Introduction
Assimilasjon, or assimilering in Norwegian, is a term describing how individuals or groups of minority cultures gradually adopt the values, norms, language, and traditions of the majority society. The word comes from the Latin assimilare, which means “to make similar.” Within a social scientific context, this often refers to a process in which minorities become absorbed into the dominant culture, by force or voluntarily. This is a process that typically takes generations, in which children and grandchildren of immigrants or indigenous people come to adapt to the majority lifestyle.
Historically Assimilasjon
has been the means through which nations were built. During colonization, for instance, empires in Europe forced natives to give up their languages and rituals as a way of “civilizing” them. This is well illustrated in the US policy on natives whereby children were forcibly taken away from their families and placed in boarding schools with the aim of “killing the Indian and saving the Man,” as the popular phrase put it. Similar processes occurred in Canada,
Australia, and other colonies
In Norway, known as “fornorskingspolitikken,” Samer, Kvens, and Skogfinns faced systematic Assimilasjon policies from the mid-19th century to the mid-20th century. The state prohibited the use of the Sami language in schools, refused land property to those who did not speak Norwegian, and encouraged settlers to move into the northern parts. This was in furtherance of an ethnically homogeneous Norway inspired by nationalism and social Darwinism,
which portrayed Sami culture as “primitive” As a result, there was loss of languages, trauma, and cultural erasure among many families. It was not until 1997 that an official apology came from King Harald V. More recently, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission documented the damages that led to further apologies in 2024.
It differs from Assimilasjon-a term often preferred in the modern debate-on the understanding that while Assimilasjon means giving up much of the original identity to “become” like the majority, integration allows participation in society without losing cultural heritage.
Integration is twofold: a minor- ity learns the majority’s language and societal norms in order to be able to function within both job and society, but the majority accepts diversity. In Norway today, integration is official policy for immigrants, while Assimilasjon is associated with the darker fornorsking.
However, boundaries are blurry
many immigrants are integrated partially through Assimilasjon-like processes, such as learning Norwegian or adopting Norwegian holidays.
In a global context, we can see assimilation of immigrants. In the United States, for instance, the melting pot model has traditionally supported Assimilasjon in that European immigrants of the 1800 and 1900 centuries melted into “Americans” through language, names, and values. Research indicates that children of first-generation immigrants often choose more “American” names and marry across ethnic lines, indirect indicators of cultural assimilation. Contemporary immigrants from Asia and Latin America also experience assimilation but at a slower pace due to larger cultural differences and racism.
They nevertheless learn English, find better employment over time, and their children often fare better than their parents. Critics assert that “segmented Assimilasjon” demonstrates how some groups may become poorer and marginalized while others climb the social ladder.
The advantages include social cohesion and economic mobility.
Once minorities learn the majority language, the incomes surge dramatically-up to 33 percent for English-speaking skills in the United States. This will reduce conflicts and enhance national unity. In multicultural societies like Norway, Assimilasjon tends to lead to immigrants’ participation in the labour market and democracy.
the disadvantages are tremendous: the loss of cultural diversity, traumas from compulsion, and feelings of subordination. The Norwegian Assimilasjon policy led to many Samis hiding their identity; indeed, this is the reason for the higher suicide rates and loss of language. Globalization complicates the whole picture; with the use of the internet, immigrants remain in contact with their nation of origin, thereby hindering full assimilation and promoting complex identities.
Integration instead of Assimilasjon
Today, many countries choose to preserve diversity. Norway has Sametinget, kvensk, and samisk as official languages in some areas, and celebrates the Sami national day. New waves of immigration from Syria, Afghanistan, and Africa challenge this, however. The debate is about balance: Should immigrants “become Norwegian” or enrich Norway with their cultures? Research shows that diversity pays off: global studies by McKinsey confirm that inclusive societies grow faster.
Assimilation is not a straightforward process; it’s a dynamic between man and society. It can free from oppression, yet simultaneously eradicate unique heritage.
How do we create unity without requiring uniformity?
Norway has come full circle-from forced Assimilasjon to reconciliation-and points toward a model where accommodation meets respect for difference. The future of integration protects both community and diversity so that Assimilasjon will no longer mean loss but choice.
