Differences include the outcomes and attitudes toward European integration and how each country sees their place and role in the EU following their respective referendums. The most relevant similarity is the fact that immigration, refugee, and asylum issues dominated debate in both countries.

The UK and Hungarian cases mentioned above are particularly interesting because although they share many similar traits in terms of how the “in defense of national identity” argument informed debate during and after their respective referenda, there are also several important differences.

This essay presents a brief interpretation of why this is the case. As such, we are witnessing the emergence of a deep illiberal-liberal cleavage in politics, which in the context of Europe has the potential to create significant challenges for the direction of European integration. For others, it represents a return to the xenophobia and ethno-nationalism that underpinned the horrors of twentieth century Europe, and in doing so further reinforces what they see as an “illiberal turn” driven by the growth of right-wing populism. For some, this is an acceptable development, evidenced by the increased use in political rhetoric of the “in defense of national identity” argument. National identity and its cultural, ethnic, and constitutional components are now regularly used to justify and shape policy and political decision-making. These are only some of the growing number of examples of political events where nationalism and national identity have become important defining concepts. Likewise, in the UK’s June 2016 referendum on whether to remain a member of the European Union, and the October 2016 Hungarian referendum on whether to accept or reject an EU policy on quotas for the resettlement of refugees, the issue of national identity was front and center of public, political, and even judicial debate. The 2016 presidential election in the United States saw the Trump campaign extensively use national identity to frame its arguments on issues including trade, immigration, education, and security, among others. Recent events, however, show us that nationalism and national identity are no longer taboo. Kiss wrote, “By the end of the twentieth century, ‘nationalism’ had become a loaded term, generally associated with xenophobic ethno-nationalism and smacking of genocide and ethno-territorialism.” It is for this reason, he continued, that “there is a tendency to avoid discussing nationalism, national identity and the power of ethnicity in shaping policy” (Kiss 2000).

In 2000, the Hungarian academic Laszlo J. This is part of our special feature on Forced Migration, Cultural Identity, and Trauma.

Laszlo kiss immigration hungary