APA Resource Document
Resource Document on Xenophobia, Immigration, and Mental Health Approved by the Joint Reference Committee, June 2010 “The findings, opinions, and conclusions of this report do not necessarily represent the views of the officers, trustees, or all members of the American Psychiatric Association. Views expressed are those of the authors of the individual chapters." -APA Operations Manual.
Prepared by the Committee on Hispanic Psychiatrists
While prejudice is defined as an evaluation (usually negative) of a social group or individual that is significantly based on their group membership, xenophobia can be considered a form of negative prejudice directed against a national or ethnic group. Historically, xenophobia has been associated with various large scale destructive acts of violence between peoples or by persons against other persons belonging to the “other” group. These include wars (from the Crusades to both World Wars and beyond) and genocidal acts and disasters (such as against defenseless peoples such as the indigenous peoples of the Americas, African slaves across the Diaspora, Jews during the Inquisition and during World War II, Armenians (during World War I), Gypsies (during World War II), and, in the last 20 years, Hutu tribesmen in Rwanda, Muslims in the Balkans, Kurds in Iraq and Turkey, and Saharan Africans in Dharfour and Sudan. The United States has had xenophobic experiences and periods in its history. These have included the pervasive attitudes about indigenous populations found by European settlers and about imported Black slaves, the anti-immigrant feelings during late 19th and early 20th centuries (against Irish, German, Italian, Polish, Russian, Chinese, and other early immigrant groups), paternalistic attitudes about Mexico and Latin America over the decades (as exemplified by the doctrine of “Manifest Destiny”), and the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. More recently, during the 1980’s to the current time, xenophobia has fueled much of the antiimmigrant feelings of the late 20th and early 21st Century, which are directed largely against Mexican and other Latino immigrants. Such feelings have been extremely negative to the point that they distort objective economic findings that demonstrate economic benefits to this nation and to border states from immigration, even by undocumented immigrants. For example, the State of Texas Office of the Comptroller (Strayhorn, 2006) published an analysis that clearly demonstrated a net economic benefit of billions of dollars for that state from so-called illegal immigration. After 9-11, people of Arab/ Middle Eastern and Muslim origins have been the target of much xenophobic behavior, commonly termed “Islamophobia,” which has resulted in assaults which are commonly designated as “hate crimes” (Sheridan, 2006). Unfortunately, xenophobia has contributed not only to
individual violent action such as property destruction, assaults, and murder, but has also led to the adoption of controversial U.S. foreign and domestic policies and political positions. Xenophobia usually has a number of underlying conditions and overarching contexts. Since it involves prejudice against a nationality or ethnicity, it is usually associated with assumptions of cultural/ethnic or racial superiority. It is also often rationalized when a group of people is perceived as being a threat to the way of life of the person or the people who experience it (Chen & ParkTaylor, 2006). It is usually experienced as a group phenomenon, but it can also be experienced and acted upon by individuals in daily life and in relationships in the workplace, schools, and other community settings. It is also used to justify warfare or negative action against a group of people (which often disguises more utilitarian motivations). It can become a convenient device to project blame for adversity (including economic adversity, adverse social change, or even personal misfortunes). Xenophobia is easily exploitable by narcissistic charismatic leaders (e.g., Adolf Hitler) to mobilize public opinion and solidify/reinforce total control and power, which ultimately undermines democracy and free speech and choice. Xenophobia can be considered as a defense against individual or mass anxiety resulting from social or individual adversity. It involves the use of pathological defense mechanisms such as projection and displacement and even splitting, with the “other” hated group ending up on the negative side of the split, and the group practicing it on the positive side. It also involves a certain degree of depersonalization, with the individual characteristics of “other” people involved being blurred or subsumed by stereotypes. It contributes to mass hysteria or “groupthink,” especially when it becomes incorporated into ideology (including political, religious, nationalistic, etc.). In totalitarian regimes or nations at war, it is fueled by propaganda (e.g., Nazi mass rallies; depiction of enemy solders as “baby killers” in war bond posters in the US in World War II). However, these days xenophobia is fueled by modern mass media seeking sensationalism. There is some research basis in the social and even biological sciences for understanding xenophobic behaveiors. Animal models using multiple separations can produce social discrimination and xenophobia, such as in baby chicks (Rajecki, Ivins, and Kidd, 1977; Rajecki, Lamb, & Suomi, 1978) and monkeys (Suomi, Harlow, & Domek, 1970; Sackett, Holm, & Ruppenthal, 1976). Research has shown that negative prejudice is damaging and disruptive to social interactions and social justice (Brown, 1995; Jones, 1997). Prejudice has been shown to be common across cultures, time, languages, and national boundaries (Brown, 1995). Some research has supported the