According to Gerstenfeld (2004), this is another common motivator of hate crimes. It occurs in circumstances where a certain social group in society either has access to more opportunities in terms of employment, education and other aspects of the social, economic or political life. It may also occur when there is the perception that one group has higher opportunities than other groups, even if this is not necessarily the case. In the US, most native Americans have better social and economic opportunities compared to immigrant groups.
As a result of this, these immigrant groups are forced to live in poor neighborhoods and projects. This increases their probability of joining gangs, and after they join them, they start targeting the people who they perceive to be the cause of their problems. In most cases, white native Americans are targeted due to similar reasons. This situation may also take the reverse form. The native residents of a country may view foreigners and immigrants as the reason why there are limited employment and other opportunities.
As a result of this, the immigrant groups are attacked by native residents. Retaliation. As was discussed before, past historical injustices are major factors which lead to the formation of hate groups. Some of these hate groups are filled with so much rage that they dedicate their lives to ensuring the destruction of the groups which they decide to retaliate against. This is one reason which demonstrates the danger of hate groups. When hate groups are formed to retaliate against other groups, soon the groups also form their own hate group to defend themselves.
After some time, the society is filled with many hate groups whose mission is to ensure the destruction of other groups, and it is difficult to neutralize the groups once they reach this stage, since they will be continuously provoking each other leading to lack of social order in society. Methodology. This paper uses a combination of primary and secondary sources of data. The primary sources of data include interviews and observations while the secondary sources of data include the use of academic books and journals. The strengths and weaknesses of these sources will be briefly analyzed below;
Primary data sources. These are the most valid sources of data and they include observations and interviews. These sources of data share the following advantages; the first advantage is that there is the possibility of corroboration in the event that the researcher or the interviewee does not clearly understand a question, or answer to a question. Corroboration is possible since the interviewee is physically present. Another benefit is that the non-verbal forms of communication such as gestures and body language can be observed and information deduced from them.
This is a very beneficial form of extracting information from a person since most people exhibit body language subconsciously. It may reveal information which is much deeper than most forms of information can extract. However, interviews suffer from certain weaknesses and one of them is the low response rates which are attributed to interviews. Some people are not receptive to interviews and prefer to give anonymous feedback, and this is the reason that there are generally low response rate associated with interviews.
According to Creswell (2002), interviews do not present the interviewer with an opportunity to ask for clarification in case there is an unclear response to a question. This is because the interviewee is not physically present to answer such questions. This may make researcher come up with an inconclusive or invalid research. Another weakness of an interview is that open ended questions usually attract long responses which are difficult to evaluate. Finally, some individuals only give the socially desirable responses in interviews. This may limit the accuracy of information which is received by the researcher.