agree on the term “integration”. The previous post is illustrated with a cartoon of The Broken representing two immigrants dancing the jota. No need to get to that end: or maybe learn the local languages ​​and what could be considered a good indication “integration”.

(c) Sofia Servando Baig

When we talk about not talking about immigration veil: Essentially we are talking about.

In a speech in perpetual construction Us, a hijab should not be any more strange or more threatening than a dress fallera.

Some time ago I was invited to a conference on multiculturalism and gender organized at the Faculty of Pedagogy in Barcelona Gredidona.

It was, in my case, speaking of hijab (Muslim veil).

The theme of veil appears repeatedly in our conversations, in our news, in our political debate. And we just solved it wrong we put debate.

We talked about the veil and Immigration. The veil as a foreign element that has just arrived “our” country (if there is one country, I would say Jaume Sisa). One element that must decide if we incorporate into our world, in the.

If the debate is this, what to enter “our” country, defining what we are is who we are opposed.