Coping with marginality: to stay or to go

Abstract

By definition border areas are at the margins of the nation-states. In addition to the geographical marginality, people living there are often also marginalised politically, socially and economically. In some of the European border regions, ‘unwanted’ people, minorities (Sinti, Roma), the disabled, or expatriates have been settled there. In others, ‘confident’ citizens have been positioned and isolated along the borderline. We focus on the strategies people in the border areas deploy to cope with their marginality and the question of whether they should stay or leave. In contrast to much existing research about migrants, we investigate this issue from the viewpoint of those who have remained and how they legitimise their decision to stay. Their main arguments are: love of the country/home; moral obligation; lack of alternatives. We also explore their view on those who have left. Here, too, their reasoning can have different dimensions, such as: emigration to escape from the poverty of the periphery (economic marginalisation); refuge from political marginalisation; migration for educational or professional reasons. We differentiate between the views of different generations, genders, and the specific visions and contexts of the different communities east and west of the former Iron Curtain. Finally, we study the strategies people use when talking about their future.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.