Theoretical and conceptual framework

Racism has its origins in the emergence of the notion of race that, according to ^{Knauth (2000)}, is a concept associated with differentiation based on physical characteristics-skin color, facial features, type of hair, height, eye color-. This distinction is used to legitimize power relations that result in discriminatory practices. Moreover, phenomenon such as heightened identity expressed through ethnocentricity generate insecurity and mistrust in the presence of the other, who represents an outsider or something foreign when faced with one own's symbols of belonging and identity, that are threatened by the unknown. Situations like xenophobia, prejudice, stereotyping and dependency, on their own, do not cause racism but they do contribute to the emergence of the phenomenon. For ^{Taguieff (2001)}, racism is an ideology tied to the theory of inequality among different human races that is founded in biological determination that materializes in discriminatory practices associated with prejudice and stereotyping.

^{Wade (2014)}, also reflecting about racism, investigates the chronology of the concept of race and affirms that it acquired diverse interpretations depending on the socio-historical context at the time: in the 16th century, it was used to name the lineage or stock of animals, mainly horses and cows; in the 18th century, it was associated with modernity and processes of European colonization; in the 19th century, grounded in scientific racism, it served to justify human diversity using skull and body measurements; and in the 20th century, backed by the generalized rejection of Nazism, it was replaced by the word ethnicity and used as a category to indicate social and cultural differences in a variety of academic and political spaces. For the authors, independent of multicultural and integration policies, in di fferent contexts the concept of race acquires multiple connotations that continue to permeate the life of inhabitants in many different regions around the planet.

According to ^{Wieviorka (2009, p. 13)}, it is possible to approach the definition of racism by "characterizing a human grouping using natural attributes that are also associated with intellectual and moral features that can be applied to each individual related to that grouping and, on that basis, adopt certain practices of inferiorization and exclusion." Racism naturalizes inequality, under biological argumentation that justifies the exclusion of the other and favors situations of social differentiation. Some scholars on this topic, such as ^{Wieviorka (2009}, ²⁰⁰⁷, ¹⁹⁹²⁾, ^{Castel (2010)} and ^{Cisneros (2004}, ²⁰⁰¹⁾, situate the origin of racism in connection with different social and historical events. Nevertheless, ^{Castellanos (2001)} points out that processes of colonization and the development of different nation-states, together with nationalist sentiments and the rise of racist theories from the 19th century, drove manifestations of these theories in Europe and the Americas.

The transcendence of racism lies in its use to legitimize power relations of one group in regards to other groups, placing them in situations of subordination (^{Knauth, 2000}; ^{Castellanos, 2001}; ^{Paris, 2002}; ^{Gall, 2004}; ^{Casaús, 2009}; ^{Guimaraes, 1996}). Racial distinction, which gives rise to racial discrimination, occurs associated with phenomena such as xenophobia, in which the presence of the other, perceived to be the stranger or the outsider, increases beliefs and prejudice about inferiority. The propagation of different racial theories during the 18th and 19th centuries, such as the theories Goebbels defended that were backed by genetic studies and theories from Spencer and Gobineau that were based in biological grounds (Gall, 2004), justified physical differences and served as scientific explanation for demonstrating racial differentiation, affirming that nature generates inequalities and thus, these distinctions are natural. Phenotypical traits reinforced racial differences that, in turn, justified social stratification, segregation and discrimination mainly for populations of Afro-American and indigenous descent (^{Castellanos, 2001}; ^{Paris, 2002}).

Phenotypical traits were associated with individual potentialities and weak-nesses, thus justifying the place each one occupies on the social scale. Afro-descendant and indigenous populations were placed on the last rung of the scale, being identified as clumsy, cheating, dumb slackers (^{Paris, 2002}). In contrast, the collective imaginaries that associated white-skinned people with beauty, intelligence and professional success were disseminated. The incorporation of these stereotypes to society gave way to racial prejudice that generated discriminatory practices with heavy repercussions for segregated groups. From that perspective, differentiated groups have few possibilities for upward mobility, since once their physical features are associated with individual potentialities and abilities; these groups are generally discriminated at work, school and in the community.

For Castoriadis, racism as a universal, aggravated phenomenon is present in almost all human societies because, "It is the apparent inability to constitute one-self as oneself without excluding the other and the apparent inability to exclude the other without devaluing and ultimately hating him" (^{2005, p. 34}). Unlike other theorists such as ^{Wieviroka (2009)}, ^{Taguieff (2001)} and ^{Gall (2004)}, who reject the idea that racism is a product of modernity, on the contrary, ^{Castoriadis (2005)} contends that it arose in the most ancient civilizations since even in the first writings of the Old Testament, we find manifestations of rejection of the others-the unbelievers-who professed different beliefs and defended them with the sword and the cross. He argues how exclusion and inferiorization of the other are linked to the social imaginary that communities build, with their ways of representing the world and categorizing it.

Institutional racism is known as the set of ways and practices that organizations adopt internally that serve to reproduce discrimination, violence and segregation based on ethnic origins (^{Wieviorka, 2009}, ²⁰⁰⁷), such as segregration of some children in a school setting for not speaking Spanish, not being hired for a job due to physical appearance, or the difference in treatment when receiving a public service. Different specialists in this field (^{Wieviorka, 2009}; ^{Taguieff, 2001}; ^{Gall, 2004}) have documented multiple manifestations of this phenomenon and confirmed how, instead of disappearing, racism is changing. This phenomenon is called neo-racism (^{Balibar and Wallerstein, 1991}), cultural racism (^{Wieviorka, 2009}), differencialist racism (^{Taguieff, 2001}), and modern racism (^{Javaloy, 1994}; ^{Espelt and Javaloy (n.d.)}, to refer to the phenomenon whereby racism not only does not disappear but as a result of processes of globalization, adopts new expressions that turn into discriminatory practices that no longer focus on physical features rather on cultural characteristics. These new forms of racism consider culture to be the main obstacle to the lack of integration of these minorities, who are rejected. ^{Wieviorka (2009)} also refers to this new reality as symbolic racism.

Research on racism

During the final decades of the 20th century and the first decades of the current century, numerous studies have been developed on racism in Europe and Latin America (^{Paris, 2002}). Although this is not a recent phenomenon, with some theorists maintaining that it is as ancient as early civilizations (^{Castoriadis, 2005}), other specialists place its beginnings starting with modernity linked to the processes of colonization during the 16th and 17th centuries (^{Castellanos, 2001}; ^{Moreno, 1994}; ^{Wieviorka, 2009}; ^{Paris, 2002}; ^{Gall, 2004}; ^{Casaús, 2009}; ^{Wade, 2013}), in which incursion to unknown territories and the opening of new trade routes opened other types of relations with different human groups. There is an abundant production of short theoretical essays that address the phenomenon of racism (^{Wieviorka, 2009}, ²⁰⁰⁷, ¹⁹⁹²; ^{Taguieff, 2001}; ^{Gall, 2004}; ^{Wade, 2013}, ²⁰¹¹; ^{Castoriadis, 2005}; ^{Moreno, 1994}; ^{Castellanos, 2001}) but less empirical research that demonstrates racist discriminatory practices in different contexts. This article is interested in documenting some pieces of research that have studied concrete, explicit manifestations of racism through individual or institutional practices that occur in environments that generally fail to recognize the presence of current racist phenomena.

In Spain, several works call attention to discrimination towards African populations that emigrate to Europe. In an article published in the El País newspaper, ^{Borasteros and García (2007)} document the existence of numerous articles on racial discrimination between April 2006 and May 2007. They point out the emergence of a new racial panorama in the face of the rising wave of immigrants. They call this new visage of discrimination low intensity racism and demonstrate its presence in the collective imaginary with several testimonies that show indirect yet latent rejection of foreigners, who are blamed for the lack of employment, housing and room in schools. In her work, Moreno also demonstrates the phenomenon of growing racism in different European contexts, which she defines as "a doctrine that represents the justification and natural legitimization of a modern context hierarchy that is ideologically dominated by the idea of equality (^{1994, p. 50}). ^{Espelt and Javaloy (n.d.)} analyzed the results of surveys used with the Spanish population as applied by the Center for Sociological Research. They document attitudes on immigration, finding strong contradictions between an attitude of tolerance and the denial of racist attitudes, accepting that the majority of Spanish people have race-related prejudice, particularly towards African migrants. Although a high percentage (95%) defend the freedom of migrants to work and live, only 26% would be willing to give them refuge, whereas 11% express rejection and 15% do not answer. The authors express concern in the face of doubtful answers because, although a large number of Spanish interviewees see themselves as not prejudiced, they indicate that the majority of Spanish citizens are prejudiced against foreigners.

Using Pettigrew and Meertens Blatant and Subtle Prejudice Scale (BSPS), Sánchez, Campillo, Illán, Llor and Ruiz explored student attitudes in the Murcia region in regards to Maghrebi immigrants. The authors affirm that due to the promotion of democratic principles in different societal spheres, "[people] have developed more concealed and refined ways to channel their prejudice, characterized by discriminatory beliefs and feelings that acquire different nuances from age-old racism" (^{2005, p. 2}), which the authors called subtle expressions of racism, allowing them to establish the basis for the existence of a high percentage of racist expressions among sample subjects. ^{Cea (2009)}, placing an emphasis on methodology, studies the validity of the survey to detect racism and xenophobia in the attitudes of Spanish peoples prior to the immigration phenomenon. The author concludes that many results from past measurements can be attributed to characteristics of the instruments themselves and proceeds to underscore the importance of methodological interaction in empirical research to ensure the validity of results.

In France, ^{Castel (2010)} looks further into so-called negative discrimination, pointing out the subtle ways in which society and institutions discriminate against French citizens of African descent. He documents discriminatory practices to which ethnic minorities are subject as part of the legacy of colonial racism, as society, raising the defense of Republican principles, demands they assimilate and renounce their culture of origin or remain in a situation of social, political, and cultural subordination.

In Latin America, different empirical studies show the multiple ways in which racism manifests itself in daily life. In Ecuador, ^{Rahier (2013)} documents the presence of racist representations of the black population in the mass media, particularly in the Vistazo magazine, who appear as beings with negative characteristics, as a way to justify domination exercised over the others. ^{Traverso-Yépez (2005)} analyzes racist discourse from linguistic practice, arguing the institutionalization of racial segregation against the non-white population by Ecuadorian elites. She carried out semi-structured interviews with leaders from political, economic and cultural spheres, concluding that the presence of discourses that minimize racial discrimination towards indigenous and black populations justify the pejorative image of the other as different, as a threat, and emphasizing that these discourses contribute to the reproduction of prejudice and conceptions in daily interactions. ^{Placencia (2008)} reflects on discriminatory practices based on ethnic-racial prejudice towards Kichwa indigenous peoples by white-mestizo Ecuadorians. Using observation, in-depth interviews and focus groups with indigenous residents in Quito, she studied the ways in which discriminatory practices are constructed to inferiorize indigenous peoples compared to white-mestizo peoples and how these mechanisms are reproduced in different arenas of daily co-existence.

In Guatemala, ^{Casaús (2009)} discerns the phenomenon of racism practiced by the State during the 1980's, which culminated in the brutal repression of the civil population and the genocide of Mayan indigenous peoples, resulting in the calculated deaths of approximately 200,000 Guatemalans. The author examines the results of some studies to demonstrate that Guatemala is a racist country, a situation that the political class and some intellectuals fail to recognize. In one piece of research, she also presents testimonies from family members and survivors of the killings perpetuated by the army, with the objective of diagnosing levels of racism within the population, in order to generate public policy to combat and erradicate racism.

In Venezuela, ^{Ishibashi (2003)} studies racist practices of the mass media, analyzing the exclusion and inclusion of black people. This study combines a quantitative study, which counts the participation of black people in different forms of media, with in-depth interviews and working groups, in order to identify practices of exclusion towards this population by the media. For the author, the most serious problem facing this country is the invisibility of minority groups and systematic denial of racist practices that are present in Venezuelan society.

In Colombia, ^{Ojeda and González (2012)} studied student stereotypes at the University of Nariño in southwestern Colombia. Using focus groups, they inquired into perceptions of their Afro-Colombian and indigenous classmates, using four categories of analysis: personality, interpersonal relations, academic performance and cultural traditions. In their results, the authors found that negative stereotypes prevail towards these communities, thus determining the types of relations established among students who do not belong to these groups with Afro-Colombians and indigenous peoples.

In Brasil, work by ^{Guimaráes (1996)} addresses the myth of alleged institutional anti-racism that the author categorizes as assimilationist and universalist, for seeking to conceal the racial differentiation derived from physical features of the population. This policy sought to naturalize racial differences and make social phenomena such as poverty; ignorance and unemployment appear to be natural, by justifying social hierarchies and relations of domination and exploitation towards indigenous peoples and Afro-descendants. According to the author, phenotypical characteristics of the Brazilian population have racialized and symbolically and materially established a system of social hierarchization founded in the lightness of skin color and social whitening.

In Chile, ^{Pávez (2012)} inquiries about experiences of discrimination and racism of Peruvian children who migrate to the city of Santiago. Pavez conducted observations in two public schools and interviews with 15 children of Peruvian families. The data was analyzed based on three categories: skin color and phenotype; personality; and nationality. In her conclusions, the author indicates that conditions such as nationality, social class and gender are used to justify discriminatory practices towards Peruvian migrant children.

As observed by the brief overview of these investigations, racist practices continue to permeate daily life in many regions of Europe and the Americas and there is a lot of work to be done to bring visibility to this issue and fight for the eradication of racism.

Racism in Mexico

As a multicultural and multiethnic country, the phenomenon of racial discrimination is not a new problem. The origin can be found in the processes of colonization during the 15th and 16th centuries in territories known as New Spain (^{Castellanos, 2001}; ^{Paris, 2002}; and ^{Gall, 2004}). The argument of racial difference grounded in biological difference has been used to perpetuate a racist legacy, emanating from the process of colonization in Latin America and particularly in the conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards, to justify situations of domination and subordination of native groups. In the case of indigenous peoples in Mexico, belonging to an ethnic group makes them subject to differential treatment that magnifies their racial origin, making their differences a disadvantage: skin color, clothing, speech and customs are all motives for differential treatment that leads to mistreatment and stigmas by people of European descent and mestizos (mixed-raced peoples). Discrimination emphasizes differences, placing the person who practices discrimination in a position of apparent superiority and placing the target on a plane of subordination. Currently, according to figures provided by the 2010 Mexico Population and Housing Census conducted by the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (^{INEGI, 2010}), there are 15.7 million indigenous peoples in Mexico, 6.6 million of which speak an indigenous language and 9.1 million who identify them-selves as indigenous peoples, even though they do not speak a native language.

In Mexico, discrimination places discourses on citizenship, equality and human rights, as well as the 4th Article of the Mexican Constitution that prohibits discrimination in our country, at the center of this debate by affirming the presence of multiple racist practices in different spheres of social life. Many different studies conducted on the living conditions of indigenous peoples in Mexico (^{Paris, 2002}; ^{Castellanos 2001}; ^{Cisneros, 2004} and ²⁰⁰¹; ^{Gall, 2004}; and ^{UNDP, 2010}), confirm the huge inequality and social inequity that have characterized these populations for decades. The Human Development Report 2010, The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development (^{UNDP, 2010}) shows figures in reference to the indigenous population, indicating that these groups reach a Human Development Index that is 11.3% lower than the non-indigenous Mexican population, stressing that income levels present the highest levels of disproportion, with inequality re-aching 17% in this field.

Mexico's National Survey on Discrimination indicates that 8 of every 10 Mexicans of indigenous origin interviewed manifest that their rights have not been respected due to reasons relating to their customs or culture, their accent upon speaking, their skin color, for coming from another place, their education, their religion, or their way of dressing; whereas 7 of every 10 indicated that it was because of their condition of being a man/woman, their age, their physical appearance or not having money (^{CONAPRED, 2010}).

The same source documents that 44% of Mexicans consider they do not respect indigenous peoples' rights; 54.7% of people who speak an indigenous language speak Náhuatl, Mayan, Mixtec, Tzeltal and Zapotec. Moreover, 15.9% of the total of people who speak an indigenous language do not speak Spanish, that is to say, they are monolingual. The main problem perceived by ethnic minorities is discrimination (19.5%), followed by poverty (9.4%) and the lack of government support (8.8%). They also consider language (6.8%) to be another factor contributing to unequal treatment.

Pro-native projects in the first half of the 20th century had the aim of integrating ethnic groups under the principle that progress for these communities consisted of abandoning their ancient culture and traditions and of adopting a life according to the vision of civilization proposed by dominant groups (^{Gall, 2004}; ^{Castellanos, 2001}; and ^{Paris 2002}). Miscegenation, as a pillar of nationalist discourse on integration towards modernity and progress made mestizo-or mixed-race-peoples the incarnation of national identity, thus condemning cultural legacy of pre-Hispanic civilizations and failing to recognize the existence of over 10 million indigenous people spread throughout national territory. Cultural assimilation programs attempted to incorporate indigenous communities to the new national project (^{Paris, 2002}; ^{Gall, 2004}).

However, processes of resistance and persistent defense of indigenous cultures and their traditions led to the failure of these projects. It would appear that the choice was to assimilate or to disappear (^{Castel, 2010}). Paradoxically, after several centuries, these groups continue to subsist in defense of their cultural legacy, with actions of resistance and, in many cases, survival. Mexican society, as a historical consequence of its colonial past, inherited a history of discrimination towards native peoples and has proceeded to continue to reproduce differential forms and practices that render racist expressions and manifestations.

Other forms of exclusion towards indigenous groups occur in educational curriculum and thus, in practices that unfold in school micro-universes of the classroom, some of which are visible and others invisible due to their familiarity (^{Hernández and Estrada, 2012}). Teachers are a sector that validate and invalidate both knowledge and actions. For ^{Granja (2009)}, policy to modernize public education was designed at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century in Mexico. "Scientific" construction of the categories of schooling became indispensable. Measuring and countering children and developing categories to classify children's physical and mental features became an essential task in order for Mexico to undertake modern education and an integrationist policy through public policy endeavors. Poor children, many of whom come from diverse ethnic groups with habits that differ from urban, middle and upper class children were classified negatively.

For ^{Hamel (2001)}, a child who does not speak Spanish in school arouses discrimination from principals, teachers and students. Spanish is proclaimed as a lan guage whereas indigenous languages are called "dialects," the latter of which are presumed to have lesser status. Furthermore, teachers teach in Spanish regardless of whether or not the school is bilingual; the teacher gives class in Spanish to children who speak an indigenous language, with no concern that s/he master the indigenous language. In this and other educational practices, the dominant culture is overvalued and the subordinate culture is excluded.

For this same author, the school is a cultural microcosms where numerous practices are woven that respond to deeply rooted cultural representations and principles in the participating actors. ^{Hernández and Estrada (2012)} report that teachers are bearers of hegemonic representations and, in their daily activities, consider children of indigenous descent to be inferior. Teachers fail to observe, much less understand, that the child's behavior derives from his/her contextual, socio-economic and cultural situation (place of origin; parent, sibling and family occupations; and living conditions). To the contrary, teachers and students assume that the child is different, that his/her learning problems, absenteeism and even personal hygiene are due to the fact that s/he does not speak Spanish, is a member of an indigenous group, is an immigrant, etc. All of these practices reproduced in the school micro-space are invisible to actors.

Belonging to an ethnic group, almost by historical determination, converts the person who inherits this identity in beings with generally negative attributes. As part of this investigation, it was of interest to observe the expressions of acceptance, stigmatization and denunciation that students from three intercultural universities demonstrated in regards to indigenous peoples.

Analysis of meaning

On a second level, words were analyzed for their connotation. Three semantic categories were constructed (^{Reyes, 1993}; ^{Valdés, 1998}) based on the relations of synonymy of some words. The analytical categories were as follows: acceptance, with positive words that denote feelings of approval and pride towards indigenous groups; stigmatization, with negative words that express rejection, mockery, non-acceptance; and denunciation, using words that indicate situations of marginalization and structural discrimination that have characterized these communities for centuries. Following, we provide a review of the terms grouped in each of these categories.

Acceptance

Acceptance is voluntarily receiving what is offered, what one person grants to another who receives it freely, without any objection or consideration. In the case of social interactions, acceptance is relating freely and voluntarily with others, without regard for their physical or social characteristics, ways of thinking, ideologies, customs, political preferences or sexual orientation. In the case of students in the sample, acceptance means respect for the lifestyles, traditions and cultures of indigenous groups. It is openly declaring recognition for the cultural legacy and knowledge that these communities contribute to the configuration of Mexican society. See Table 3.

Table 3 highlights favorable terms towards indigenous peoples that received great semantic weight: culture (117), native tongue (75), traditions (42) and knowledge (32). These words contain the meaning of what the word indigenous means to them, associated with situations of pride and recognition for their ancient traditions and cultural legacy. If these young students refer to native groups using these terms, it is because they value the cultural legacy that these groups have contributed to the conformation of Mexican culture and they express it in words.

Stigmatization

Stigma is a classification of rejection towards a person or group because s/he/they bear an attribute that the dominant group considers to be negative. In colloquial language, pejorative and offensive terms are used to refer to people who, for some particular characteristic, are different from the general public, thus causing rejection and estrangement. To bear this particular difference makes the virtues invisible and places these people in a situation of disadvantage and inferiority compared to others, creating an effect of social disrepute compared to others (^{Goffman, 2008}). In the case of indigenous peoples, the lack of information and certain stereotypes embedded in the social collective imaginary leads them to be stigmatized for physical traits such as their height, facial features or skin color, or for cultural characteristics like their customs, native tongue or clothing. The stigmatizing terms used to refer to indigenous peoples indicate that some university students in the sample, although they belong to these very groups, continue to reject them. In the following ^table, the stigmatizing terms with greater semantic weight are shown.

Terms with high semantic weight, such as poor (49), illiterate (19) and Indian (19), stand out. In regards to this last term, although we recognize it as an anthropological category used to refer to native groups in Mesoamerica, in this case it is considered a stigmatizing term due to the reasons indicated by students to defend this choice of words. Upon analysis of the reasons that young people offered to explain the stigmatizing terms they used to define indigenous peoples, we observe that they are related to situations of precariousness and personal insufficiencies such as being ignored due to a lack of education or living in distant, hard to access locations. In addition, in the words written by the students, we observed that these situations seemed to depend more on a question of personal will rather than structural living conditions that are difficult to overcome. It is concerning that young people who come from these communities use stigmatizing words to refer to their own ancestors and blood relatives, which shows that racism as a differentiating phenomenon continues to be present, even within these very communities. Even though there are very few terms with representative semantic weight, the attitudes of exclusion and discrimination they represent are still present through these kinds of terms.

Denungation

University students have been a sector sensitive to social injustices. Indigenous groups in Mexico have been exploited and marginalized from social benefits (^{Castellanos, 2010}, ²⁰⁰³; ^{Gall, 2004}; ^{Paris, 2002}; Saldaña, 2013) because the State and its representatives have failed to resolve the structural problems that enshroud this population (^{Castellanos, 2010}, ²⁰⁰¹; ^{Paris, 2001}; ^{Gall, 2001}). Social marginalization provokes vulnerability in determined social sectors; in the case of indigenous peoples, systematic anti-indigenous racism has been denied under the argument of miscegenation; however, different voices have produced multiple statements about the presence of a "clear phenomenon of great weight" (^{Gall, 2004: 221}) and regarding the different forms racism adopts in the daily practices of Mexican society. In this category of denunciation, terms that indicate situations of inequality, exclusion, inequity and structural discrimination that have characterized these communities for centuries are included. At the core of the network, four terms stand out that were used to indicate situations of inequality, injustice, exclusion and discrimination that students expressed in reference to ethnic groups, as presented in Table 5.

Words with great semantic weight such as discrimination (68), poverty (35), traditional attire (20) and marginalization (16) were mentioned and upon analysis of the reasons why they were written, research subjects denounced issues of social injustice, inequality and being forgotten by different governments that have held the responsibility of correcting these situations but have failed to carry out actions to reduce this delay. The young students denounced discrimination; they are conscious of the inequality and marginalization that ethnic groups experience and they refer to how the authorities have forgotten about these populations and the way their rights are affected based on their native tongue, dress and cultural traditions. Student testimonies also denounce how, in a country like Mexico, with its multicultural and multiethnic characteristics, ethnic minorities are not only treated differently, but also in the majority of cases, they are situated in a status of inferiority in regards to other social groups.