Racism and economic clout

[mr friendly guy]

Its been a given that countries may swing towards racist, nationalistic tendencies when the economy is bad. But what happens if migrants who are targets of racism are from countries which are more economically powerfully than the country they are currently living in.

What happens if South Africa, Nigeria, Angola, Sudan had a GDP nominal twice the size of the equivalent largest EU economies, eg Germany, France, UK, Italy respectively AND this fact is at least well known, in the same manner the average person may not know how large China or Japan's GDP are, but they know they have large economies. Will Italy still show its class and throw bananas at its first black minister. Will black soccer, er sorry football players still be subjected to racist taunts AT THE SAME LEVEL? Racists may be racist for a variety of irrational levels, but will some (a lot of them) respond to strength? After all a lot of the diatribes against Africans have been that they aren't as developed as Europeans, their civilisation isn't as great etc. Hard to say that when you know that they have more economic clout than you.

If having a larger GDP by itself isn't enough, how about having at least a GDP / capita comparable to the rich European nations?

[energiewende]

I don't necessarily agree that there is a historically very strong connection between economic downturns and racism. But if we're to take the biggest example of that as representative - the Nazis in 1930s Europe - then a less economically successful majority persecuting a more economically successful minority (eg. German Jews) is the archetype, not the exception. I think it was a bit more complex than people seeing reduced income and flailing wildly for someone to lash out at. But in particular it's easy to consider a successful, visible minority to be responsible for the state of the country. We do the same thing today with bankers, but when bankers are identified with an ethnic group, potentially justified criticism of bankers could spill over into blanket hatred of the entire group.

The specific example - very rich Africa - probably isn't conducive to this. The people who are members of that race as a whole may be successful, but they're not identified as elites within Western society, so people don't blame them for current conditions. Just look at the treatment of Japanese and [rich ex-pat/student] Chinese today. Some people might blame China in vague terms for the crisis (though I rarely hear this), but targeting East Asians just for being rich and a different race is pretty much unheard of.

[mr friendly guy]

Poorer immigrants aren't identified as elites in some European countries either. They are however targeted by racist rhetoric as they are perceived to be smooching off the welfare state when the country can't afford it, for example the rhetoric from Golden Dawn in Greece.

In regards to the other points, I am pointing out in passing that there is some association with economic downturns with racism. The fact that racists target groups which are weaker economically or stronger for that matter doesn't really affect my point either way.

[madd0ct0r]

Its been a given that countries may swing towards racist, nationalistic tendencies when the economy is bad. But what happens if migrants who are targets of racism are from countries which are more economically powerfully than the country they are currently living in.

Look at the British Empire. The Migrants become twice as racist back. The host society will have a large group of people who will hate and resent the richer new-comers, will have another smaller group of people who'll see the migrants as an opportunity to be exploited but not exactly admired and a final smallest group who may or may not be racist generally but will get on fine with individuals.

My experience in Vietnam was basically this. The wife and I would have comments shouted at us in the street.
Elitism also varies - Philipinos were pretty universally despised, some people were surprised by my qualifications (they were used to bullshit from 'the white guys who knew better')

[mr friendly guy]

Some groups eg Jews and Chinese (in Indonesia) have been attacked for being economically well off. With the Jews its highly unlikely becoming richer would change it, given the conspiracy theories built around them given their history as money lenders (that is the racist propaganda usually relies on the fact they are rich). However with some groups, eg Africans, some Muslims are attacked for smooching off the state, having a "less successful" civilisation etc. Presumably those foundations would be challenged if the countries they came from were economically stronger, and having a larger GDP than say the countries they are currently residing in. The question is, will it make the racist feel stupid, or will they just find a new excuse. Maybe African conspiracies instead of Jewish ones.

[energiewende]

Chinese are badly treated in South East Asia, but this is because they're viewed like Jews were in Germany: a 'too successful' minority that must therefore be exploiting the majority. There's a lot of overlap with socialist rhetoric and ideology; just replace 'the working class' with '<poor racial majority>'. Similarly poor immigrants, when they're complained of, are treated like automation and outsourcing, putting poor majoritarians out of work, possibly for good. This is probably why this rhetoric is so effective, and tends mainly to appeal to poor majoritarians rather than successful businessmen and intellectuals.

But this is why I say it's a bit more complex than bad economic conditions leading to racism. The European anti-immigrant movements have been fairly constant since immigration began. US treatment of blacks tended to improve during the Great Depression. The US seems to have come out of the Great Recession with serious momentum behind an amnesty for illegal immigrants and expanded H1B visa program; at the very least things have not become more restrictive. It depends on the pre-existing intellectual climate.

[Simon_Jester]

Yeah. It's a catch-22.

An unsuccessful immigrant group from a poor country is viewed a bunch of ignorant, criminal subhumans who are all lazy (and live off charity) and hardworking (so they steal jobs).

A successful immigrant group from a rich country, or one that becomes rich after immigrating, is seen as having stolen this wealth from the rightful owners- namely the majority. Therefore, they must be treacherous thieves who secretly scheme to take over the country.

About the only kind of immigrant group that is safe from such targeting is one which comes from a country very similar in social and economic background to the place it arrives to. For example, there was never that much discrimination against French immigrants to the US, excepting times when we were at war with France or likely to become such. Likewise with regards to Germany- but not with regards to other European countries like Ireland, Italy, or Poland, where the typical immigrant came to America from a lower socioeconomic position.

[AniThyng]

Chinese are badly treated in South East Asia, but this is because they're viewed like Jews were in Germany: a 'too successful' minority that must therefore be exploiting the majority.

Yeah, the Chinese in Malaysia are so badly treated, they have the highest overall income, dominate the private sector at all levels and have their own schools in the national education system. Woe be to us.

Indonesian Chinese did not have it so easy, with Suharto trying his level best to break them and force them to submit to the broader indonesian culture (e.g. forbidden to use chinese names) but they never were forced iirc to convert to islam, and continue to be a force in the economy despite being an even smaller minority than in Malaysia.

Singapore - LOL nevermind

Phillipines and Thailand - the chinese population might have assimilated much much better than in malaysia, but it is still obvious that as a whole the community *is* successful than the rest of the nation. Nevermind actually having members of said minority holding the highest levels of government and economy.

So yeah. Honestly I don't necessarily find it surprising that the majority resents this, and sometimes find the case for oppression to be too one sided. Chinese in malaysia can correctly point out it's difficult to get promoted as a civil servant, but

a) no one seriously joins the civil service unless you mean doctors or other prestigious civil service jobs.

b) i'm sure malay employees in the private sector love it when everyone else in the office speaks mandarin.