III – CONCERNS OF IMMIGRATING Since many immigrants migrate as a result of potential economic opportunity in response to the consequences of globalization, as shown in Section II, it is important to analyze whether or not immigration poses a true alternative to the problems they were attempting to escape, or whether it generates new problems of its own, with no two countries being affected in the same way. This is an important connection to understand, as globalization has changed every country in different ways. Ultimately, for that reason, the costs and benefits of immigration must be weighed. Unfortunately, the literature seems to suggest that, while immigration into the first world removes the individuals from certain third world problems,
…show more content…
She found that the heart of the linkage between globalization, immigration, and urban social relations is an economic restructuring across societies that has strong social consequences for immigrant populations. People migrating to avoid globalization effects often find growing ghettoization, isolation, and cultural antipathies in their new settings. This supports the idea that globalization not only has an economic impact, but also has social and cultural impacts in various ways, primarily impacting the immigrants themselves (Laws, …show more content…
She claims that when people have a stronger sense of patriotism, or attachment and critical loyalty to one’s country, their sense of nationalism, or sense that their country is superior to other nations, and support of foreigners is significantly diminished. She has found that, across different countries, nationalism is predictive of negative attitudes towards immigrants. More specifically, Ariely found that Israel and Germany were less willing to grant citizenship than other, more multicultural, countries were, such as the United States of America or France. By and large, Ariely determined that “the central psychological consequence of globalization is that it results in transformations in identity, that is, in how people think about themselves in relation to the social environment” (Ariely, 2011, p. 542). This coincides with the findings of Xu and Walsh that large-scale immigration can change the culture and attitudes of the native population. In other words, globalization has the potential to create discrimination and cause entire cultures to become
She found that the heart of the linkage between globalization, immigration, and urban social relations is an economic restructuring across societies that has strong social consequences for immigrant populations. People migrating to avoid globalization effects often find growing ghettoization, isolation, and cultural antipathies in their new settings. This supports the idea that globalization not only has an economic impact, but also has social and cultural impacts in various ways, primarily impacting the immigrants themselves (Laws, …show more content…
She claims that when people have a stronger sense of patriotism, or attachment and critical loyalty to one’s country, their sense of nationalism, or sense that their country is superior to other nations, and support of foreigners is significantly diminished. She has found that, across different countries, nationalism is predictive of negative attitudes towards immigrants. More specifically, Ariely found that Israel and Germany were less willing to grant citizenship than other, more multicultural, countries were, such as the United States of America or France. By and large, Ariely determined that “the central psychological consequence of globalization is that it results in transformations in identity, that is, in how people think about themselves in relation to the social environment” (Ariely, 2011, p. 542). This coincides with the findings of Xu and Walsh that large-scale immigration can change the culture and attitudes of the native population. In other words, globalization has the potential to create discrimination and cause entire cultures to become