I’m not surprised to learn that Chinatown had its own underground political system. However, I am surprised at how at how far they took the general American capitalistic system. Asian immigrants had many reasons to come to America. However, I assume that a major reason was the need for financial stability and the American right to compete in the economy. It’s interesting that the subculture of Chinatown included an economic system that was always trying to eliminate competition.

According to Kwong, Asian immigrants competed for space, or “territory” as they would call it, in Chinatown. This fact in itself is not particularly interesting. In fact, this type of behavior in our American society is very common. However, once a business took hold of a building, only their associates were able to use that space. It almost seems ridiculous that business owners would go to such extreme measures to ensure no one else had the right to property.

I understand wanting to maximize profit and minimize competition, but you can’t try to eliminate it all together. Isn’t this a form of monopolizing a markets? I suppose that because these deals included different types of affiliated businesses, nothing could have been done to stop it.  

With the way that Kwong described such affiliations in “The Defensive and Offensive Nature of the Associations,” it almost felt like there was some sort of economic war that happened in Chinatown. The fact that corporations fought to buy the most amount of buildings, only to exclude certain business owners from renting out property almost seems undemocratic. How were these corporations allowed to discriminate business owners based on affiliation with a certain social institution?

It was almost as if the rich were perpetually limiting the poor economically, even when immigrating to a new country. The wealthy would buy buildings, and would decide which smaller business owners would thrive based on their membership status.

-Christina Torossian

I understand the allure of Chinatown from the point of view from an already wealthy businessman. It was obviously extremely easy to buy office or residential buildings and rent out in-demand space to immigrants of the lower socio-economic class. What I don’t understand is why these immigrants still chose to go to Chinatown, knowing that they would have to pay a great deal of money to live there.

As Peter Kwong stated, at some point in the 1970s-1980s, living in Chinatown was more expensive than the most elitist parts of Manhattan. Why then, did people choose to immigrate there? Why didn’t the masses of poorer Chinese immigrants opt for a cheaper neighborhood? Would the Chinese investors just follow them and their demand for housing?

On top of being expensive, many of these buildings were outdated, cramped, or even dilapidated. It’s obvious that these foreign investors couldn’t care less about their tenants. To an extent, I can understand these investors wanting to profit as much as possible. However, I don’t understand why they would allow tenants to live so horribly in return for so much money. Furthermore, I don’t understand why the tenants would put up with it.

Some investors bought these old buildings with the intent to create quality residential and commercial buildings. However, they also intended to kick out all the building’s previous tenants, and hike up the price even more so that only the upper-middle class could afford it. It’s disheartening to hear that only a few activist groups were able to expose these large, impersonal, and apathetic enterprises. I can only imagine what other tenants, and small business owners, who were unable to voice how unjustly they were being treated, had to endure.

It’s interesting how Chinatown thrived. It seemed to only thrive because of foreign investors and at the cost of those who lived there previously.

-Christina Torossian

Transnationalism may not necessarily be a new idea. As we’ve been learning all semester, cases of Transnationalism have been evident as early as the late 19th century with the Italians in Italian Harlem.

However, transnationalism has been made easy recently, due to new and developing technology. For example, a hundred years ago, Italians immigrants who wished to talk to family and friends abroad, would have to save every penny until they were able to afford to send just a letter overseas. Now, because of computers and phones, it’s very easy to contact absolute anyone.

In recent times, travel has become increasingly easy. Speedier planes have replaced the dangerous and lengthy boat rides. Thus, immigrating to a new country has become far easier. Communication has also become far easier due to new technology. Instant phone calls and video chatting have replaced letters that could take days to arrive. Not only has it become easier to travel to different countries, it’s become easier to communicate with the people that were left behind. It’s become easier to communicate with anyone for that matter.

I feel that those such as Linda Basch believed that transnationalism was a new concept because it’s become far easier to communicate with people all over the world. I believe that this idea of Transnationalism, in their minds, was more closely linked to globalism, and therefore was not as applicable to people in the late 19th-early 20th century.

Perhaps the idea of transnationalism exceeds the idea of holding on to an old culture when one moves into a new country. Perhaps the term transnationalism is more about actually being able to hold on to that old culture at all.

I agree that a hundred years ago, many immigrants did hold strong ties to their homelands. However, unless they were a part of a community where everyone immigrated from the same general area, immigrants were forced to assimilate. I feel that the Italian immigrants who lived in Italian Harlem and the Russian Jews, who moved to Russian and/or Jewish communities, are two very specific examples that can’t be applied to all immigrants from that time period.

It was very difficult to hold on to an old culture when you couldn’t readily contact or visit anyone from that home country. I believe it’s only recently become possible for immigrants to be able to contact family members abroad or even visit their home countries. This could explain why many believed that transnationalism is a new concept.

-Christina Torossian

Before reading this article, I would have never thought to consider the undocumented among those who tragically died during 9/11. It’s terrible to think that so many could have passed away without any recognition.

Dealing with undocumented people in the United States is a complicated issue. One of the biggest issues the U.S. faces, is how to treat the undocumented when they are not protected by our legal system and are therefore not equals, legally, to U.S. citizens. However, I feel that in times of crises, legal citizenship should no longer become an issue, and the situation becomes more of a humanitarian crisis in which relief groups should focus on all individuals involved equally.

When the article explained that some families from other countries were given a hard time when they asked for information regarding their loved ones who worked illegally in the Twin Towers, I was not surprised but I was severely disappointed. I understand how complicated it becomes trying to find information on victims with false names and information. However, reuniting families or providing closure to loved ones should not have been exclusive to only some of those who worked in the Twin Towers, they should have tried to account for all workers from the start.

That being said, I’m surprised that so few groups stood up and tried to help the undocumented. Why did the undocumented become a separate issue to begin with? Aren’t we all human beings with some form of a family? Shouldn’t it be a natural right for a family to be reunited or even informed in a time of crises? Why didn’t relief groups focus on all individuals in the Twin Towers? Why did one relief group have to stand up and deal with all the undocumented on their own with such little resources?

It’s incredible to think what the few individuals can accomplish with the right amount of dedication and determination. Tepeyac should be publically praised for their humanitarian efforts. Regardless over whether or not the people they helped were legal citizens, they still helped thousands in need and their time and effort should not go unrecognized.

-Christina Torossian

Nancy Foner explains that prejudice is a constant, especially against new immigrants. It is interesting to see, however, that a lot of the reason why these people develop these prejudices is not only because of the obvious social customs that others do not understand, but because these new immigrants isolate themselves from their neighbors.

As we’ve read in the Madonna of 115^th Street and Race and Religion Among the Chosen People of Crown Heights, new Jewish and Italian immigrants often isolated themselves into their respective communities for the comfort and familiarity they brought. Perhaps it was for this reason that “original New Yorkers” felt racial prejudice against them.

According to Race and Religion Among the Chosen People of Crown Heights, the non-Jewish neighbors in Crown Heights felt a discontent with their Jewish neighbors because they were excluded from their culture. The prejudice of the Jewish people stemmed from this discontent with their isolation.

Racism seems to be a very superficial form of prejudice. The new immigrants that come to America stick together for comfort and exclude people of other cultures because they do not understand them. Out of this misunderstanding, the people of other cultures develop a dislike for them.

Skin color is the first distinguishable quality in a person, and therefore the easiest to discriminate. Once a culture develops a dislike of another culture, they generalize their dislike to skin color, because it’s the easiest way to distinguish them from the rest.  The more distinguishable a skin color, the easier it is to discriminate that person/culture, which could explain why prejudice of the African American population has lasted so long, and why prejudice of the Italians and Jews lasted for a limited time in history.

The ridiculous part of racial discrimination is that it’s the cultural perception that determines whether or not someone is “white.” Although it is unlikely that this will happen anytime soon, perhaps one day even African Americans will be considered “white” and another race will be discriminated in their place.

At the end of the day, it’s not about race; it’s about having a negative trait attributed to your culture, and being visibly distinguishable enough from the rest of the population to be easily discriminated against.

-Christina Torossian