This article uses a theoretical framework derived from migration studies to examine different understandings of migration and national belonging in the debate preceding Sweden's full legal acceptance of dual citizenship in 2001. The empirical question concerns the place of nationally versus transnationally oriented conceptions of migration in the debate, and the analysis of a wide range of public documents demonstrates that both kinds of conceptions were present. Opponents of dual citizenship generally gave expression to a national understanding and considered migration a temporary deviation from a normality of undivided national belonging. Some proponents of dual citizenship, on the contrary, held a more transnational view of migration, and regarded mobility and the maintenance of dual or multiple national bonds as normal. However, there were also many proponents who, from a national perspective, treated migration as more or less problematic, but still advocated dual citizenship as a tool for reducing some of the individual and social problems that it brought about.
Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research
Choose a citation style from the tabs below