While the 'ethnic groups' different positions in the social division of labor (although, of course, the boundaries of social positions are not completely airtight), it is realistic "to some point-to assume that different interests exist. In other words, the "we" and "them" might make some sense in materialistic terms, beyond the ghostly illusions of representations of "culture" and "civilizations." So we can say in previous post and other entries of this blog, that foreigners have endured the most unpleasant of our model of capital accumulation in economic good times and the balance of the mobilization of the workforce has been generally favorable for local people (at the expense of non-native). However, once generated these categories or labels that classify people into imaginary groups, they come alive as cultural representations that tend to reproduce and perpetuate a certain state of things and generally unequal relations power. In our universe of meaning, these categories to be sacred and objectify, replaces reality itself. The "soul" that animates the life of these labels is formed by a series of emotional experiences, more or less intensity, "which give them relevance. We know that emotions play an important role in memory and the construction of cognitive categories with which we view the world. This emotional experience is achieved through shared expressions scorn, mockery deeper or more superficial or, in a more "politically correct" in the idealized approach of conflict "of cultures" or "civilizations" or the continuous bias "culturalist" in terms of "integration." In reality and subconscious way, this is a process of affirmation of identity (usually in positive terms by comparison) and therefore construction of a collective identity of others, usually referred to in derogatory terms. The distortions can be seen in the classic debate on the Prohibition of the handkerchief on the head for the streets "of this issue we also have to deal in more detail, are an example of how the real merits of the case is not the affirmation of human dignity but the affirmation of female superiority "cultural" (and through this mythology the superiority of the group that exercised the domain). This emphasizes the existence an "us" and a "them" is not included in the about us and therefore can be excluded from the solidarity, and that is not part of the same solidum .
Once converted into things, these categories of exclusion generate dysfunctional effects for members of the dominant ethnic group that does not belong to the privileged classes of society. Because, as I tried to explain above, the categories of exclusion can hide the real relations of interdependence and prevent the setting of common interests. This is very clear in the case of employees, the discourse of "foreigners", "us removed our jobs "or" make our reduce wages, "even though no explicit criminalization of immigrants, but with pure evil capitalists and top hat, he did join in the process of fragmentation of the working class and their subsequent impotence. has a sense to think about the effect of mobilizing the workforce, but the fact is that the speech ends up affecting aliens already here and actually participating in our society, composing national working class (and in the background affects even those who have English nationality but are still perceived as outsiders). In this case, the categories of exclusion serve to nullify the collective power of workers .
But this does not happen only in the workplace. The categories of exclusion also conceal the common interests of indigenous and allochthonous as users of public services, citizens, and even consumers, making it difficult to control. Deficits in health and education, for example, hastily attributed to excessive population derived from the annoying presence of immigrants who are perceived as "surplus." As if the migrants did not have enough dignity to be equally deserving of these public services (it is equivalent to saying the stupidity of that healing does not work because there are too many women) or as migrants are not really part of society. His status as "immigrants" imagination sends a position "outside", hiding the fact that we really are part of our society and are involved in interdependent relationships with us. "Immigrants" work and consume (buy goods and services in the market with revenues of his work), with both activities generate benefits for both capital and profits for the state, also paid their own taxes and contributions; allow survival of certain sectors, the maintenance of certain rates and the integration of women native in the labor market in replacing caregiving tasks, their discomfort may be our discomfort, lack of real integration affects our lives. They live with us, work with us, suffer with us. And yet, they are perceived as eternal "other" would be entitled only to eat the cake when the locals have been satisfied (but let's services, social, by its very nature, are always insufficient). People who suddenly turns out that "plenty", especially in the context of crisis.
This effect is largely emotional and relates to the links that connect the categories of exclusion with our emotions. Therefore, the effect can occur even if formally sustain the right of foreigners to equal access to these services (which, obviously, does not hold all the world). We affirm this right but, paradoxically, we can afford to say "left" or "collapse of social security" or "overburdened the education system." We affirm equality, but when we find a real equal treatment, what we perceive as a "privilege" of foreigners who apparently placed above the dominant ethnic group (the cognitive bias of "most discriminated against" is very typical and certainly deserves a separate entry.) Is not necessarily a coherent and explicit but just a vague feeling that report and live with more egalitarian discourse.
Thus, the government can channel their responsibilities towards immigrants in the maintenance of public services for social citizenship. The dismantling of the welfare state can stand on the speech of immigrants abound. As an example may serve Arias Cañete statements last year, " We have some tensions in the health system of the autonomous communities spectacular with emergencies collapsed because immigrants have discovered the greatness of the national health system. Of course, someone that having a mammogram in Ecuador have to pay the wages of nine months come here, to the emergency room and make a quarter of an hour . "You have to wonder if, for example, health problems in the community of Madrid due to the excesses of migrants who have discovered our greatness and apparently the parasites. In fact, immigrants use health services less often than the English, probably because it is a younger population and also because they have less knowledge of the institutions. However, emotionally, their presence is most striking and most annoying, especially if you are before you in line for emergencies. Certainly, the older population makes a greater use of health services, but that does not mean they have less right than younger people to care, saying that would be perceived as a bit silly, but is that the largest voting yes and thus are not just objects of discourse but also partners.
be aware of this effect is a necessary condition to overcome it and find out how solidum transcends the categories with which we have built solidarity exclusive.
