Economic Satisfaction 0.29*** (0.07) Democratic Satisfaction 0.93*** (0.06)
Health Satisfaction 0.37*** (0.06)
Government Satisfaction 0.97*** (0.07)
Religiosity 0.12* (0.05)
Discriminated Group -1.69*** (0.27)
First Generation 0.59 (0.48)
Second Generation -0.04 (0.53)
Political Interest 0.67*** (0.13)
Education 0.02 (0.45)
Female 0.92 (0.24)
Age 0.02* (0.01)
N 2,742
R2 44.36%
Source: ESS Rounds 1-7. Own calculations. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression estimated with country-fixed effects and clustered standard errors, including controls
3 The OGLM models show similar results.
for ESS waves 1-7, not plotted here. Standard errors in parentheses. * = significant at the 0.05 level ** = significant at the 0.01 level *** = significant at the 0.001 level.
Discussion, Further Analysis and Conclusion:
The results as seen in Table 4 show that if European Muslims perceive themselves as part of a discriminated group, they have significantly less trust in domestic institutions. Substantively the coefficient for the
“discriminated group” shows it has one the strongest effects on the trust in institutions. This is a discouraging trend as discrimination can lead to problems in political integration as well political participation of Muslim citizens as shown by the works of Adda et. al. (2016) and Erisen (2017) in the French and American contexts.
Further analysis of the ESS as reported in Table 5 depicts that European Muslims are overall quite trustworthy of domestic institutions. However, it is the perception of being discriminated against that makes European Muslims more skeptical of the government. Future signs do not seem promising, as additional analysis showed that second-generation European Muslim immigrants are more likely to perceive themselves to be part of the discriminated group than first-generation Muslim immigrants, and they are less likely to trust domestic institutions. Currently, most Muslims in Europe as well as in my sample are composed of first generation immigrants, so prospectively trust and feelings of discrimination are likely to worsen.
A recurring theme in this POMEPS series is that there might be significant generational differences in how Muslims respond to conditions in Europe and the USA.
Hall (2018) depicts how a group of second-generation British Muslims engage in the politics of resistance and refusal. Seurat (2018) and Hamming (2018) point out that second-generation Muslim immigrants may reject certain cultural practices of their parents to follow more orthodox forms of Islam. The analysis done for this memo reinforces the generational differences present among Muslim immigrants in the West. Not only are second-generation Muslim immigrants more likely to feel discriminated
against, but they are also significantly less trusting of government institutions.
Table 5: Mean Combined Trust in Domestic Institutions by Religious Denomination
Religious Denomination Trust in EUP (0 to 40 scale)
Protestant 24.30 (n= 36,080)
Eastern Orthodox 17.65 (n= 9,404) Roman Catholic 19.19 (n= 59,162) Other Christian 20.30 (n= 2,253)
Muslim 22.13 (n= 3,172)
Jewish 20.87 (n= 198)
Eastern Religions 21.36 (n= 775) Other Non-Christian
Religion 19.81 (n= 530)
Belonging to No Religion 20.23 (n= 76,687)
Source: ESS Rounds 1-7 (2002-2014).
In conclusion, this essay’s primary finding, that the perception of being discriminated against has a negative effect on trust in political institutions suggests that more needs to be done by the respective European governments and the European Union to reduce feelings of discrimination among its Muslim population. These could be but are not limited to, for example, an increase in mosques and praying spaces for Muslim residents or programs that develop understandings (or remove misconceptions) of Muslim practices such as the wearing of headscarves. Eliminating feelings of discrimination may be crucial in maintaining cordial European Muslim relations with domestic institutions and the society at large.
References
Adda CL, Laitin D and Valfort M (2016) Why Muslim integration fails in Christian-Heritage societies. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Alba R and Nee V (2003) Remaking the American
mainstream: Assimilation and contemporary immigration.
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Alba R, Schmidt P, and Wasmer M. (2003) Ausländer in the Heimat: ethnocentrism in contemporary Germany.
In Germans or Foreigners? Attitudes Toward Ethnic Minorities in Post-Reunification Germany (pp. 1-17). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Astor A. (2011) Mobilizing Against Mosques: The Origins of Opposition to Islamic Centers of Worship in Spain.
(Doctoral Dissertation) University of Michigan: Ann Arbor.
Brehm J and Rahn W (1997) Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science 41(3): 999–1023
Caldwell C (2009) Reflections on the revolution in Europe:
Immigration, Islam, and the West. New York: Doubleday.
Ciftci S (2012) Islamophobia and threat perceptions:
Explaining Anti-Muslim Sentiment in the West. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 32(3): 293-309.
Crowley J (2001) The political participation of ethnic minorities. International Political Science Review/ Revue internationale de science politique 22(1): 99-121.
de la Garza RO, Falcon A and Garcia FC (1996) Will the real Americans please stand up: Anglo and Mexican-American support of core Mexican-American political values.
American Journal of Political Science 40(2): 335–351.
Easton D (1975) A re-assessment of the concept of political support. British Journal of Political Science 5(4): 435-457.
Gibson JL (1997) Mass opposition to the Soviet putsch of August 1991: Collective action, rational choice, and democratic values. American Political Science Review 91(3): 671–684.
Isani M and Schlipphak B (2017) In the EU we trust:
European Muslim attitudes toward the European Union.
European Union Politics 18(4): 658-677.
Joppke C (2013) Legal integration of Islam. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Landman T (2006) Human rights and social exclusion indicators: Concepts, best practices, and methods for implementation. Colchester: University of Essex, Department of Government Human Rights Centre.
Maxwell R (2010a) Trust in government among British Muslims: The importance of migration status. Political Behavior 32(1): 89-109.
Maxwell R (2010b) Evaluating migrant integration: Political attitudes across generations in Europe. International Migration Review 44(1): 25-52.
Maxwell R (2013) The geographic context of political attitudes among migrant-origin individuals in Europe.
World Politics 65(1): 116-155.
Norris P (2002) Democratic phoenix: Political activism worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Putnam RD (1993) Making democracy work. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton.
Röder A and Mühlau P (2011) Discrimination, exclusion and immigrants’ Confidence in public institutions in Europe. European Societies 13(4): 535-557.
Röder A and Mühlau P (2012) Low expectations or different evaluations: What explains immigrants’ high levels of trust in host-country institutions? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 38(5): 777-792.
Sauer B (2009) Headscarf regimes in Europe: Diversity policies at the intersection of gender, culture and religion. Comparative European Politics, 7(1), 75-94.
Seligson MA (2002) The renaissance of political culture or the renaissance of the ecological fallacy. Comparative Politics 34(3): 273–92.
Sidanius J, Pratto F, Van Laar C and Levin S (2004) Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology 25(6): 845-880.
Waters MC (1999) Black identities: West Indian immigrant dreams and American realities. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Welborne, B. C., Westfall, A. L., Russell, Ö. Ç., & Tobin, S.
A. (2018). The Politics of the Headscarf in the United States.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press.