Résultat de la recherche
Are immigrants allowed to criticize the government? Ingroup identity, economic threat, and majority group support for immigrant civil liberties in the US, Switzerland, and Turkey
Assaults on immigrants’ civil liberties have been on the rise across Western countries. This study asks whether majority-group natives exhibit less political tolerance (i.e., support for restrictions on civil rights and liberties) toward immigrants who criticize the government compared to citizens, adding thereby a neglected element to the discussion on the conflicted nexus between migration and citizenship. Drawing on social identity theory and theories of economic threat, we find that across three countries (US, Switzerland, and Turkey) immigrant critics are more strongly penalized. However, the size of the penalty is not moderated by ingroup identity salience, but there is evidence in the US that ingroup victimhood—a different measure of ingroup attitudes—does moderate the treatment effect. Moreover, in all three countries, the treatment effect is amplified by economic threat, and in the US and Turkey, but not in Switzerland, we find significant three-way interactions between the treatment, ingroup identity salience, and economic threat, showing that economic threat activates the effect of ingroup salience. Our findings add to the inconclusive existing evidence on the link between identity salience and political intolerance, by showing that only in combination with realistic feelings of threat (economic threat or victimization) will national or white identity amplify political intolerance towards immigrants.
Crises, Migration and (Im)Mobility: Towards a Reflexive and Multilevel Approach
Scholarly inquiry into the intersections of migration, mobility, and crisis has mainly focused on international migration. The scope of this scholarship underscores the continuing influence of methodological nationalism in the field. We argue for a broader exploration of mobility (and immobility) perspectives. Accordingly, we embrace an encompassing understanding of crises as particular events and structural conditions with rather “extensive and large-scale changes and effects” (Bergman-Rosamond et al. 2022: 5). We further adopt what Bösch et al. (2020: 5) call a reflexive perspective “in which the constructivist dimension remains acknowledged” without relativizing a more objectivist view of “the real causes and effects” of the crises in question. Our approach builds on the concept of the Migration-Mobility Nexus (see Piccoli et al. 2024) and its interplays (continuum, enablement, opposition, and hierarchy) to study the crisis-induced shifts between migration, mobility, and immobility. To understand the complex and potentially intertwined ways in which crises interact with the Migration-Mobility Nexus, we propose to combine a multilevel analysis of experiences, practices and agency, perceptions and attitudes, and governance.