Vecoli – The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity

• The hope was that the 13 former colonies would become one unified state.
  • However, contrary to popular belief, the population was hardly homogeneous and was, in fact, a “complex ethnic mosaic.”
• 1790 → criteria for naturalization established, but only available to “any alien, being a free white person.”
  • Full rights weren’t available until much later.
• Race was used as grounds for citizenship, especially during the mass immigrations of the 19^th and 20^th
• In the Declaration of Independence, it was written that “all men are created equal,” but were they really?
• Intense debate has existed over the years
  • Notion that America is an asylum for the oppressed of the world. (Common Sense)
  • However, there was a fear of instability in the social order because of these immigrants, as well as a lowered standard of living and lowered health conditions.
    • This feeling created the roots for the nativism movement.
    • The influx of Irish Catholics in the first major immigration wave created the grounds for the Know-Nothing Party in 1854.
    • Also, statutes excluding Asians in the late 18^th and early 19^th
• “Scientific racialism” was based on Social Darwinism in terms of Anglo superiority.
• How would immigration affect the American identity?
• There was a caste-like system in slavery and industrialism, but this collapsed.
• No one has taken the phrase “All men are created equal” more seriously than those denied their rights.
• Immigrants were expected to shed their cultural identity and assimilate into Anglo-American values and culture.
  • The education system especially promoted this for children of lower-class backgrounds.
  • The issue surrounding Spanish-speaking groups and bilingual education has raised fears that America will become linguistically fragmented.
  • There have been movements to make English the official language of the country.
• The notion of the “melting pot”
  • Notion where the various cultures of America come and mix together to form a new culture and identity.
  • Some have challenged this view saying that Anglos are the “cooks” in this melting pot.
• An interesting quote from Michel Guillaume Jean de Crevecoeur’s essay (1782):
  • “He is an American, who, leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the new government he obeys, and the new rank he holds….Here individuals of all races are melted into a new race of men, whose labours and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world.”
    • It seems that it was the dominant view that immigrants were expected to assimilate into the dominant culture. It was surprising to see that this view existed even when the country was still in its infancy.
• An idea of cultural pluralism (coexisting traditions and cultures) comes forth.
  • Kallen: America as a “great republic consisting of a federation or commonwealth of nationalities.”
    • Not an “American race”
    • The idea of the melting pot was beginning to be considered a failure.
• In the 1930s, pluralism flowers because the depression undermines the dominance of existing hierarchies and of the work of people like Louis Adamic.
  • This then dies back down because of two decades of war.
• In the 1960s and 1970s, a reconsideration of existing ideas takes place because of the Vietnam War and the current state of the cities.
  • There happens to be a “revival of ethnicity,” and the melting pot notion is seen as an excuse for Anglo dominance.
  • There is an outpouring of different art forms (novels, films, plays, etc.) that examine culture and identity.

Vecoli’s writing examines how immigration affected the American mindset since the country’s early days. The conflict between the idea of “All men are created equal” (and so are immigrants) and the ideal of one “American race” was one marked by volatility. Vecoli’s writing identifies the obstacles that the country had to overcome in order to find its identity. He also goes into detail on historical influences on the ideas of Anglo superiority as well as the relatively recent idea of cultural pluralism. However, there is one quote in the article that I must disagree with. Vecoli states that “the visibility of the newcomers…has triggered a latent xenophobia in the American psyche” (15). I would say that the word “xenophobia” is somewhat extreme. Although this statement does correctly characterize some people, it would be incorrect and wrong to overgeneralize to the entire country. Even describing this feeling as “latent” would be wrong. Given how people can freely express their ideas through various mediums (most notably, social media), any feelings of xenophobia would be much more well-known and widespread than what is implied in this statement. Despite this, I was pleased with the writing, and the fact that it examined the search for an identity: Something that many people and groups struggle with everyday.

Foner – Immigrants in New York City in the New Millennium

• New York City = a gateway for new arrivals
• 2010 – 37% of population were immigrants
  • Huge impact
• Immigrants come from varied backgrounds.
  • Firstly, European; now, mainly Latin American, Caribbean, and Asian.
  • Higher proportion have college degrees.
• 1965 Immigration Act – increased immigration
  • family reunification and skills emphasized
  • refugees allowed
  • diversity encouraged
• Promise of better living
  • Fleeing homelands because of no opportunities / political factors
• “Snowball effect:” people who immigrate make it “easier” for people they know in their homelands to also immigrate.
  • Immigrant communities
• Drawn by an image as well as range of social, health, and educational services offered.
• Many New Yorkers have a close immigrant connection.
• Diversity
  • No countries dominate in immigrant population share.
  • “Every major ethnosocial group…has a significant portion of foreign-born.”
• Ethnic politics contributes to NYC politics.
  • g. Mayors have made visits to other countries (like Israel).
• NYC committed to cultural pluralism.
  • g. Alternate side parking regulations
• Immigrant population not homogenized; maintain an identity.
• Pre-migration values and attitudes shape immigrant experiences,
  • Religion, family,…cooking
• Many immigrants maintain transnational ties.
  • Help strengthen cultural patterns here
  • May or may not grab attention away from U.S. politics and issues here.
• Human capital – the knowledge or skills individual migrants bring.
• Immigrants make up a good portion of NYC’s labor (~45%)
  • 3/4 of immigrant men and 3/5 of immigrants women
• Some groups can be found in occupational niches.
  • Second-generation have largely rejected parental niches, however.
• A group’s demographic composition can influence:
  • Ethnic businesses
  • Elections
  • Marriage patterns
  • Family patterns
• Racial inequality is a harsh reality.
  • Prejudice and discrimination
• However, religion usually not a barrier.
• Legal status – inequality and exclusion
  • in labor market (low pay, poor conditions)
  • no welfare and other benefits
• Immigrants have huge impact on NYC.
  • Dense ethnic neighborhoods with distinct ethnic character (e.g. Flatbush)
  • Polyethnic neighborhoods
  • Community centers
  • Political groups
  • Ethnic businesses
  • Neighborhood revitalization (e.g. Sunset Park)
  • Food (restaurants/groceries)
  • Music
  • Parades/Festivals (ex. West Indian American Day Parade)
  • Literary traditions (novels)
  • Racial and ethnic dynamics (perception)
    • Have become amicable (“United Nations of friends”)
    • Yet, conflict exists
  • Ethnic division of labor
    • “Your driver is likely to be South Asian;…nursing aide…will be West Indian; the vendor at the corner newsstand is Indian.”
  • Marks on mainstream institutions
    • Schools (public school enrollment increase, schools for recent immigrant children, Roman Catholic schools)
    • Hospitals (interpreter and translation services, services for particular groups with certain health risks)
  • Cultural institutions (libraries, museums [El Museo del Barrio])
• Immigrants have radically transformed NYC
  • And will continue to do so.

In her introduction, Nancy Foner discusses the effect of immigrants on New York City: its people, its institutions, and its future. Foner goes into great detail about how immigrants leave their mark on and adapt to the City. I admired Foner’s use of statistics, examples, and stories to describe and support what she was trying to say. The thing I admired most was her extensive use of the future tense in the conclusion: “will remain a part of the demographic picture,” “will enrich and replenish,” “will no doubt persist.” She emphasizes how truly important the future is to these immigrants and their communities. Seeing the past and how much has changed for these immigrants over the years, it will be interesting to see what the future will bring for these same people. This reading also alludes back to the search for an identity; however, in this reading, it is coupled with the search for an economic and social well-being as well. While an identity is important, it is important that these immigrants achieve a degree of stability in life. I appreciate how Foner brought this up in the writing.

Kasinitz et al. – The Next Generation Emerges

• The status of the children of immigrants (the “second-generation”) is an important matter.
  • They far outnumber the children of natives.
  • They are also beginning to make an impact on New York itself.
• A concern: How would the city adjust to the fact that whites will soon not make up the majority?
  • Authors say concerns are misplaced.
  • Assimilation by the second generation seems very rapid.
• Many of the second generation are not connected to their parents’ homeland.
• The status of the second generation seems to be generalized. However, there are marked social differences and differences in economic and educational advancement, among other things.
• Groups vary in terms of education.
  • Russian Jews and Chinese do generally better in the education system.
  • Chinese, in particular, do better in the public school system.
  • More Chinese, Russian Jews, and native white attend Tier I (top-tier) colleges.
• Worry about the second generation’s entry into labor force.
  • “Downward assimilation” and “underclass of inner-city poverty”
  • It seems like this is not the case.
• 2G less likely to work in ethnic niches.
  • They begin to reject these parental niches.
  • These niches are seen as “immigrant jobs.”
• NEET (not in employment, education, or training) rate – highest for African-Americans and Puerto Ricans
• Second-generation decline seems unlikely.
  • Most 2G work in same kinds of jobs as most young people in NYC have.
• 2G not particularly interested in politics.
  • However, some have emerged as leaders.
  • Yvette Clarke, Grace Meng, John Liu
    • Support from broad range of immigrant/second generation groups.
• Assimilation seems to be happening faster.
  • Second generation more at ease with both American and ethnic identities.
• However, some caution.
  • Studies were done in good economic times.
  • How has the recession affected the second generation?
  • What about the state of native blacks and Latinos in the education system?
  • What about the status of undocumented immigrants?
• Despite optimism, incorporation of immigrants in the city remains a problem.

Kasinitz et al. examines the incorporation and assimilation of the children of immigrants into mainstream New York City. The authors present numerous statistics regarding the state of the second-generation in terms of employment and education, among other areas. I appreciated the use of these statistics since it provided a fuller picture of how far immigrants have come in terms of these areas. One thing that I found interesting in the chapter was the authors’ assertion that a “long-term view” of immigration (one that takes into account the progress of the second generation) would lead to a more optimistic assessment of immigration in American life. This is an especially important issue today, especially with the currently raging debates over the immigration system in America. I’m interested in how the authors propose approaching this debate. They talk about using a “long-term view,” but I would like to know what the authors specifically mean when they say this and how it would specifically apply to the current debate.