Distancing From a Stigmatized Identity: Explaining Hostility by Marginalized Racial Groups Toward New Immigrants

Introduction

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations in 2015 are a collection of integrated goals created to “end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that by 2030, all people enjoy peace and prosperity” (United Nations, 2008). In particular, SDG 10 is focused on reducing inequality within and among countries and calls for attention to intragroup inequalities. To expand on the work being conducted towards achieving SDG 10 around inequalities and discrimination toward migrants and refugees, the present chapter examines intragroup hostilities between newly arrived immigrants from Latin American countries (i.e., Central and South American countries) into the United States who identify as Latinos/as compared to domestic US citizens who also identify as Latinos/as, a marginalized racial group in the US. Members of the Latino/a group who identify as US citizens might distance themselves from, or ostracize those identified as new immigrants in order to also distance or disconnect themselves from harmful stigma (McClanahan, et al., 2019; Snyder et al., 1986). These observations are counter to the predominant research and scholarship in the psychological sciences which often presumes that the perpetuation of inequality and discrimination stems from social outgroups. Intragroup hostility encourages unhealthy competition, builds further animosity, and diverts the groups’ attention away from other issues, while less intragroup discrimination could serve to unify Latino/a sub-groups. This could foster collaboration and greater equity for all Latinos/as in the US, as well as the enjoyment of greater “peace and prosperity” as envisioned by SDG 10.

The emergence of intergroup hostilities toward immigrants and refugees is a global phenomenon. By mid-2020, the number of refugees globally reached a record high of 24 million with 307 out of every 100,000 persons being refugees (United Nations, n.d.). For years, this ever-increasing number has exacerbated the rising anti-immigrant and anti-refugee sentiments and conflicts in host countries. The anti-immigrant hostility in Europe has maintained a divide of national identity between the ‘true compatriots’ (e.g., ‘us Swedish/German people’) and the immigrants (e.g., Non-Whites and Muslims), who are not considered within the national ingroup’s definition of the national ‘us’ (Bauer & Hannover, 2020). According to a 2018 Pew Research Center survey, majorities in Hungary, Greece, South Africa, Russia, and Israel view immigrants as a burden to their countries (Gonzalez-Barrera & Connor, 2019). While such hostility is often witnessed from outgroups, ingroup hostility has also been on the rise. In the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide, tensions and violence between the ethnic groups, Hutu and Tutsi, have increased due to intragroup polarization (McDoom, 2012). This polarization in attitudes reportedly stems from the fear and distrust caused by security threats. Anti-immigrant attitudes in Belgium are found among Belgians of Turkish and Moroccan descent (Meeusen et al., 2019). Meeusen and colleagues' (2019) study investigates the relationship between unfair treatment/identity and interminority attitudes. Hostility and discrimination arises from a perceived threat, and in this case, immigrants are seen as job and social competition. There are instances where immigrant-origin voters will support an anti-immigrant political party (see Spies et al., 2022). Fetzer’s (2000) research indicates that opposition to immigration and support for nativist political movements in France, Germany, and the USA are impacted by race and ethnicity and partially caused by perception of marginality. These and the numerous such anti-immigrant sentiments should be acknowledged and addressed globally. This chapter focuses on one particular case of this phenomenon - the Latino/a intragroup hostility in the United States.