Since the 1980s, the countries of the (then) European Community (EC) 1 engaged in joint policymaking in an area that was not initially an EC competence 2 : policies on various aspects of immigration by third-country nationals (i.e., nationals of states other than those of the European Union) and on granting asylum or, more generally, other forms of international protection. At the same time, Greece, where these two policy areas were of low priority, became a country of destination for immigrants, the vast majority of whom entered the country illegally, and a transit country for people who either wanted to move to another European Union (EU) member state or were in need of international protection. The gradual convergence of member states' domestic policies on immigration and asylum toward a common EU-wide legislative framework had a major effect on Greek policies and represents a significant case study of " Europeanization " in policymaking. This article examines the parallel development of policies and practices in these two areas at the Greek and EU levels, from both legislative and policymaking angles. It analyzes the particularities of Greek immigration and asylum realities and political priorities, compares developments in the country with those in the rest of Europe and inside the EU institutions, and draws conclusions as to the effects on Greek policies of the progressive framing of common EU policies in regard to the process of Europeanization.

In this paper, we analyse discourses about Europe in Greek debates about immigration and citizenship and highlight the complexities of ‘Europeanness’ as a symbolic resource for argumentation in these debates. Our data consist of lay discourses from two rounds of online public deliberation (2009/2010 and 2015) about a controversial new citizenship law in Greece. Our analysis shows that Europe is an ambivalent category. On the one hand, Europe symbolises progress, but, on the other hand, it is also constructed in terms of decline and ‘contamination’ by multiculturalism. Further, our analysis shows that the category of Europe can be mobilised in contradictory ways, in order to support arguments for and against citizenship rights for migrants. The paper concludes with a discussion of the ways in which constructions of Europe are implicated in processes of othering and inclusion in the context of current immigration debates.

The term “Fortress Europe” has been used frequently in the debates on European integration in immigration and asylum issues. “Fortress Europe” is used above all to criticise European policy developments as being overtly exclusionist against non-EU citizens who aspire to migrate to the member-states of the EU. The critics of EU policies stress that the latter inflict a high price in terms of universal human rights violations and racism, while they often fail to deliver their declared policy aims. Yet, away from the spotlights of academic research and public opinion, common EU norms may promote the liberalisation of immigration policies in the EU memberstates. The reason for this effect is to be found in the dual character of EU immigration policies. Notwithstanding the bias in favour of immigration controls, the EU framework of cooperation has also included a secondary attention to the integration of third-country nationals who already reside in the member-states. The participation of “new” countries of immigration in the process of establishing a common EU immigration policy exposed them to different gears of policy developments in Europe. Specifically, the adoption of common binding EU norms provided for a transmission belt of policies and priorities of “older” immigration countries across time and space. In the case of Greece, the dual EU policy framework and its binding EU norms created pressures to include aspects of integration policy for the legally resident immigrants. These resulted in the adoption of pro-immigrant measures at home that would have been unlikely outside the framework of EU membership. These findings invite for the reconsideration of the nature and limits of "Fortress Europe" and invite for further cross-country comparative research.

Este livro tem o objetivo de estimular o debate sobre a concepção de novos métodos e técnicas de ensino e de aprendizagem voltados para criação, atualização e transformação dos processos de comunicação entre professores, estudantes e outros atores envolvidos com a área da educação. Para tanto, as autoras e o autor propuseram-se a estudar, a analisar e a apresentar para o público de educadores que atuam no contexto do ensino básico, técnico e superior os desafios de trabalhar sistematicamente com a plataforma Redu no ambiente educacional.

Rassismus bezeichnet eine Weltsicht, die im spätmittelalterlichen Europa entstand, sich seither stark wandelte und mit dem europäischen Imperialismus (Kolonialismus) weltweit ausbreitete. Sie gründet auf der Überzeugung, dass sich Menschen anhand körperlicher oder kultureller Merkmale oder ihrer Herkunft in kategorial unterschiedliche «Rassen» einteilen liessen, dass diese Gruppen in einem hierarchischen Verhältnis zueinander stünden und dass die eigene «Rasse» allen anderen überlegen und deshalb zur Herrschaft über «die Anderen» berechtigt sei. Rassismus gilt in der Forschung als ein Phänomen der Moderne, das jedoch Vorläufer in der Antike und im Mittelalter hat. Die vielfältigen Ausdrucksformen des Rassismus werden unter verschiedenen Begrifflichkeiten diskutiert, namentlich Antisemitismus, Anti-Schwarzer und Anti-Muslimischer Rassismus (Islam) oder Orientalismus. Ob sich Rassismus gegenüber Roma, Sinti und Jenischen als Antiziganismus bezeichnen lässt, wird kontrovers diskutiert, da der Begriff den rassistischen Begriff «Zigeuner», den er überwinden will, fortschreibt.

Análisis de los equipos de trabajo y los grupos