Citizenship and Social Identity Among Migrants

Last reviewed: February 2017

Abstract

Immigration and citizenship have been hotly debated in the United States and other parts of the world in recent years, with some arguing that people should be free to move across borders at will, and others affirming that countries should try to reduce immigration to protect their economies and national characters from attack or from gradual transformation. Often lost in this debate is the perspective of the migrant, including at a minimum some recognition of the delicate—even precarious—position one occupies when deciding to leave one’s country of origin and relocating to another nation.

Overview

Migrants have always had an extremely complicated relationship between their citizenship and their social identity, and this is even more true today because of the pressures of globalization and the political rhetoric surrounding the issue of immigration. Citizenship in this context refers to the tension between a migrant’s citizenship in the country of origin and the migrant’s potential citizenship in the destination country. Social identity refers to a complex array of roles, assumptions, stereotypes, and expectations that society has toward a group and that the group members have about themselves, their group, and society. Whereas citizenship tends to be more of an objective quality, social identity is subjective and fluid—it has to do with how one is perceived by others, how one thinks and feels about those perceptions, and how all of this shapes a person’s sense of themselves (Simon, Reichert, Schaefer, Bachmann & Renger, 2015).

Citizenship is for most people a central part of their social identity; when people are asked to describe themselves, citizenship is almost always near the top of the list, as they identify as German, American, Venezuelan, and so forth. Citizenship encapsulates many different parts of an individual’s sense of the world, from geography and climate to food, religion, career, and customs. Where a person is from accounts for a large part of who that person is.

The process of emigrating from one country to another is so life-altering—one must be willing to undergo profound changes in circumstance to take such a step, and these changes can and often do bring about radical transformations of identity as well. For example, a person might be a university professor in her home country, but upon relocating to another nation as an immigrant, she could find herself forced to accept a much less prestigious position, or no employment at all (Coutinho & Koinis-Mitchell, 2014). It takes time to learn the new country’s language and customs and to make friends and build up a network of personal and professional connections, which puts immigrants who are professionals in their native country at a severe disadvantage.

Further, many countries do not recognize degrees and other types of training that were obtained in foreign countries. At a minimum it is usually necessary to have one’s foreign degree certified as being equivalent to one in the new country, and in many cases an immigrant must start over, repeating an entire course of professional education in the new country. The impact of this on social identity is difficult to overstate—people derive much of their sense of self from their profession, and having to confront a decline in status can be a humbling or even humiliating experience (Verkuyten, 2013).

Apart from the changes in profession that many migrants face, there is the arduous process of acquiring citizenship in the destination country, which also influences social identity. As in the case of careers, the process of migration entails a quite drastic step downward on the ladder of social status; one goes from being a presumably self-reliant, productive member of society in one’s home country, to feeling like one is begging for recognition and assistance in the destination country. The more a particular country is considered a desirable destination by large numbers of migrants, the more challenging it becomes to navigate that country’s immigration process.

In the United States, which is viewed the world over as a haven for religious and political liberty, there are elaborate immigration restrictions in place, and complicated requirements that applicants must meet. For example, because the United States has long received so many more applications for admission per year than it can accommodate, it has implemented a quota system. Each country has a different quota that functions as the maximum number of immigrants from that country that will be allowed entry in a given year (van Bochove, Burgers, Geurts, de Koster & van der Waal, 2015).

Countries from which small numbers of people seek admittance have higher quotas, and countries from which large numbers of people seek entry, such as Mexico and the Philippines, have lower quotas. For those whose applications are accepted under this quota system, the naturalization process still requires many different stages and statuses to be traversed, allowing one to move from lawful permanent resident to full citizen—a process that can take years or even decades for some types of visas. The sheer mechanics of migrating from one country to another can be baffling for all but the most educated and affluent, the more so because in the world of immigration it is easy to make a mistake that can require years of waiting to correct, if there is even a remedy to be had (Verkuyten, Martinovic & Smeekes, 2014).

Further Insights

Of particular concern to the development and evolution of social identity are the personal circumstances many migrants find themselves in that lead them to move to another country. The painful adaptations described above would be enormously challenging to cope with even for a person living in relative comfort, with enough money to live on and with adequate food, shelter, and other basic necessities. The unfortunate truth is that most migrants are not so fortunate—indeed, most people who have these comforts have no reason and no desire to leave their home countries. Those who migrate tend to be the poor, the afflicted, the vulnerable, and the desperate. This may be due to personal circumstances, such as family estrangements or unemployment, or to political situations involving persecution, war, and even the threat of death based on, for example, one’s ethnicity or religion.

Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, the numbers of refugees seeking asylum have risen because of international conflict and uncertainty (Burholt, Dobbs & Victor, 2016). This uncertainty and suffering takes its toll on the social identity developed among various groups of migrants. Many migrants are said to suffer from a kind of societal post-traumatic stress disorder based on not only the harrowing conditions they left behind but also on the sometimes less than welcoming reception they receive in their destination country.

Migrants frequently encounter discrimination, racism, and other forms of prejudice as they attempt to adjust to life in a new nation, and these prejudices complicate their feelings about citizenship in the new country. Migrants want to adapt to the new expectations and customs they are encountering, but at the same time they also resent being mistreated and vilified when they have committed no crime other than desiring to live their lives and be left alone. This creates a simultaneous desire to be a citizen of the new country and to reject this new identity and cling to the old country and its welcoming familiarity.

In keeping with these unfortunate pressures, migrants often describe their identity as if they are being pulled in two different, contradictory directions. They long for a place they cannot return to, and at the same time they feel that no matter how hard they try, they cannot integrate themselves into their new home. This is the often-described situation of being a person without a country, because migrants are changed internally by their new land in such a way that even if they did return to their country of origin, they would find that they no longer feel at home there either (Verkuyten & Martinovic, 2015).

Issues

Migrants face a difficult challenge as they attempt to negotiate the delicate pathway between identification with what it means to be a citizen of their newly adopted country, and maintaining their connection to their original cultural heritage. For one thing, they face the urging of their new homeland that they must adopt its social and cultural norms to acquire citizenship, yet there is almost no guidance available as to what set of beliefs and behaviors demonstrate citizenship in a person. This is particularly true of the United States, a country that since its inception has been populated primarily by people—immigrants—from other places.

While other countries such as France, Germany, and India have more distinctive national characters that make them somewhat easier to describe, the United States is an amalgam of people from many different countries. Immigrants in the United States often settle in enclaves where they can be in the company of others from the same nation of origin—neighborhoods with names such as Chinatown, Little Italy, Koreatown, and Little Armenia—but the character of these is not representative of what it means to be a US citizen. The character of the United States has been an enigma for years; many have tried to describe parts of it—independence, equality, diversity, ingenuity—but a description of the whole remains elusive. It is little surprise, then, that migrants newly arriving in the United States have trouble adapting to their new lives (Prati, Crisp, Pratto & Rubini, 2016).

Migrants’ efforts to adapt to their new culture has often been complicated by resistance from the nation they have migrated to. These negative reactions can take a variety of forms and intensities, from subtle prejudice to overt racism, or even xenophobia, which is an aversion to anyone perceived as an outsider—a much broader form of bias than that which is directed at a specific ethnicity. Regardless of how these attitudes manifest, they inevitably affect the social identity of migrants against whom they are directed. Migrants may feel that they are unwelcome in their new country even though all they wish to do is settle down and resume their lives in peace; even the most innocuous routines from their daily lives can be misinterpreted in the new country as offensive or even threatening (Maciel & Knudson-Martin, 2014). They may even feel that they are not physically safe, depending on the ways in which others express their resistance to the migrants’ arrival. This can cause migrants to feel resentment and fear of their own, and slow down their process of acculturation as they avoid interacting with citizens of their new country and instead remain in the company of other migrants, especially those from the same country as themselves.

Unfortunately, isolating themselves in this way can intensify the bias felt toward the migrant group, as the migrants seeking to avoid rejection may instead be perceived as insular and aloof, and this is held against them as well. This dynamic can persist until migrants have children in the new country. As the children mature, they can act as a bridge between the culture of the migrants’ country of origin and their new home, even helping to translate for their parents. In fact, children and family connections tend to be the primary motivator for migrants to relocate and eventually assimilate (Grant, Abrams, Robertson & Garay, 2015).

Terms & Concepts

Asylum: Asylum is a protected status sought by some migrants who might otherwise not have a valid reason for being admitted to their country of choice. It is based on some type of danger that the migrant would face if forced to return. Usually the source of this danger is one or more persons intent on harming the asylum seeker or a group to which he or she belongs. This is in contrast to refugees, who may be fleeing inhospitable conditions in their home country, but who are not being personally targeted there.

Deportation: Deportation is the process by which a person is removed from a country due to a violation of its immigration laws. In many cases, a person who is deported is also barred from reentering the country for a set term of years, or permanently.

Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR): A lawful permanent resident is an immigration category in the United States. It describes a person who is not a citizen of the United States, but who has been granted permission to live in the country. For many, becoming an LPR is a step on the path to attaining full citizenship. Others are content to remain in LPR status.

Naturalization: Naturalization is the process through which a person from another country becomes a citizen of a new country. There are often restrictions on who may or may not become a citizen—these restrictions can pertain to past conduct or to present status, or other factors such as the number of other immigrants from one’s country of origin who have applied.

Refugee: A refugee is a category of migrant who travels to another country in the hope of settling there, due to persecution in his or her country of origin. Proof of the persecution and the likely harm that would befall one upon returning to the country of origin are usually required of anyone applying for recognition as a refugee.

Visa: A visa is a mark imprinted on the passport of a person visiting from another country, indicating that the person has received permission to remain in the country for a specified period of time. In the United States there are different types of visas one may apply for, each with different purposes and requirements.

Bibliography

Burholt, V., Dobbs, C., & Victor, C. (2016). Transnational relationships and cultural identity of older migrants. Geropsych: The Journal of Gerontopsychology and Geriatric Psychiatry, 29(2), 57–69.

Coutinho, M. T., & Koinis-Mitchell, D. (2014). Black immigrants and school engagement: Perceptions of discrimination, ethnic identity, and American identity. Journal of Black Psychology, 40(6), 520–538.

Grant, P. R., Abrams, D., Robertson, D. W., & Garay, J. (2015). Predicting protests by disadvantaged skilled immigrants: A test of an integrated social identity, relative deprivation, collective efficacy (SIRDE) model. Social Justice Research, 28(1), 76–101. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=102011765&site=ehost-live

Maciel, J. A., & Knudson-Martin, C. (2014). Don’t end up in the fields: Identity construction among Mexican adolescent immigrants, their parents, and sociocontextual processes. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, 40(4), 484–497. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=98950095&site=ehost-live

Prati, F., Crisp, R. J., Pratto, F., & Rubini, M. (2016). Encouraging majority support for immigrant access to health services: Multiple categorization and social identity complexity as antecedents of health equality. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 19(4), 426–438. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=116003522&site=ehost-live

Simon, B., Reichert, F., Schaefer, C. D., Bachmann, A., & Renger, D. (2015). Dual identification and the (de‐)politicization of migrants: Longitudinal and comparative evidence. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 193–203.

Van Bochove, M., Burgers, J., Geurts, A., de Koster, W., & van der Waal, J. (2015). Questioning ethnic identity: Interviewer effects in research about immigrants’ self-definition and feelings of belonging. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(5), 652–666.

Verkuyten, M., & Martinovic, B. (2015). Majority member’s recognition and protest against discrimination of immigrants: The role of power threat, deprovincialization and common national identity. Social Justice Research, 28(3), 257–273. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=109304745&site=ehost-live

Verkuyten, M., Martinovic, B., & Smeekes, A. (2014). The multicultural jigsaw puzzle: Category indispensability and acceptance of immigrants’ cultural rights. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(11), 1480–1493.

Verkuyten, M. (2013). Justifying discrimination against Muslim immigrants: Out-group ideology and the five-step social identity model. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(2), 345–360. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=87917774&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Cleaveland, C. (2013). “Mexico City North”: Identity and anti-immigrant sentiment. Qualitative Social Work, 12(3), 270–288. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=87519762&site=ehost-live

Finell, E., Olakivi, A., Liebkind, K., & Lipsanen, J. (2013). Does it matter how I perceive my nation? National symbols, national identification and attitudes toward immigrants. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 54(6), 529–535.

Gee, G. C., Morey, B. N., Walsemann, K. M., Ro, A., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2016). Citizenship as privilege and social identity. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(5/6), 680–704. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=114452153&site=ehost-live

Kristjánsdóttir, E. S., & DeTurk, S. (2013). Cultural insiders to cultural outsiders: Structure, identity, and communication in the adaptation of domestic, involuntary migrants. Howard Journal of Communications, 24(2), 194–211.

Schwartz, S. J., Kim, S. Y., Whitbourne, S. K., Zamboanga, B. L., Weisskirch, R. S., Forthun, L. F., & ... Luyckx, K. (2013). Converging identities: Dimensions of acculturation and personal identity status among immigrant college students. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19(2), 155–165. Retrieved October 23, 2016, from EBSCO Online Database Sociology Source Ultimate. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sxi&AN=87554003&site=ehost-live