Mutual Accommodation as a Way of Global Cohesion - An Essay Exmple

In the wake of increased international migration, the effects, on both the migrants and the receiving nation are inevitable. Complaints have been levelled against the immigrants by the receiving communities; that those moving to new places often fail in their integration and acculturation processes to level up and adjust to the cultures, languages, religion, social and economic classes of the places or countries to which they move (Adachi, 2011). While the processes of adapting to new ways of life are fully operating, the general view and need to adapt to or adopt a new lifestyle is a mistaken venture. The clash of cultures and ethnic practices has often led to tensions between the two sets of people, undermining the economic, social cohesion and mutual growth in the process (Spoonley, 2014). Not everyone supports mutual inclusion as some believe it interferes with the spirit of national unity. The argument is that the influx of foreigners with their different values will destroy the western democratic value systems (Sasmooth, 2007).

Existence and lack of mutual accommodation come with several impacts, both positive and negative. That forms the basis on why most countries are not very receptive to the idea of immigrants, yet where they have settled, the hosting community have little option other than maximizing on benefits of the same group, which can be immense too. The paper highlights the fears, the benefits and the net effects of mutual accommodation, treating it as a concept that is either existing, or which needs actions.

Fears Surrounding Diversity and Immigration

Some receiving nations fear the adverse effects that come with immigration and diversity such as the possibility of not being able to control those who enter or leave their countries. This can be demonstrated in the widespread fear that came along with Trumps presidency. President Trump has been very vocal that the contribution of immigrants to America was insignificant, compared to the cost of having them in the country. From the cost of providing them with jobs and other economic benefits to the security risks that accompany them, Trump and millions of other supporters have consistently argued that they need to restrict foreigners entering the United States. Such reasons create paranoia thereby jeopardizing mutual accommodation, even when other immigrants are allowed into the country. Their argument is that they risk losing their sovereign right to determine new entrants, even when some have questionable backgrounds. For example, after President Trump inauguration, he went ahead to ban citizens from several countries from entering the US, an issue that has been a matter of public debate as well as legal battles. Such instances escalate tensions and undermine the probability of adequate accommodation for other individuals with relations with banned people. Discourses are claiming that when accorded full rights, the immigrants would swamp in leading to a significant challenge in controlling the process (Chan, & Chan, 2006). These fears are unlikely to come to pass due to the increasing popularity of the non-permanent migration.

The modern global migration tendency is that people do not prefer permanent settlement in the new destinations. Instead, they opt to travel while keeping the citizenship and families in their native nations. The affordable costs, frequency and international travel and communication, have made movements easier than before. The strict immigration rules and regulations that have been put in place, for instance, the change of Americas Green Card VISA program, is aimed to discourage permanent immigration. It will be hoped that limiting immigration will reduce elements of suspicion among natives, making them more welcoming and accommodative to immigrants. Trumps call that foreigners were taking Americas jobs while campaigning for the presidency was detrimental to efforts of making the entire United States population receptive to immigrants. Instead, it was likely to escalate suspicion. That cannot be healthy for any community will to accommodate immigrants with varied cultures, ethnicities and other distinguishing features. A contrary would possibly provide a basis for mutual understanding and accommodation for widespread global cohesion.

Mutual Accommodation for Solidarity against Terror

The modern era, with its technological advancement and globalization, is associated with so many upheavals which, when not monitored mutually by everyone, can disrupt the peace and the peaceful coexistence and stability that all humans desire. Such challenges affect negatively everyone irrespective of country of origin, ethnic background, or religious affiliations. One of such global problems as terrorism. The constant mobility associated with the new age might let the knowledge of who is living next door pass unnoticed. It is possible not to be aware who moved to the neighborhood in the last few days. There is no sense in saying that when an act of terror strikes, the only people who lose their lives are one set of individuals, which is not true. Death does not choose. Everyone at the point of impact will probably die. There is need to understand one another, and respect and appreciate the diversities which exist among populations and at the same time, to enable facing issues like terrorism with a single spirit. Antiterrorism conscience and alertness are the issues everyone should take very seriously. That can only be emphasized and dealt with in an environment of mutual understanding and togetherness. Diversity should not be a basis for dividing people. Therefore the global community must unite to fight such ills.

Social Integration

Social integration is one of the inclusion models that have been used to achieve mutual accommodation in the 21st century (Sassmuth, 2007). There is need to find common ground as far as the immigrant, and native values, needs, rights, and responsibilities are concerned for a nation to move forward on all fronts. America and many other countries in Europe have put integration as a central issue in policymaking, and this is because it cuts across other significant policies like citizenship, education, labor market, and housing, immigration culture, and heritage. Human needs are meant to care for all people irrespective of race, color or regions from which they come. What is good for the majority of the native population is also good for the minority immigrant population (Sassmuth, 2007). The discourses and the debates involving rights and responsibilities of both the immigrant and native individuals have gained momentum. Social cohesion so much depends on the matters of identity and constant interaction among members of a community. Integration laws encourage comprehensive education, job market, and cultural recognition all which are important for a country to achieve its economic and social goals. Several countries, including the United States and EU countries, have emphasized those policies, and even though they continue to face several discriminatory challenges which undermine the efforts of social integration, the success that has been recorded cannot be downplayed.

The Economic Benefits of Mutual Cohesion

The economic advancement of a country hinges on its population and the labor dynamics involved (Spoonley, 2014). Without mutual accommodation, employment policies might be structured in a way that ostracizes the immigrant population from the labor market, which is in itself detrimental to the host nation. Every person in a country is already an expense, or in other words costs a government something ranging from the cost of healthcare, security to the infrastructure they are using. That only means if anyone is allowed into a country, he or she must be integrated and allowed to contribute to its development in various ways; one is entering the labor market. With restrictions in place, the minority population will not be able to access good education or secure jobs due to shortages in skills. Consequently, they will struggle to fit in the social classes, something which can lead to possible engagement in violent activities, such as it has been demonstrated in France, one of the developed nations with the largest number of immigrants, many of them unemployed. In Germany for example, the immigrants from third world countries are restricted in the labor markets. The trend follows that citizens from the European Union have the upper hand in job openings even if the qualifications are equal (Adachi, 2011). The When such underpinnings weigh down on the host country, the general economy would be adversely affected. It would be an undesirable backwardness at a time when the superiority of an economy carries more advantages.

The migrants and the migrant laborers contribution to the economies of the host nations have been a verily ignored factor, and this is done through both their labor skills and taxation channels. Their net economic contribution surpasses that of the non-migrants since in most cases, the host governments do not take care of the education cost and training of the migrant populations, as it the case with natives. Because of that, they should have equal rights to get access to the infrastructure and services provided by the host governments (Singer, 2004). It is also important to argue that such individuals do pay taxes, like any other. In the recent past, several foreigners have faced criminal charges over fraud in Europe, particularly athletes playing for soccer clubs in Spain, Germany, England and other countries within the region. First, it costs the government significantly to follow up on such crimes, an illustration that having an immigrant is not that cheap, and demonstrates like any other citizens, the contributes to the governments revenues through taxes, promoting local economies. Mutual cohesion and accommodation would significantly increase that. Another example is the number of field athletes running for various countries, the United States being one from other nations, many of them migrants. They not only put the country on the global platform but also contribute economically. A case example is some of the United States marathoners whose origin is in Africa. Those individuals come here because of the mutual understanding between the respective countries, and for the reception and accommodation, they receive. With the above as examples, it is evident that mutual understanding and accommodation is highly beneficial and should be embraced.

Global Cohesion from Super Diversity

This term refers to the existence of large ethnic and immigrant groups collectively in one area (Chan, & Chan, 2006). Empirical research has found out that super diversity can result in massive economic benefits (Spponley, 2014). The opportunities that diversity and mutual solidarity bring include increased levels of worker productivity and cross-fertilization of ideas that can lead to innovation and creativity. The migrant populations living in new countries can increase the demand and supply for locally produced goods. Cities or nations with large immigrant populations have been found to have higher innovation and productivity scopes. Research literature and studies related to diversity in the United States suggest that the US relies on immigration for regional growth. Innovative ideas contributed to the growth of Silicon Valley. It has also been noted that being open to immigrants entices entrepreneurial persons (creative outsiders) and firms. According to research, 25% of populations in the immigrant receiving countries are foreign-born (Spoonley, 2014). Such countries partially rely on the immigrant population for skills and labor force. Even though political and racial prejudices still mar superiority,...