Countering radicalisation through higher education

John Hudzik is a NAFSA Senior Fellow and has contributed an essay to NAFSA’s International Education in a Time of Global Disruption report. The following is an edited critique of Bernhard Streitwieser’s essay in the same report on migration and the tendency to portray immigrants and asylum-seekers as threats to national security. Streitwieser argues that migrants and refugees have a place in international education and are vital for social integration.

Radicalisation is the adoption of increasingly extreme positions on one or more issues. This can occur in highly homogenous societies or in very diverse ones, such as the United States and other countries.

Threats to social stability, dialogue and compromise in diverse societies arise when polar positions align on numerous reinforcing dimensions. Seymour Martin Lipset (the famed mid-20th century political sociologist) held that the absence of ‘cross-cutting cleavages’ polarises core beliefs and behaviours across various groups of people.

Cross-cutting cleavages occur when differences exist within groups. For example, within the group ‘American’ there are cleavages of individuals of various socio-economic statuses. Intragroup diversity enables diverse groups to more productively engage on other dimensions, such as socio-economic status.

Lipset would see diversity in a society as a strength, but only if accompanied by cross-cutting cleavages. A flow of immigrants enriches diversity and renews societies by challenging the status quo. The melting pot concept combines cultural diversity and cultural assimilation, yet ideally preserves aspects of each (for example, African American, Asian American, Italian American or Muslim American).

Without cross-cutting cleavages, the viewpoint, ‘You are either with us or against us’, is not only directed from one polar extreme to another but is also directed at those occupying the middle (centrist) ground.

For those in the polar extremes, the middle ground is equally anathematic because it is seen as intellectually vacuous and without the purity and stability of ‘my’ core values. This mentality tends to empty the middle ground of dialogue (the arena for compromise).

Is the absence of cross-cutting cleavages one reason why a comprehensive immigration policy eludes many societies? Immigration can compound the problems of polarisation and the absence of cross-cutting cleavages by reinforcing for some people linguistic, racial and other differences that make immigrants ‘not like us’.

The role of higher education

I agree with Bernhard Streitwieser that immigrants’ and refugees’ access to education, particularly higher education, is critical to finding balance and place within a knowledge society. Denying them access to basic social and economic opportunity perpetuates their isolation. Consequences can be onerous: ghettoes, ongoing social and political ostracism and persecution, a permanent ethnic underclass, their radicalisation, or mass deportations and the ultimate sin against humanity – ethnic cleansing.

Immigration is a renewing force in societies, but only if some balance can be achieved between assimilation and preservation of diversity. Radicalisation is the bane of diversity and tolerance.

Radicalised divisions in societies can force social minorities and dispossessed individuals to migrate across borders. In a polarised receiving society where significant parts of the population are under economic and cultural threats, an influx of immigrants and refugees is rocket fuel for populist demagoguery and a convenient scapegoat for invoking threats to safety and security.

Immigration is a great challenge because it isn’t just about immigration. Divisive ideological, political and social divides continue to ensnare the search for solutions to polarisation and other contemporary threats to an inclusive society.

While radicalisation is not simply the cause of anti-immigrant sentiments and policies of demagogues, radicalisation and the absence of cross-cutting cleavages make finding solutions exceedingly problematic at best.

Dr John K Hudzik serves as chair of the NAFSA Senior Fellows for Internationalisation and professor of criminal justice at Michigan State University (MSU) in the United States. From 1995 to 2010, he was dean of International Studies and Programs at MSU, served as vice president for global engagement and strategic projects, and was acting provost and vice president of academic affairs. Hudzik is past president and chair of the board of directors at NAFSA and past president of the Association of International Education Administrators.

The opinions expressed by the Senior Fellows are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of NAFSA: Association of International Educators. NAFSA’s International Education in a Time of Global Disruption report is available free to non-members here.