Rights to education, health care, and food and housing
This is really a response, to a comment, to a prior post -Hop On The Bus Gus - about escaping from societal traps.
Xenophobia is a word because Xenophobia exists, not because it is pervasive. To avoid escaping a trap because you are afraid of the world beyond the trap is your choice - but others may see value in considering alternatives. Your comment about xenophobia and Mexicans in the US seems likely to have been based on politically inspired news. It did not fit the post - but it expressed a political viewpoint instead.
I therefore will provide you with my viewpoint on that one facet of the US immigration problem.
"It's not an endlessly expanding list of rights - the "right" to education, the "right" to health care, the "right" to food and housing. That's not freedom, that's dependency. Those aren't rights, those are the rations of slavery - hay and a barn for human cattle." - Alexis De Tocqueville (1805-1859)
The majority of Mexicans are poor because their government treats them like human cattle. They come to the US wanting to prosper and improve themselves - but they still expect the rations of slavery. In the capitalist system on which the US was founded - independent, mutually beneficial actions resulted in opportunity for all.
The Mexican situation in the US seems best explained by analogy.
If you own a house and invite guests to join you, it is because you will enjoy their company and will be able to share experiences with them. If they accept - it is because they also see benefit in association with you. This is analogous to a Perpetual Tourist / host country relationship.
You might own a house and advertise for a gardener, cook, and caretaker - offering occupancy of the cottage behind the house as partial payment. This is an employee / employer relationship. If capitalism is allowed to work - both parties benefit or they would not agree to the relationship. America is now great because it once allowed mutually beneficial relationships to develop without interference - value was added with each transaction - America prospered.
What if you own a house and someone climbs over the back wall, forces their way into your garage and moves in. When discovered they claim it was right to break in because you had a house and they didn't. They also demand you pay them and buy their insurance, and educate their kids in their language and culture - because they are willing to clean your kitchen. Trying to toss intruders out of your house is not xenophobia.
Tourists are almost always welcome, transient labor is frequently welcome, unlawful entry is normally punished.
Several garages currently have squatters, they have joined together saying they do not have to pay their share of taxes and other burdens -- but they want to receive a share of benefits for which others have worked. They even post signs in front of your house and say they will not clean your kitchen for a day unless they get what they want. Only you remember you never asked them in to clean the kitchen - they broke in. If you went to their home town and broke into their house to clean their kitchen - you would be arrested.
Your town council is then pressured to force the intruder's demands on you and declare the law breakers legitimate "stakeholders" in your property.
It is axiomatic that if it is evil to do something - it is also evil to get someone else to do it.
It is taking the US, a former capitalist country, 250 years to destroy itself - and only then by abandoning its founding principles. The Soviet Union's coercive state died in less than a hundred years, China is prospering by rediscovering free will and capitalism - and very slowly leaving coercion behind, time will see if they succeed.
In short - mutually beneficial arrangements add value to everyone concerned. Coercive arrangements subtract from one party first, and consequently from the whole - and the losses are cumulative.
The PT proposition exists because it is mutually beneficial for the one escaping a country and the countries they visit as a tourist.
Illegal emigration stirs hostility if it avoids paying social costs, and demands social benefits.
In those areas where xenophobia does exist, and it does, few would consider being a tourist - and the offer may not be made to be an invited guest.
A PT understands this, and travels to where how he chooses to live is acceptable, and perhaps even valued.