Xenophobia In America

Due to the discrimination through economical, educational, and societal ways; non- American citizens trying to regain a peace of mind or in other terms “freedom”, coming to America consequently face anti-immigration groups and a sense of non- acceptance in America.

Migration policies are often designed with the sole objective of influencing international migration by either restricting or encouraging circular migration, immigration or emigration(Ripsman & Paul, 2010). Open border policies have contributed to the uncontrolled to the flow of illegal immigrants into countries and in turn generating challenges to the host countries. The fundamental basis for arguments has been whether open immigration policy or restricted immigration policy

Jeremy Adam Smith’s “Our Fear of Immigrants” proposes a sympathetic outlook towards immigrants. Smith wants the disgust and loathe of citizens to stop, and instead for them to start retaining empathy for newcomers. While reading the article, there is a sense of fear that people hold for immigrants. Many of these fears are mainly blamed on many motives such as psychological reasoning, genetic cognitive, and social status. Although Smith provides plenty logic behind the behavior of citizens, there should also be the point of view behind the immigrants themselves.

What is nativism and xenophobia and how are they being expressed in today’s society? (20 points)

The 2016 presidential election and the now 2017 president, has struck fear in many Americans, especially immigrants; both legal and illegal. Immigration has been one of the top headlines throughout President Donald Trump’s presidency. Many immigrants feared for their lives. They did not know what to expect if Trump were to become president, but now, the fear of being kicked out of America or even being restricted from coming back to America with a green card, has increased. While we still have other issues surrounding us, immigration plays a key factor in causing mayhem in our society.

The securitization of international migration according to Samuel Huntington (as cited in Faist 2005), has brought about the ‘clash of civilizations.' This clash further conveys that the securitization has brought about conflicts and “reinforces stereotypes about cultural fears and clashes” (Faist 2005).

Recent elections in the United States and Great Britain have identified certain vulnerabilities in the promotion of the free movement of people within and between their respective borders. The vulnerabilities for both countries seem to be rooted in fear within their respective populations and a lack of cohesive national immigration policy from their respective governments. When the bellwethers for free societies do not react appropriately to immigration and free trade challenges, the result will be to stifle movements for multicultural societies and cross-cultural experiences everywhere.

Perhaps, the most supported position in the literature is the idea that economic factors are less important than these ethnic factors. Recent elections have demonstrated a strong link between nationalistic political parties that have anti-immigration rhetoric along with ethnocentrism (Pew, 2016) (BBC, 2017). Kevin H. O’Rourke and Richard Sinnot argue that feelings of patriotism and levels of chauvinism are the best indicators to determine people’s immigration attitudes (O’Rourke, Sinnot 2005). Their arguments focus on a more national identity markers like Patriotism. On the other hand, Alan. Kessler argues that the racial competition within a local community (instead of state or national) is the most important factor (Kessler, Freeman 2005) (Kessler, 2001). Therefore, an individual could support immigration to part of the country that is not in his/her local area but oppose ethnically different immigrants moving into their

Immigration, a controversial topic of the modern world, is often associated with illegalities of the Government. The topic continues to loom over the 21st century as more and more poverty stricken countries are under financial strain. It is the national movement of people into a country in which they are not natives or where they do not possess residency and citizenship as their own country has fallen due to possibly natural disasters, war and regime. The debate still remains as to whether immigrants; illegal or not are to be either sent back to their countries or given less opportunities than citizens of their chosen country.

Some experts argue that the recent rise in xenophobic promises and policies in European countries has to do with the populace’s fear over job loss, pensions and benefits cutting, and a fear in the loss of a national identity—which some

I have a hard time comprehending the idea that was discussed in International Migration, which is that “New people jeopardize the sense of belonging.” This struck me as a toxic form of nationalism. Why are people so fearful of immigrants? People that are coming

Centuries ago, when trans national movements of people were not subject to strict immigration rules, scholars did not consider immigration worth of analysis. Samuel Herbert did not consider immigration as an issue to affect customs, character, or the institution of the British people; “…it is no more able to affect the qualities of the nation than a can of hot water is able to affect the qualities of the nation than a can of hot water is able to affect the temperature of the sea (Samuel, 1905:332). Today no serious social scientist could possibly ignore the effect of immigration since immigration is an issue more than a ‘can of hot water in the sea. Although it is believed that every nation is to be the creation of overlapping generations of immigrants (Stalker 2001), it is essential to understand that the current influx of migrant(labor) in the processes of international migration and globalization is fundamentally different from earlier forms. In modern immigration, it is noticeable that dramatic shifts in destinations, restrictions on residency and overtly strict limitations on settlement, imposed by immigration policies (Falson 2004).

Currently, many developed nations are having debates over the impacts of global migration, and recent events such as the Brexit referendum on June 23rd, 2016 and Germany’s declaration of open-door policy to immigrants in 2015 are real life portrayals of the conflicting views of developed countries regarding this issue. The question that needs to be addressed here, is whether the benefits of global migration outweigh the negative outcomes—such as strain on resources of host countries, possibilities of higher crime rates—that could also arise from it.

The various social issues present within today’s society inevitably lead to the creation of injustices and oppression faced by many individuals. While many social justice issues focus on large groups of people, such as the impoverished and homeless, others affect specific groups or cultures of people, revealing a prejudice against that group. In the United States, a history of xenophobia has contributed to the discrimination of certain ethnic groups, including the internment of Japanese-Americans in World War II and immigration laws against Soviets during the Cold War. These prejudices are often a result of fear, the main cause of America’s most recent practice of xenophobia: Islamophobia.

Another reason for the occurrence of xenophobia or a justification for this ill treatment of foreigners is on the basis of the South African economic and social issues they are facing where around half of the population is said to be living in poverty (Neocosmos, 2011). Acco0rding to Neocosmos (2011) this has led to the widespread social exclusion of foreigner, as they are viewed as competitors for scarce resources.The notion of competition for scarce resources is actually true, especially when following the patterns of xenophobic attacks that have previously taken place. It is evident thatan outburst of xenophobic violence usually occursin townships and informal settlements, where foreign nationals compete with the poorest South Africans to make themselves a basic living (Crush, 2001).