Pillarisation

[CaptainCernick]

I was in doubt where exactly to put this: VV or mudpit, in the end I chose for mudpit because it hasn't entirely disappeared yet or may even be rising up again.

Pillarisation is generally believed to be a typical phenomenon for Belgium, the Netherlands and Austria. It's a phenomenon that divides a society in different "pillars", with each pillar supporting "their" public. These pillars provide entertainment, culture, social security, education and political influence (political parties) for their part of the population. Pillars are usually grouped around a certain political or religious ideology. For example, in Belgium there were a socialist, a catholic and a liberal (economically liberal, not American liberal) pillar. In the Netherlands, there was a Protestant, Catholic and socialist pillar.

While pillars are no longer such rigid structurs nowadays as they used to be, they still exert some influence. It is unclear and dependant on the local situation exactly when these pillars start to appear, but mostly from around 1850-1900. Pillarisation had its climax after the first World War untill the 50's and continued to divide societies untill the 60's, when "depillarisation" started to kick in again.
In the heydays of pillarisation, people were born into their pillar, and it provided them with everything they needed in life: social security (trade unions, insurances, health service etc...); education (private vs. public schools, universities); culture and entertainment (newspapers, radiostations, publishing houses, vacations etc...); d other pillarised instances were banks and political parties. People lived their lives inside their pillar and voted for their party, there was no need to go outside the pillar for anything.
Nowadays, the pillars are still there, but they're less rigid. People will "zap" between them and choose what element from which pillar they like to use. For example, take a socialist newspaper and go to a christian mutuality.

As I said already, it's a typically Belgian, Dutch, Austrian and, according to Wikipedia, Maltese phenomenon, but I think it may have/may still/may start to exist in other countries as well. How is/was it in your country?

The sources I used were my university handbooks. If you'd like to know more, Wikipedia has a nice introduction on the subject, or you could talk to your local social history professor.

[The White Knight]

Interesting. Without knowing there is a specific name for it in social sciences I was under the false impression that this 'phenomenon' is not unique to the Belgian society, and I find it hard to believe it is only or mainly present in Holland, Belgium (Austria and Malta ?!).

Any reason why it is so particularly present in the named countries?

[CaptainCernick]

Interesting. Without knowing there is a specific name for it in social sciences I was under the false impression that this 'phenomenon' is not unique to the Belgian society, and I find it hard to believe it is only or mainly present in Holland, Belgium (Austria and Malta ?!).

Any reason why it is so particularly present in the named countries?

It's known as "verzuiling" in Dutch. And it is quite particular to the countries I mentioned because there are no racial or cultural divides between the pillars. I'm not exactly sure why it existed in exactly these countries, It's a fairly new studyobject in history and social sciences, so explanations may not have been permanently formulated yet, but I'll try to look it up.

For those who are unsure what pillarization is: "Chanatowns" are a good example of pillarization in your own country.

Chinatowns are not pillarised in the Belgian/Dutch sense of the word. It provides everything a certain immigrant ethnicity needs, but based upon their ethnicity. There lies the difference with the pillarisation I described. It's still pillarisation, but of a different sort. In the forties and fifties, Belgian and Dutch societies were completely divided between the pillars. Almost everyone belonged to a certain pillar. That is not the case with Chinatowns or ghetto's. Still, it is probably a good example to clarify the phenomenon to an outsider.

So I take it that pillarization means that every niche in a working community was filled by the particular immigrant group, I guess...its like creating a mini-society???

You've got that almost right. They are indeed sub-societies, but they do not necessarily solely encompass immigrant groups. In the Netherlands for example, there was a protestant, catholic and socialist pillar. In Belgium, the society was divided in socialist, liberal and catholic pillars.

I should note that "pillarisation" isn't what I know it as. Actualy I wouldn't know exactaly what to call it, If I had to use a word.

My professors told that it is quite a difficult term to explain to members of countries who haven't known the phenomenon. But apparently you recognise it, only you haven't given it a name yet.

In england as recently as my grandfathers generation you could not get a job in certain areas if you were a catholic however other areas would take special note because you were, and vice versa with protestants. There were of course schools and the like for particular religous groups and the same existed for tories and labour politically though they could be mutually exclusive. You had whole families and communities voting specifically for one party.

Indeed, so it did exist in England as well. Have you any idea to exactly what extent? How dependable were people on their pillar, which services did these pillars offer and are there still remains of them?

[Denny Crane!]

Indeed, so it did exist in England as well. Have you any idea to exactly what extent? How dependable were people on their pillar, which services did these pillars offer and are there still remains of them?

Jobs, religion, healthcare, culture, social activities and add in anything I have left out. It is fair to say that we were experiencing a slow decline of the segregation between the two christian denominations that existed since the (?) 16th century (?) and lasted a few decades into this century.

Peter

[Erik]

For those who are unsure what pillarization is: "Chanatowns" are a good example of pillarization in your own country.

I didn't know Austra and Matla had pillarized societies too, would be interesting to compare them to Dutch/Belgian society.
And I also didn't know Dutch socialist were big on Morris dancing, I realy wonder why that is.

I think pillarization wil have a come-back in the Netherlands, but it won't become as strong as it was during the 1950's.
Pillarization is a good way to deal with groups of immigrants because it gives them the opportunity to organize themselves so they can improve their own living conditions in stead of relying on the state (just look at how well Chineeze immigrants do compared to unorganized groups like Mexicans, Africans, etc)

But I also think there wil be a need for some cross-pillar organizations.
My government is currently trying to increase pillarization between TV broadcasting organizations, so we wil get "christian news", "catholic news", "socialist news" etc. ect.
I think this is a realy bad step because I rather watch general "unbiased" news than "socialist news".
Best IMO would be to have some pillarized TV and some general TV, so people have even more choice what to watch.

[sephodwyrm]

I never knew we're organized. But once a Turkish friend in the US state told me: "I finally knew the reason why the Chinese can choose not to learn English in the US."

"Ok. Why is that?"

"I remember trying to rent this house from this Chinese gentleman. He couldn't speak English at all, but he got Chinese bilingual lawyers and plumbers to fix up the deal."

"Really?"

So I take it that pillarization means that every niche in a working community was filled by the particular immigrant group, I guess...its like creating a mini-society???

[hsimoorb]

I think I know what your talking about. For instance, there is an(2 actualy) influential Polish institution in Chicago(I live near there). The only reason there isn't an organization like that in my town is bacause everyone(99.5%) is white prodestant, there's not a political minority for people to organize.

I should note that "pillarisation" isn't what I know it as. Actualy I wouldn't know exactaly what to call it, If I had to use a word.

[Erik]

So I take it that pillarization means that every niche in a working community was filled by the particular immigrant group, I guess...its like creating a mini-society???

Exactly.
Each "pillar" is it's own mini-society with it's own schools, hospitals, sports clubs, lawyers, supermarkets, religious places etc. etc.
But of course no society is 100% pillarized so there wil always be some interaction (however maybe not enough to learn eachothers language)
And there is always a common law that applies to everybody, no matter what pillar they are from.

[Denny Crane!]

In england as recently as my grandfathers generation you could not get a job in certain areas if you were a catholic however other areas would take special note because you were, and vice versa with protestants. There were of course schools and the like for particular religous groups and the same existed for tories and labour politically though they could be mutually exclusive. You had whole families and communities voting specifically for one party.

Peter