There is turmoil in the strange world of citizenship tests. The UK is planning to revise its test for would-be Britons, adding questions on crucial issues such as the life of the poet Robert Browning. In France’s test, introduced this month, applicants must obviously know about Brigitte Bardot. Meanwhile a recent survey by Xavier University found that more than one-third of Americans would fail their own country’s naturalisation test. Only 8 per cent could name even one author of the Federalist Papers. And Denmark is quietly scrapping its test. No wonder that no country seems quite happy with its citizenship test. Being a citizen has little to do with what’s in your head.
Tests for wannabe immigrants or citizens came into vogue in the era after September 11 2001. Most seemed designed to weed out Muslim fundamentalists. The Netherlands made this most explicit: along with its test, it released an integratiefilm featuring a gay wedding and topless Dutchwomen. These images were presumably meant to shock Muslims out of coming to the Netherlands, just as they would have shocked most Dutch people of a generation ago. The idea was so brilliant that the anti-immigrant Danish People’s Party proposed sticking breasts into Denmark’s film. However, the Dutch soon had to offer a breast-free version of their film, after discovering that diligent, aspirant Dutchmen caught with the hardcore version in, say, Afghanistan, might get into difficulty.
The Iraqi refugee Rodaan al Galidi, who wrote a prizewinning novel in Dutch, failed the Netherlands’ integration test. He explained afterwards: “I don’t know when a woman gets her period after a miscarriage, because I have never been pregnant. I can prove that.”