Immigration represents a major global challenge in the twenty-first century (Moghaddam & Hendricks, Reference Moghaddam and Hendricks2022). Of course, large-scale immigration has taken place in past centuries and backlash against immigrants is not new. However, a number of new developments have resulted in immigration becoming a more serious and complex challenge for numerous Western and also non-Western societies in the twenty-first century. This book explores the new immigration challenge from a psychological perspective, giving attention to the psychological experiences and processes underlying both immigration and the policies available for the integration of immigrants in host societies.
The challenge raised by immigration in the twenty-first century is new and perplexing in a number of ways. First, the availability of rapid mass transportation means that enormous numbers of people now move across national borders, regions, and continents at an extremely rapid pace – far faster than was previously possible. This means that large-scale intergroup contact between dissimilar groups can take place extremely rapidly – far more rapidly than even before. Second, climate change and environmental disasters are putting new pressures on increasing numbers of people to move to safer geographical regions, which in some cases are only found in other countries and/or regions of the world. This problem will become exacerbated over the next few decades, as environmental disasters accelerate. Third, many immigrants to North America and other immigrant-receiving countries (e.g., European countries, Australia, New Zealand) are now from Africa, Asia, and South America. That is, they are mostly non-White, often not Christian, linguistically and culturally more dissimilar, and also phenotypically different, from the majority populations of the host societies. The movements of hundreds of millions of “dissimilar others” across countries, regions, and continents are being fueled by a fourth factor: Shifting labor needs in North America and Europe, where the host populations have low birthrates, are aging, and are even in decline in some countries. In important respects, what we discuss as the new challenge of immigration is a result of the unstoppable force of demography, and the international dynamics it unleashes (Dao et al., Reference Dao, Docquier, Maurel and Schaus2021).
These developments are associated with a number of psychological experiences, and theoretical and empirical psychological studies of immigration have grown as a specialized field of research to examine these experiences (Birman & Bray, Reference Birman, Bray, Bond, Serrano-Gracia, Keys and Shinn2017; Cobb et al., Reference Cobb, Branscombe, Meca, Schwartz, Xie, Zea, Molina and Martinez2019; Dovidio & Esses, Reference Dovidion and Esses2001; Frisby & Jimerson, Reference Frisby and Jimerson2016; Hernandez, Reference Hernandez2009; Jasso, Reference Jasso, McLeod, Lawler and Schwalbe2014; Mahalingam, Reference Mahalingam2006; Okazaki et al., Reference Okazaki, Guler, Haarlammert and Liu2019; Torres et al., Reference Torres, Santiago, Walts and Richards2018; Verkuyten et al., Reference Verkuyten, Wiley, Deaux and Fleischmann2019). Much of this literature is focused on acculturation or intergroup relations (Berry, Reference Berry2001; see also Schwartz et al., Reference Schwartz, Walsh, Ward, Tartakovsky, Weisskirch, Vedder, Makarova, Bardi, Birman, Oppedal, Benish-Weisman, Lorenzo-Blanco, Güngör, Stevens, Benet-Martinez, Titzmann, Silbereisen and Geeraert2020). Almost all of the psychological literature on immigration is in specialized journals or edited books. This book is designed to address the lack of introductory books on the psychology of immigration in a global context.
The new immigration challenge is associated with increased perceived threat among citizens in host societies; these citizens feel threatened by the sudden arrival of large numbers of dissimilar others in their homelands. An outcome of this perceived threat is backlash against immigrants, and also populist movements in support of authoritarian strongmen (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2019). This is particularly unfortunate, because a substantial number of immigrants to Western countries are escaping authoritarian regimes (such as those in Iran and Venezuela). A related development involves deglobalization, a strong backlash against globalization broadly, associated with the strengthening of local identities, but also in many cases associated with ethnocentrism and extremist right-wing nationalist movements (Leblang & Peters, Reference Leblang and Peters2022). These trends are reflected in the success of extreme right-wing political parties in elections in France, Germany, Austria, and other European countries, and the popularity of anti-immigrant politicians in the United States, in the third decade of the twenty-first century.
The rise of extreme right-wing anti-immigrant political movements poses major challenges for societies with diverse populations, including those that have a history of receiving immigrants. This challenge arises at a time when economic disparities between social classes are increasing, but the gap between ethnic groups is decreasing – so that group-based inequalities are more based on social class and less based on ethnicity (Chetty et al., Reference Chetty, Dobbie, Goldman, Porter and Yang2024). But rising social-class economic differences are being masked by controversies around immigration, and particularly the anti-immigrant attitudes of some working-class Whites in Western societies. Many working-class Whites see the economic gap between themselves and middle-class Whites increasing, but the economic gap between themselves and ethnic minorities decreasing (Chetty et al., Reference Chetty, Dobbie, Goldman, Porter and Yang2024). We explore these and related developments from a psychological perspective, with a focus on trends in both Western and non-Western societies.
Our analysis is guided in particular by psychological research on groups and collective behavior (Brown & Pehrson, Reference Brown and Pehrson2019; Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2008; Taylor & Moghaddam, Reference Taylor and Moghaddam1994). This research has been strongly influenced by the major theories and empirical studies on intergroup relations, and especially the social identity tradition (e.g., Lindstam et al., Reference Lindstam, Mader and Schoen2021). We interpret identity to be central to the psychological processes underlying the interactions of immigrants and host society members, and to the perception of immigrants as threats to “our nation” and “our way of life.”
Immigration has been examined from the perspective of economists, political scientists, sociologists, and various other disciplines (for example, see Bansak et al., Reference Bansak, Simpson and Zavodny2021; Collier, Reference Collier2013; Hollifield et al., Reference Hollifield, Martin and Orrenius2014). However, no one discipline can present a complete picture of immigration. By giving priority to the psychological perspective in this book, we are adding in valuable and accessible ways to the picture of immigration already developed by researchers from other disciplines.
Global Backlash against Immigrants
The contemporary global rise in anti-immigrant sentiment can be tied to the fear that immigrants do not share the same identity as the native-born citizens; they tend to be different in terms of religion, language, core values, appearance, and other key characteristics. Hence, they are perceived by host populations as not sharing the same identity. Increasing diversity in societies is in large part because of demographic trends around the world (which are linked with migration and climate change, Hugo, Reference Hugo2011): Western societies have birth rates lower than 2.1 percent, which means that unless they import millions of people from abroad, they will decline in population levels. On the other hand, the countries with high birth rates and the ability to export labor to Western societies are in Africa, Asia, and South America. This pattern of demographic growth discrepancies has resulted in large numbers of refugees, asylees, and immigrants who are dissimilar to host society populations arriving in Western societies. Examples are the arrival of millions of Middle Eastern and North African Muslim immigrants in Europe, and millions of Hispanic immigrants in the United States.
Anti-immigrant sentiment is also linked to labor market competition. Local workers in economic sectors with a large immigrant labor force often perceive the arrival of immigrants as a direct threat to their material interests (Kunovich, Reference Kunovich2013). Consequently, in Europe unsettled macroeconomic conditions, such as GDP contractions and increasing foreign-born workers, have led to an increase in anti-immigrant attitudes (Polavieja, Reference Polavieja2016). Another source of anti-immigration attitudes is the perceived insufficiency of state resources. For example, Colombian citizens living near the Venezuelan border identify healthcare as an insufficiently provided public resource due to the increase of Venezuelan migration which, in turn, has been linked to an increase in anti-immigrant attitudes (Vega-Mendez & Visconti, Reference Vega-Mendez and Visconti2021).
As the above example of Venezuelan migration in Colombia indicates, anti-immigrant sentiment is not limited to Western societies (Harris et al., Reference Harris, Findley, Nielson and Noyes2017). For example, in South Africa there have been very strong negative reactions to immigrants and refugees from other African countries (Gordon, Reference Gordon, Houston, Kanyane and Davids2022). Also, the arrival of millions of Afghan refugees in Tehran, Isfahan, Mashhad, and other Iranian cities has resulted in anti-Afghan sentiments among Iranians (Ruhani, Reference Roth, Méndez, Smith-Castro, Sirlopú, Eller and Çakal2023). Another example is anti-Muslim sentiments in India, which have been stirred up by the “Hindu nationalist” leadership of Narendra Modi, resulting in Hindu extremists attacking Muslim migrants. (See Kim & Kim, Reference Kim and Kim2021, for a discussion of the Asian Barometer Survey that reflects these trends.)
Thus, twenty-first century deglobalization serves as the larger context for anti-immigrant sentiments, in both Western and non-Western societies.
Managing Diversity and Identity in Society
Psychological research on immigration emphasizes a motivation to manage the diverse array of group identities that coexist in contemporary societies (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2008, Reference Moghaddam2012, Reference Moghaddam2024). While there have been positive impacts from initiatives to welcome immigrants into host societies (e.g., Tropp et al., Reference Tropp, Okamoto, Marrow and Jones-Correa2018), immigrant integration into host societies is challenging and often associated with feelings of uncertainty and threat (Bose, Reference Bose2018). A number of studies suggest that trust is negatively associated with diversity (see the meta-analytic review by Dinesen et al., Reference Dinesen, Schaefer and Sonderskov2020). Thus, one interpretation for the decline in trust in Western societies is the increased diversity experienced by these societies. We argue that a solution to the apparent negative association between diversity and trust is the development of more constructive integration policies.
Over the past century, assimilation and multiculturalism have been the two main policies that have emerged for immigrant integration into society (Cabaniss & Cameron, Reference Cabaniss and Cameron2018; Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2024). The objective underlying assimilation policy is to promote social cohesion and maintain one central identity by immigrants’ adoption of the host culture, and abandonment of their heritage culture, language, and identity (Badea et al., Reference Badea, Iyer and Aebischer2018; Callens & Meuleman, Reference Callens and Meuleman2017). In theory, through reduction of the differences between immigrants and native-born citizens, and increasing their perceived similarities, immigrants become equal members of the national ingroup (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2024).
However, in reality native-born citizens often do not see immigrants as belonging to the host society – as sharing the same collective identity as themselves. This is particularly true when immigrants are phenotypically different from the host population, such as in terms of skin color and other physical characteristics. Further, psychological research on intergroup relations has shown that it is impossible to eliminate all differences between groups of people (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2008, Reference Moghaddam2012, Reference Moghaddam2024). Assimilation into the host culture does not stop discrimination against immigrants, especially if they are perceived as belonging to an ethnic minority group (Cabaniss & Cameron, Reference Cabaniss and Cameron2018; Moghaddam & Perreault, Reference Moghaddam and Perreault1992). For this reason, many immigrants who perceive discrimination tend to strengthen their ties with their native culture and identity instead of acculturating to the host culture and identity. Identifying with their native community has long been suggested to provide a protective buffer against discrimination (Crocker & Major, Reference Crocker and Major1989; Moghaddam & Perreault, Reference Moghaddam and Perreault1992; Tajfel, Reference Tajfel1981). For example, in the United States context, Schildkraut et al. (Reference Schildkraut, Jiménez, Dovidio and Huo2019) found that Latino immigrant and citizen participants who felt unwelcome in the state they lived in were more likely to identify as Latino than American.
In part due to this perceived outsider status within the host society, immigrants and ethnic minorities tend to prefer multiculturalism as an integration policy (Moghaddam & Breckenridge, Reference Moghaddam and Breckenridge2010; Ward et al., Reference Ward, Gale, Staerklé and Stuart2018), possibly because ethnic minorities have stronger multicultural identities than the majority. For example, Roth and Mendez (2020) found that in Bolivia, Indigenous students had a stronger multicultural identity than non-Indigenous students. Through multicultural policies, immigrants can maintain their native culture while still integrating into the host culture. The idea is to promote diversity within the host society and the celebration of cultural differences (Levrau & Loobuyck, Reference Levrau and Loobuyck2018; Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2012).
However, highlighting and celebrating the differences between groups can sometimes cause more division in society, rather than achieving integration and cohesion. As group boundaries are highlighted and strengthened (for example, by focusing on and even manufacturing new intergroup differences), discrimination against immigrants and ethnic minorities may increase due to their separation and greater perceived gap from the majority identity (Kauff et al., Reference Kauff, Asbrock, Thörner and Wagner2013). For example, Mashuri et al. (Reference Mashuri, Burhan and van Leeuwen2013) found that in the Netherlands immigrants who chose to assimilate were perceived by native-born citizens as less threatening. The native-born citizens were more willing to help these immigrants adapt to society. In general, this perceived threat from immigrants is associated with greater preference for assimilation policies among host society members (Badea et al., Reference Badea, Iyer and Aebischer2018).
Immigration is not just a potential threat at the individual level, but also a potential collective threat at a national level (Young et al., Reference Young, Loebach and Korinek2018). Research has shown that native-born citizens with strong national identification are more threatened by immigrants and more likely to support assimilation policies (Badea et al., Reference Badea, Iyer and Aebischer2018). Wojcieszak and Garrett (Reference Wojcieszak and Garrett2018) found that priming Americans with an existing anti-immigrant bias to think about their national identity significantly increased their bias against immigrants, compared to Americans who did not have this preexisting bias against immigrants (see also Lucas et al., Reference Lucas, Barkho, Rudolph, Zhdanova, Fakhouri and Thompson2014). These findings are in line with research suggesting that individuals with high ingroup identification will strengthen their group loyalty when they perceive threat from outgroup members (e.g., Dovidio et al., Reference Dovidio, Gaertner, Ufkes, Saguy and Pearson2016).
Some psychological interventions have focused on finding commonalities and connections, a “common group identity,” that members of both groups share in order to reduce the negative bias that forms toward a perceived outgroup (Gaertner & Dovidio, Reference Gaertner and Dovidio2014). In line with this, omniculturalism has been suggested as a policy for managing diversity with the goal of uniting ethnically diverse societies through giving highest priority to shared similarities and values shared by all groups (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2024). In this policy, group differences are acknowledged, but priority is given to cross-cultural similarities to create an equal and diverse community (Levrau & Loobuyck, Reference Levrau and Loobuyck2018; Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2012, Reference Moghaddam2024). The main focus is on how humans are similar and share common characteristics, rather than how they are different. A representative sample of Americans showed support for this “common group” approach to managing diversity (Moghaddam & Breckenridge, Reference Moghaddam and Breckenridge2010). Related to this, Li and Brewer (Reference Li and Brewer2004) found that when a common goal and shared interests were the focus, a unified American national identity could be reinforced without having to reduce tolerance for diversity. A challenge is that when national identity was based on similarity of identity, tolerance for diversity decreased.
A central theme in this book, then, is to explore paths toward more effective integration of immigrants, refugees, and asylees through critical assessments of different policies. In addition to the traditional policies of assimilation and multiculturalism, the alternative new policy of omniculturalism is also considered. The larger context for these discussions is the development of national identities in relation to deglobalization.
Book Contents
1 The New Immigration Challenge in Global Context
Immigration continues to be seen as a major force of disruption and change in the twenty-first century, both in historically immigrant-receiving societies such as the United States and in areas of the world – such as the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) – which have not traditionally been seen as destinations for immigrants. Public opinion toward immigrants has become increasingly divisive in recent decades and attempts by governments to place restrictions on immigrants have become highly controversial. On the one hand, businesses, education systems, and liberal groups tend to welcome more immigration but, on the other hand, some widely popular nationalist politicians have pushed back against immigration. The contemporary global rise in anti-immigrant sentiment can be tied to the fear that immigrants do not share the same identity as the native-born citizens, and that immigrants use scarce resources badly needed by host populations. The reaction from host society populations has added to the backlash against globalization. This introductory chapter highlights the major themes discussed in the book (immigration, identity, globalization, deglobalization), and provides a framework through psychological theories and diversity management policies (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2008, Reference Moghaddam2012, Reference Moghaddam2024) to help readers better understand the impact that immigrants have on national identity in societies around the world, as well as the global backlash against immigration.
Part I: Understanding the New Immigration Challenge: A Psychological Perspective
The three chapters in Part I explore psychological aspects of immigration in the context of globalization. These psychological aspects include threatened national identity arising from the perceived threat of large-scale immigration (Chapter 2), lower trust and other challenges arising from increased diversity (Chapter 3), and the emergence of a deglobalization movement, associated with ethnocentrism and extremist (sometimes violent) right-wing nationalism (Chapter 4).
2 Threatened National Identity, Nationalism, Patriotism
In Chapter 2 we examine the psychological processes underlying national identity, from basic cognitive processes involving categorization to affective and identification processes associated with nationalism and patriotism. Categorization is a universal cognitive process, with important consequences for intergroup relations. Examples of these consequences are the minimization of differences within groups, and the exaggeration of differences between groups. Categorization is also associated with stereotyping, as in the case of national and ethnic stereotypes. Particularly since the nineteenth century, the nation state has served as a highly important source of social identity, with individuals being socialized (through families, schools, sports events, and various international competitions) to show loyalty, dedication, and favoritism toward the national ingroup. Nationalism can transform to a sense of national superiority and dominance over other nations; whereas patriotism is seen as a healthier love of country (although their relationship with political orientation is not straightforward, Hanson & O’Dwyer, Reference Hanson and O’Dwyer2019). The centrality of the nation in personal and social identity becomes more important during times of threat, such as threats created by wars, or by large-scale migration of dissimilar others into the homeland. Such perceived threats can lead healthy feelings of nationalism to become transformed into less constructive and more ethnocentric populist movements, which create opportunities for authoritarian leaders to grab the spotlight.
3 The Perils of Diversity: Lower Trust, Disunity, and Intergroup Conflicts
Research shows that, on the one hand, increasing diversity in major societies is inevitable; on the other hand, diversity is associated with a number of perils. In the United States and many other societies, the level of trust reported by people has been declining, and research points to increasing diversity as a possible causal factor. People tend to show more trust toward others who they see as more similar to themselves. Also, increasing diversity has been associated with increasing prejudice, discrimination, and intergroup conflicts more broadly. Research in these domains and possible solutions (e.g., increased intergroup contact suggested by psychological science) are critically discussed and assessed. Finally, it is argued that psychological insights could inform effective policies aimed at managing diversity and enhancing trust in increasingly diverse societies.
4 The Deglobalization Era: The Psychology of Backlash against Immigrants and a Globalized Society
Chapter 4 explores how rising perceived threats associated with globalization have led to a backlash, discussed in the newly emerging literature on “deglobalization.” The roots of this deglobalization movement were already evident in fractured globalization, “… the tendency for sociocultural disintegration to pull in a local direction at the same time that macroeconomic and political systems are set up to accelerate globalization” (Moghaddam, Reference Moghaddam2008, p. 13). On the one hand, identity needs tend to pull people to the local level, but on the other hand, economic forces are pushing people toward the global level. This sets up competing trends: For example, at the same time that integration into the EU is ongoing, there is Brexit taking the UK out of Europe, and Scottish nationalism and Irish nationalism pushing to get Scotland and Northern Ireland out of the UK. The backlash against globalization is in part a reaction to perceived threats “against our group, our way of life, our culture, our language, our values, and everything about us” in the face of perceived large-scale “invasions” (examples of such perceived invaders are Mexicans “invading” the United States, Muslims “invading” Europe, Westerners “invading” Islamic societies, and so on).
Part II: The Immigration Challenge and National Identity
National identity is the main theme of the three chapters in Part II. Immigrants are an unknown outsider element that can present a threat to the majority-endorsed national identity – particularly if they are believed to be too different to become integrated and truly belong to society. Thus, a major challenge of managing and maintaining the identity of a nation is controlling immigration. Immigrants are often labeled as “other,” “undeserving,” and seen as separate from the rest of society. The following three chapters delve into this conflict between national identity and immigration, and inclusivity versus exclusivity.
5 Immigration and American Identity
Chapter 5 examines national identity and immigration in the United States, with specific attention to undocumented immigration. Approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants live across the United States. These undocumented immigrants present major challenges for the United States government authorities. First is the challenge to the nation’s ability to successfully manage immigration. The second challenge is perhaps of greater psychological importance: The ability to manage American identity. Undocumented immigrants represent a loss of control over national identity, and the threat of the United States being overtaken by “un-American” people. They present a major challenge to a nation’s ability to successfully manage immigration to, and the identity of, the country. American identity was founded not from people coming from a common place and bloodlines but for a common purpose. Yet recent studies and public opinion polls have shown these shared ideals (e.g., individualism, hard work, liberty, equality of opportunity, and rule of law) are not so common across the United States. There is polarization and division in beliefs regarding America’s history, present, and future. This chapter concludes with discussion of a recent research study exploring the extent that differences in beliefs regarding American identity relate to differences in beliefs regarding undocumented immigrants.
6 Immigration and European Identity
The experiences and challenges of developing a European identity are the central focus in Chapter 6. In addition to developing the EU as an integrated economic system, the challenge has been to develop a “European identity,” so that the approximately 450 million people in the EU will feel that they are part of the same unit. Given the long history of wars within Europe, and the strong identities and fierce rivalries of the European nation states, achieving a European identity has been an uphill battle. One obstacle is demographic: The low birth rate of European countries has resulted in a need for imported labor, but the only available labor force is from non-Western societies, where birth rates are much higher. The result is large-scale importation of populations that are dissimilar to the European hosts, in terms of religion, language, phenotype, and other key characteristics. In reaction to this “invasion,” extremist right-wing nationalism is on the rise in Europe, and the likes of the French extremist (anti-EU) politician Marie Le Pen have gained large-scale popular support and become “mainstream” (Japan is among a number of other non-Western countries that also have a low birthrate, need immigrants, but find it difficult to absorb them, as a newspaper headline suggests: “Japan Needs Foreign Workers. It’s Just Not Sure It Wants Them to Stay,” Rich & Notoya, Reference Rich and Notoya2024). However, despite the threat of anti-EU right-wing extremism, evidence from the Eurobarometer suggests that a sense of European identity is growing stronger in Europe, particularly among younger Europeans.
7 Immigration within the Global South: Case Studies of Low-Income Countries
Chapter 7 uses South America as a case study for migration in the Global South. Most of the literature on immigration focuses on immigration flows to countries in the Global North (including Australia and New Zealand). However, at the global level, most immigration actually occurs within the Global South. Thus, there is a gap in research regarding immigration in the Global South. (See the discussions in Smith-Castro et al., Reference Smith-Castro, Sirlopú, Eller, Çakal, Gibbons and Cumsille2021.) This is not surprising since the countries with the greatest resources for research are in the Global North. This chapter reviews and compares cases from Global South countries to bridge the knowledge gap regarding immigration within this region. Special attention will be given to how national identity, and economic and political contextual differences shape varying responses to immigration in the Global South. Additionally, we examine how religious fundamentalism, secular nationalism, and rising economic growth influence policy responses to immigration. For example, one of the case studies examines the evolution of identity and immigration in the context of Chile, a country that has experienced major changes in government in recent years. Immigration to Chile has grown rapidly since 2010 following years of closed borders and mass emigration in which many Chileans left the country under the Pinochet dictatorship. Today, approximately 70 percent of immigrants have arrived from neighboring countries in Latin America and share cultural commonalities with the Indigenous population in Chile. We discuss this recent increase in immigration and examine the impact this has on Chilean national identity. The discussion also centers on the interactive evolution of Chilean identity and the Indigenous people, given the current context of new demands for intergroup equality and dignity for minorities.
Part III: Traditional and New Solutions to Managing Diversity
The three chapters in Part III look to the future, by exploring different possibilities for how societies characterized by diversity can be better organized. The psychological foundations of the traditional approaches to managing diversity, including multiculturalism, are examined (Chapter 8). Next, psychological research is used to explore alternative approaches to managing diversity, based on a focus on human commonalities and universals (Chapter 9). In the final chapter, we look to the future of diversity and democracy, and examine how immigration can become a force for strengthening democracy, rather than representing threats and lowering trust (Chapter 10).
8 The Psychological Foundations of Multiculturalism and Traditional Solutions to Managing Diversity
Chapter 8 critically examines the traditional diversity management policies of assimilation and multiculturalism, as they evolved in historically immigrant-receiving societies. We identify and assess the psychological assumptions underlying multiculturalism and assimilation, in light of empirical evidence from psychological science. We also assess the public policy challenges of implementing both integration paradigms, highlighting the benefits and challenges to the identities of both host societies and immigrants. Multiculturalism and assimilation first developed in affluent Western countries, and were later exported to low-income societies. We discuss how these exported policies have evolved in low-income societies, and how their limitations have continued in the new contexts. The chapter will also discuss how South American countries managed migration by implementing policies based on assimilation and/or multiculturalism.
9 Building Commonality through Families, Schools, and Communities
In earlier chapters, we argued that a number of factors associated with globalization led to perceived threats to national identities, and a backlash that has been discussed under the term “deglobalization.” Traditional solutions to diversity management, discussed in Chapter 9, have proven to be inadequate for solving twenty-first-century challenges. Our main goal in Chapter 10 is to critically assess an alternative new solution, with reference to research on the common group identity model, contact theory, and similarity-attraction research at the intergroup level. We argue that the alternative policy of omniculturalism is supported by psychological research and has high promise for managing diversity, because it gives priority to what is common to all human groups and individuals. Rather than highlighting and celebrating differences between human groups, omniculturalism prioritizes and celebrates intergroup similarities and the important ways in which all humans are similar to one another. The goal of developing common or “super-ordinate” identities (Gaertner & Dovidio, Reference Gaertner and Dovidio2014) for humanity is discussed at the local level through families, schools, and communities, and globally in relation to climate change, maintaining peace, and other serious challenges faced by all humankind.
10 Looking Ahead: The Future of Immigration, National Identity, and Deglobalization
In the Afterword, we look to the future, particularly with an eye to how national identities can develop in ways that enhance rather than weaken democracy, despite the possibility of perceived threats from immigration. The authors critically analyze the challenge of building a common global identity in an era of deglobalization and polarized national identities.
Concluding Comment
Immigration is now a hotly contested and central political issue in many Western and non-Western societies. In this introductory book, we explore the challenge of immigration from a psychological perspective, highlighting the policy challenges confronting immigrant-receiving societies. Given the demographic and economic trends across the world, with declining and aging populations in most high-income societies, immigration will continue and probably even grow in the foreseeable future. This means that in the future most societies will become more diverse, and it will become even more important to better understand and manage immigration.
