Basic features of antigypsyistic manifestations
Manifestations describe the various forms in which antigypsyism occurs. They refer to different contexts (historical events, social regulations, etc.) and differ in terms of the intended or unconscious, unintentional functions that the antigypsyistic attitudes, remarks or actions fulfill.
Although antigypsyism is deeply rooted in social norms and institutional practices, it constantly adapts itself to social, political and economic circumstances and therefore shows itself in new forms. Today the manifestations of antigypsyism are largely determined by racist ideas. Psychosocial characteristics such as deviant behavior were constructed hundreds of years ago for religious, cultural or social reasons and codified as projections. In the 20th century, a racialization took place that culminated in the genocide of the Sinti and Roma. After the Nazi era, these racist ideas continued to be carried forward, despite semantic shifts to constructs such as “ethnicity,” “origin” or “culture.”
In order to be able to document current antigypsyistic incidents, we focus on four manifestations, which express themselves in public life, in the media and politics, in the context of work, housing and health as well as in government institutions (educational institutions, administrative offices, the police and the justice system, etc.). The manifestations or the antigypsyistic stereotypes can be connected to other power dynamics, such as sexism, anti-Muslim racism, class discrimination or antisemitism.
Manifestations:
Nazi-related antigypsyism refers to antigypsyist crimes, policies and practices during the Nazi era. This form serves to relativize or frame the racist persecution and extermination policies and practices of the time positively. It expresses itself, e.g., in the denial, distorted representation, trivialization or glorification of the genocide perpetrated on the Sinti and Roma or the persecution of alleged or actual members of the minority group.
Civil antigypsyism refers to the prevailing values and norms of today’s dominant culture / majority society, i.e., the normative order of the society and its legitimization. This manifestation indicates how the virtuous citizen is not allowed to behave and stigmatizes supposedly deviant behavior. This manifestation of antigypsyism can be divided into the following subcategories:
- Social antigypsyism refers to deviations from normatively expected social behavior and expresses itself, e.g., in stereotyping people as being prone to crime or laziness. Women are also accused of being promiscuous or bad mothers.
- Cultural antigypsyism refers to stereotypes about ‘gypsies’ supposed low level of civilization and reflects stereotypical ideas about lack of identity and rootlessness.
- Romanticizing antigypsyism expresses itself in the idealization and glorification of a way of life that is perceived as different, which serves as a mirror / projection screen for the majority society’s longings.
- Religious antigypsyism includes prejudices that arose centuries ago in a religious context, such as the accusation of practicing pagan, magical or satanic rites (fortune-telling, healing or cursing practices, etc.).
Antigypsyistic othering is based on the construction of an outside group as opposed to an “inner group,” providing a projection screen for stigmatizing attributions. Othering serves to enhance one’s own value through delimitation/distinction from an imaginary object, which embodies characteristics or types of behavior that are undesired and that deviate from the norm (but are not specifically named). This form is therefore the basis for further attributions. Here, othering will be used as a category for incidents that do not allow any further conclusions to be drawn about specific attributions, as, for example, with antigypsyistic chants or shouts in a football stadium.
Migration-related antigypsyism is associated with the antigypsyistic stereotype of the “foreign, parasitic invader.” This form aims to prevent and delegitimize unwanted (EU) migration, which is defamed as “poverty-related immigration.” It has parallels to social antigypsyism and connections to class-related prejudice and anti-Muslim racism (e.g., when talking about clan structures and criminality).