The three articles read this week revolved around immigration in the United States. Specifically, the three articles focused on incoming and settled immigrants, from the past to the present, and their impact on policies, American ideology, employment, institutions, and of course culture.

The Significance of immigration in the formation of an American identity by Rudolph Vecoli discusses the journey the U.S. has underwent in forming its own distinct nationality. Vecoli states that from its beginnings, the American identity was built upon the immigrant populace, but yet for so long, America has continued to exclude immigrants from its society. The article supports the idea of an immigrant identity in the U.S. through statistics of immigrant numbers in the U.S.. At its formation, the U.S. was an amalgamation of different nationalities and races, 19% being of african ancestry, 12% western european, and 48% English. However, only “free whites” in the population were considered citizens. From 1820-1920, in three waves, 55 million people emigrated to the country as the U.S. was seen as an asylum for the oppressed due its supposed open acceptance. However, many of these immigrants, like the catholic Irish were oppressed due to their religion. Also, east asians were completely excluded from entering the country by the exclusion acts of the late 1880’s. Thus, immigrants composed a huge population of the American society, and although some nations were excluded, almost all were allowed entry. This huge immigrant population caused an issue. The hegemony of white american citizens wanted these immigrants should assimilate to the already settled American identity, and although some did, others did not. The opposers argued that to assimilate would be contradictory to the melting pot idea. As Kallen states, the U.S. was formed on immigrant populations that infused their own culture into a new American one, that included the best of countless cultures, beliefs, and customs. This was the true American Identity, as opposed to assimilating to become a WASP society.

I couldn’t agree more with Vecoli’s essay. The U.S. was founded as an immigrant society, and to oppress immigrants and force them to assimilate would be contradictory to its foundations. Immigrants should not assimilate to the white American society, but should add on to an American identity that continues to grow with every immigrant group’s contribution.

Immigrants in NYC in the New Millienium by Nancy Foner discusses how immigrants have impacted New York businesses, institutions, politics, demographics, and the population. Mainly, the essay is proving that immigrants have diversified the city and have given benefits and growth to the economy. 1 in 3 New Yorkers were immigrants or of immigrant parents in 2010. That 1 in 3 contains a multitude of nationalities, that today are much different than what they were in the past. Specifically, in the number of non-europeans that includes Caribbean islanders, Latinos, Africans, South Asians, and East Asians. These immigrant groups however do not have a foothold in the cities majority population as no one group is long dominant as was with white europeans in the past.  Furthermore, these immigrants are not leaving their old country behind. Rather, they are maintaining old customs and see themselves as ethnic New Yorkers. Politically, many members of these groups have joined politics, thus diversifying the New York government. An example being John Liu from Taiwan. Immigrant groups have found job niches. For example, Caribbean islanders will most likely be found in hospital care, Korean would be found in dry cleaning, and Latinos in food service. Some immigrants have formed ethnic neighborhoods, which may seem contradictory the American ideals, but these neighborhoods are reviving areas. For example, Sunset park in Brooklyn has become a major commercial center due to Chinese and Latino influxes. Finally,immigrants have also increased public school involvement due the pursuit of the American dream.

This article was my favorite. Reading it was like justifying many of the things I have noticed through out my time in New York. Being from Brooklyn, every neighborhood I pass has an immigrant majority which infuses its culture into its surroundings. For example, I live in Bensonhurst which has a primarily Chinese area after being majorly Italian. And through that, I witness all the businesses opening and the increasing number of Chinese in schools pursuing a good future. Thus, I felt connected to the essay with my everyday life.

The last essay, The Next Generation Emerges, by Philip Kasinitz focused on the second generation of immigrations and how they are coping in the American society. Kasinitz argues, that contradictory to what is popularly thought, the second generation is doing much better than believed in terms of culture, education, and employment. Half of the young adults in NYC are either second generation immigrants or 1.5 generation immigrants. Meaning they are born elsewhere but mature in the U.S.. Kasinitz performed a study abbreviated ISGMNY that questioned 2,000 immigrants youth in various fields. The study found that the second generation is assimilating well to the American society. Almost all the second generation speaks english and has adapted to American customs. However, many continue to maintain customs and the languages they learned from their parents by choice. Kasinitz finds that the second generation seeks to be distinct from other nationalities, specifically ones that are close to their own. For example, Caribbean islander youth do not like being generalized as “black” Americans; they wanna be specifically categorized as Jamaican, Trinidadian, etc. In terms of education, immigrant children seem to be doing better than natives, specifically the Chinese and Russian. The study used a NEET(Not in education, employment, or training) to be the lowest for the Chinese and Russian and highest for immigrant latinos and Africans. However, those immigrants are still doing better than the natives. ISGMNY also found that the immigrants youth are straying away from their parents occupations and seeking high profile jobs in retail and finance. To do so, a large portion of immigrant youth are attending colleges and university, specifically CUNY. The second generation also seems to be more comfortable discussing race as opposed to their parents.

This article pertains to me the most. I am of the 1.5 generation and the ISGMNY census told the story of my life. I speak english and assimilate to the American culture, but yet  I maintain my Arabic background. Furthermore, I seek to do well in school and attend CUNY in hopes of a high profile job like many of the immigrant youth.

All three readings explain that immigration has played an important role in the United States and especially in New York City. They highlight the struggles immigrants and their children faced and what jobs they worked in this country. The readings describe how immigration changed over the course of time and how much more welcoming New York City has become toward new immigrants. Since in the past Americans were afraid the immigrants would take over their country, immigrants began to be oppressed. However, now Americans see immigrants as helpful and they feel comfortable living among so many ethnic backgrounds. The readings try to convey that Americans have accepted the fact that the country is characterized by a combination of different cultures. In addition, now there are institutions helping immigrants assimilate to American culture by providing affordable housing and good education.

The first reading, The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity, mainly focuses on the nation’s policy toward immigrants. It discloses Americans’ uneasiness with immigrants because of fear of danger posed by foreigners to American values and institutions. However, this changed when they became to realize how the nation is a melting pot of foreign cultures that are melting and reforming. Ethnic diversity began to challenge the concept that people of foreign cultures could not become Americans. Now many immigrants are coming to this country and becoming Americans.

The other two readings, The Next Generation Emerges and Immigrants in New York City in the New Millennium, are concerned with immigrant social and economic status in New York City. They also explore the trends among certain groups of immigrants and compare them with immigrants of other backgrounds and even Americans. For example, children of Chinese immigrants comprise a large percent of students in New York’s top public schools. In contrast, white and black parents with high expectations send their kids to private schools. Additionally, they note the significant differences between the immigrants and their children. For example, immigrants would take low paying jobs that require long hours, but their children would not want to be employed in those kinds of jobs because they go to college and want to make more money.

I realized that the last two readings focused on immigrants in New York City. It seems they complement each other and sometimes state similar statements. They also begin with practically the same sentences. Since I live in New York City, I have notice that the trends among different ethnic groups indeed holds true. I see that many people who lack good English speaking skills have working class jobs, while most young people plan to attend college and get a successful job. Attending public and private Catholic schools, I have noticed differences in the kinds of people I see.

The first reading repeated many things I learned in my history classes. For example when certain kinds of immigrants came to the United States. In addition, I knew that immigration encouraged the government to change the definition of American citizenship. However, I was happy to be reminded that Americans started feeling comfortable living among people of different cultures.

Admittedly, prior to these readings I’ve had a very basic understanding of immigration and its history (a somewhat shameful fact as I am a child of immigrants), so it has been intriguing to learn more about the elements of immigration’s evolution.

From its beginning, the US has discussed what the national identity should be and how it should be formed. Since becoming an American was largely a choice (not counting those who had no choice), George Washington and John Quincy Adams both expressed that becoming an American meant shedding all prior beliefs, cultures, and allegiances and choosing to join the new American race. However, citizenship was originally limited to free white males, and it is virtually impossible to completely shed one’s entire culture. There was a divide about whether one should conform to the ideals set by the Anglo-American elite, or if one should have an exchange between their native culture and American culture, ultimately contributing to the melting pot.

Today, the US continues to experience its third wave of immigration, and New York acts as a unique frontier for immigration and assimilation. Immigrants continue to come for economic opportunities, oppressive, unstable conditions in their homeland, and because “newcomers do not stand out” in New York. As of 2010, New York is 37% immigrant and 55% when the second generation of American-born children is included.

Personally, I found the discussion of the second generation most intriguing. Generally, the second generation appears to be doing well, although Kasinitz and Foner both mention that this data was taken during good economic times. The second generation is achieving higher positions in the workforce than that of their parents, but it is still unclear if they will successfully assimilate into top positions. The youth also are more comfortable with the rising multiculturalism than previous generations of American. This is most prominent in multicultural communities like Jackson Heights, Queens and Sunset Park.

However there seems to be a divide in which ethnic groups are succeeding. Large amounts of Russian Jews, the Chinese, and native whites attend Tier I schools, while large amounts of African Americans, Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, and West Indians attend Tier IV schools. The latter groups also benefit less from the public school system and increased school choice than the former groups. What causes this divide, and does the public school system need to make changes? Is this discrepancy affected by the gap between the rich and the poor? Does it contribute to it?

As the baby boomers retire and immigration continues, mainstream multiculturalism will continue to increase affecting the workforce, politics, and society in new ways. This will once again challenge the notion of what it means to be American. It will be interesting what affects this major change will have, how the public will react, and how we continue to develop our national identity.

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.

How does one describe an American?  After reading this short series of articles I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t know, and I’d be willing to put money (a small sum mind you, being a college student is expensive) that most people don’t know either.  If I were to put it succinctly I’d say that an American is whoever feels comfortable in America.  New York City has proven itself to be one of the most amenable places to those hailing from countries both widely and scarcely known.  This environment has given rise to a million different ethnic enclaves each with their own distinct impact on the “feel” of the neighborhood, I use the word “feel” because there really is no one concise way to experience the impact that this myriad groups of people has had since their arrival.  Politics, local practices and, my personal favorite, food has been shaped in neighborhoods due to the demographics of the area   Truly, over the years New York City has become the most cosmopolitan city in the world.

A bit of personal information, I come from a neighborhood nestled in the heart of Nassau county that is 95% white.  While I always knew that New York City was this beautiful melting pot of languages, cultures, and peoples as I soon found out the only true way to grasp this concept is to live here.  Over the course of the day I am exposed to cultures both familiar and foreign as I maneuver the streets of Manhattan.  For example, on the intersection of 97th and 3rd (where I live currently) there’s a mosque and small hole in the wall pizzeria side by side.  Where on Earth would one find such a beautiful melange of cultures besides New York City?  As of yet I have not found a place that measures up.

It’s no wonder people come here in droves from all parts of the world, here they are given the opportunity to establish themselves, feel comfortable with their fellow countrymen and benefit from all the advantages that being an American brings.  Coupled with this, as Vecoli stated, they also are able to retain their cultural identity.  Their retention of who they are has facilitated their alignment among ethnic lines to form communities and lobby for concessions.  Of course, this situation isn’t completely advantageous for foreign transplants as there has been a long history of exclusion with regards to certain ethnic groups.  This exclusion is largely white on black based and has paved the way for black communities, such as Haitians and certain peoples from the Caribbean to rally for their rights.  I’d argue that such a mobilization of people could only happen here, where people are empowered by their heritage.

This city is one of the few places where people from all over the world  can make themselves feel as if they belong.  America was founded on immigrants, the various waves of immigration changing demographics both locally and nationally.

I walked into my first day of kindergarten knowing only a few English phrases. In a family full of immigrants, my first teacher was the television. Since a young age, I felt the need to call myself an American. I wanted to fit in with some sort of idea that, in truth, had a very broad and flexible meaning. I wanted to assimilate very quickly, but as I have grown older, I have found my views changing. In Vecoli’s The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of An American Identity, he explores the definition of assimilation. Does it mean to completely shed your roots and leave it at the steps of the Statue of Liberty, or do we give a bit of it up to this giant melting pot that is New York City? I found that assimilation was both a blessing and a curse for me. I did lose a bit of my culture, but I felt that I was simultaneously growing up to be a part of this new American race. Being raised in New York City gave me a different definition of what it meant to be American, than had I been raised in the Midwest, and in my opinion I believe NYC has given the word “American” a different meaning.

In Kasinitz’s The Next Generation Emerges, he quotes one woman who says, “There’s a certain richness that comes along with having another culture to fall back on. People are always intrigued. They ask what does it mean to be Russian and you feel a little special to explain and it adds color to you.” Out of the three readings this week, I felt the most connected to this one line. Firstly, because I felt that I related to the woman about knowing Russian and having that culture in our blood. Second, this statement holds very true to me. It took me a while to finally realize the advantages of knowing multiple languages and being raised in a multicultural home. I think that over time, I’ve been able, as Kasintiz stated, combine the best of my parents’ culture with the best that America has to offer.”

The third work One out of Three by Foner was probably my favorite piece. I liked how it covered so many things such as education for children of immigrants, jobs that immigrants usually take on, ethnic communities and businesses, and other obvious but overlooked things. I knew a lot that was mentioned in the article, but it was interesting to find out facts such as how Korean businesses transformed NYC. I thought this article also brought up a lot of questions about the future that did not have an answer. One of these issues discussed the legal status of immigrant children and deportation. I have heard so much on the news about college students who were considered illegal immigrants that were on the verge of being deported. I think it’s a growing issue, and there should be more done to protect people our age who are trying to receive an education.

The first reading is a paper titled The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity by Rudolph J. Vecoli. In this article, Vecoli gives an in-depth overview and analysis of the immigration to the United States and how it was perceived at different points in the history of the country. Though the country is often praised as being the home of liberty and equality since its birth, it often created hierarchies within the groups living there. Some ethnic groups living in the country did not receive the same liberties and privileges as the ruling Anglo-Saxon class. There were multiple different migration waves to the United States, each from different regions of the world. The newest groups are always feared and discriminated against. The “native population” usually has several reactions; some embrace the new cultures while others push back against them. Eventually the immigrant groups are accepted into the American identity and then another wave comes, continuing the cycle. This article is important for looking at immigration through the lens of history. History is very important for an accurate evaluation of the state of immigration but is often ignored. I agree with Vecoli, that the country has always been heterogeneous, even though some like to believe that it was homogenous. It has been the combination of homogeneousness and heterogeneousness of the populations that makes the American identity such a complex and interesting topic. Vecoli’s optimism, regarding American identity and its inclusiveness, leaves me hopeful. This article also leaves me with a few questions of our future: Will the new groups of immigrants, like Latin Americans and the Chinese, ever be accepted into the American identity? Will cultures assimilate and keep the “American culture” stagnant or succeed in bringing changes? What will the “American identity” look like in the future and how much will it be affected by immigration?

The second reading is a paper titled Immigrants in New York City in the New Millennium by Nancy Foner. The article begins by describing why different groups immigrate to New York City, making it a hub and gateway. The reasons include economic ones, external political ones and changes in immigration policy, that bring immigrants to the city. I agree that New York is very special as a gateway because its immigrant population is very diverse and not dominated by a few ethnic groups. Once the groups are here, the things that they bring with them from their homelands affect and the change the city, keeping New York very dynamic. But this is not only a one-sided relationship, since immigrants keep transnational connections, so there is a lot of back and forth sharing between all the homelands and New York City. These immigrants also face different treatment based on they’re stereotypical occupations, race, religion and legal status. I agree with the idea that “continued inflows will enrich and replenish the city’s ethnic communities.” The changes that immigrants bring with them are generally for the better, creating a more culturally rich society.

The third reading is The Next Generation Emerges by Philip Kasinitz, Jogn H. Mollenkopf, and Mary C. Waters. The article discusses the experience of different generations of immigrants in New York City. It is shown that “by most measures, the second generation is assimilating into American society very rapidly,” which is something I agree with, based on my own experiences and observations. The experience of the second-generation immigrants is significantly different based on the immigrant group that they belong to. For example, “Russian Jews and the Chinese were significantly more likely to have graduated from high school, completed a four-year college degree, or acquired post graduate education than the other groups and significantly less likely to have dropped out of high school.” A trend that seems to be true for all the groups, is that the second-generation immigrants don’t fall into the ethnic niches of the workforce. The second generation, generally, does not have a strong interest in following or being involved in politics. This is another thing that I have also observed, living in New York City with many second-generation immigrants. I am very curious to see how the second-generation and further generations of immigrants will turn out and integrate themselves into the United States and the culture of New York City.

Nicolas Yehya

Immigration has always been a central topic of debate for many decades in numerous nations. In Rudolph J. Vecoli’s article, “The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity”, Vecoli thoroughly analyzes the migration waves that have occurred in the United States of America over time, specifically noting the three main waves and their consequences. Vecoli makes it clear that ever since the early 1790s, the American population was a heterogeneous mix, containing many Germans, French, Scotts, English, and Irish immigrants. America was a conglomerate of different types of people ever since the beginning of America’s history. Multiple waves in the eighteen and nineteen hundreds quickly led to the resentment of immigrants and many other dilemmas. In the first wave, Germans, Irish, British, and Scandinavians were the main immigrants to move to America. The second wave brought Italian, Russian, and Austria-Hungarian immigrants to the States. The third and final main wave brought Mexican, South American, Asian, and Caribbean immigrants. Many native citizens of the States became cautious and weary of the immigrants, believing that the immigrants would not assimilate well into the culture and replace the white natives. These irrational fears eventually led to the Chinese Exclusion Acts and other similar laws for protection to the citizens against the immigrants. In the article, Vecoli explains that the melting pot phrase is a way for all the people and cultures in America to intermix and assimilate with each other. However, in the process, the population will form “cultural half-breeds”, thus losing a sense of themselves and their culture. To this statement, I completely disagree with how Vecoli views the term “melting pot”. Ever since I was a little kid, I have always viewed the term “melting pot” in a positive light. A melting pot is a way for the community to blend all their cultures together to create a harmonious balance to coexist with each other. I never felt that in this process, people lose part of their culture. The melting pot is a way to bring diversity to America with equal importance to each culture. It seems that immigrants always create fear in society when there are large numbers of them arriving to certain countries. When will the citizens of countries become more welcoming to these immigrants who bring their cultures and amazing information with them? Vecoli ends the article with a new sense of hope concerning that American nationalism is changing to accommodate the immigrants.

There are many reasons why immigrants migrate from their countries to the United States of America. In Nancy Foner’s article, “Immigrants in New York City in the New Millennium”, Nancy explains the many reasons that motivate immigrants to move to different countries. Many immigrants came to America to escape oppressive governments back in their home countries. Some immigrants, mainly the Asians, arrived in influxes into the States after the emigration restrictions were removed in America. Many hear about the economic prosperities and the improved living standards in the community. Some immigrants also came to America because they have friends or family members who live in the country. Immigrants impact the society and get impacted by the society in many ways. New food from the immigrants are introduced into the cities while the immigrants accommodate their living style compared to the American citizens. Certain traditions even tend to change over time, such as South Asian parents having a semi-arranged marriage instead of a fully arranged marriage. Many factors impact how immigrant communities form. Their gender, age, population density, education levels, etc. all impact how the communities develop and what impact the communities have on America as a whole. Many cultural and diverse restaurants are opening up now in the communities, allowing the spread of different cultural cuisine. The culture of immigrants is ever-present in every part of the society. I completely agree with Nancy Foner’s point that immigrants have drastically changed the way the American society is presently. I live in Queens and it is amazing to see all the diverse and ethnic restaurants that line the streets on the way to my house. There are immigrants everywhere speaking in different languages. Now, students in classrooms are expected to learn a language, most likely Spanish. This is proof of the fact that immigrants and their cultures are becoming a major part in the lives of all the people living in America and that they are impacting us in many great ways, making us a true melting pot.

With immigration comes the sense of nationalism and fear sensed by the native citizens of America. In Philip Kasinitz, John H. Mollenkopf, and Mary C. Waters’ article, “The Next Generation Emerges”, the American citizens start to fear that the immigrants are assimilating too quickly into the community. They are taking up a lot of jobs and gaining high degrees for the work field, making them competitors with the citizens for the jobs. However, there are still many immigrants who are joining the labor force compared to white citizens, making the immigrant children more likely to join the labor force even if they try to avoid it. Many of the second- generation children tend to not be interested in politics of America. However, the young population is now slowly forming leaders of student groups and nonprofit organizations. In the article, the authors make a point that people who live in multiethnic neighborhoods like Jackson Heights and Queens are more comfortable with ethnic and racial diversity. In other areas of the city, people are more sensitive and cautious to ethnic diversity. I find this point to be very true. As a child, I was raised in Jackson Heights until I moved to Queens and lived the rest of my teenage years there. I always had very diverse neighbors that I lived near to and I always accepted racial diversity. Going to different areas outside of the Queens area, I become more aware of the change in attitude toward immigrants in a negative way. People seem more hesitant to approach immigrants even though meeting immigrants could help the citizens learn more about different cultures of the world. Even though immigrants are making great progress in assimilating into the culture of America, there are still many difficulties to overcome in American society.

1) Velcoli mainly focuses on what being an “American” means by analyzing American history. He opens with the idea that America is formed by states rather than one unified mass, which later connects into his ending concept of cultural pluralism. He formats his essay by studying the formation of the country and the challenge of its acceptance of fundamental Enlightenment ideas. This leads into the progression of America attempting to take control of its immigrant population in the upcoming decades and evolving theories of how immigrants integrate into society. He divides immigration into America’s earliest settlers (English Protestants, which become the majority, ruling class) and the 1(1841-1980),2(1891-1920),3(1960-present) waves of immigrants. He juxtaposes original American ideals and the concept of birthrights, specifically “all men are created equal,” with later nativist policies and restrictive immigration policies that would bar Native Americans, Chinese, and darker people. He explores 3 theories of the “Americanization” of immigrants: Assimilation, Melting Pot (both failed), and Cultural Pluralism. He regarded assimilation as the hegemony inflicting their power over others and results in a racial caste system. The Melting Pot theory, creating a new race/culture through the mixture of all immigrants, never really happened. His last and resounding theory is Cultural Pluralism, in which people live together, while maintaining their core culture.

I appreciate his analysis of America’s viewpoint of immigrants throughout history, but he delves to deeply into a less acceptable theory, assimilation, rather than focus on a more acceptable, applicable theory, Cultural Pluralism.  He is very opinionated, clearly pro-immigrant and liberal, such as his impassioned statements on pg. 17 about immigrants being in the biggest need of humanitarian rights, yet they struggle to overcome the Anglo authority. I understand racism is bad and Americans still believe in similar ideas, but at some point this essay becomes an argument against nativist beliefs and fails at producing a successful counterargument. He directly states “pluralism prevails” and states that “the outcome is much more complicated.” Why does pluralism prevail and what are the complications? And I know that cultural pluralism is a generally new theory, but if it is correct the author should be able to explains how this theory has been working throughout time rather than just briefly mention it at the end. That would definitely be more insightful.

2) These two articles are like my life story. They pretty much give a clear overview into New York society, as immigrants integrate into a new life, and circumstances as a second generation American. Their “studies”affirm a lot of stereotypes, like Asians are good at school, although these studies seem like general interviews and a small group consensus. Generally these reports say that second generation immigrants are becoming the New New York and they are mainly considered American with raising status in position in the job market. They define the upwards climb through high schools, colleges, jobs, and politics -mostly within the confines of their ethnicity. I find Kasinitz’s article interesting because he compares the growth of the immigrant communities to condition of native New Yorkers ( presumably here since the 50’s at least), especially the downturn of native black and hispanic communities. Why is that? Overall, I prefer Foner’s paper because she takes a more detailed, holistic view with many subcategories. Kasinitz seems to be determine to convince that second generation immigrants are straight up American and melded more together, while Foner focuses more the internal struggle with identity and change within ethnic communities. I found the food and child rearing section particularly interesting because it shows the city effecting the people, not the other way around. Is Foner’s study the same as Kasinitz’s? Many of the same references. I love how CUNY is mentioned as an integral part of the city’s progression.

The first reading, by Rudolf J. Vecoli, provided a brief overview of various topics having to do with immigration in the United States. First and foremost, it gave a timeline of when various immigrant groups throughout history arrived, but more importantly, how they were received by the American public. For instance, it discusses how Irish Catholics were persecuted for not only their rowdy behavior, but also for their subscription to the Catholic religion and supposed allegiance to the Pope. The paper brings up, as that example clarifies, a glaring contradiction in the American mindset. This idea is the idea of equality for all, but in practice only certain people are afforded such equality. The paper also discussed the inaccuracy of calling the United States a “melting pot” because of how it implies that more assimilation occurs than what happens in reality.

It seems to me that calling the United States a melting pot is not really very accurate. I would argue that the U.S. is more of a cultural buffet where people can choose as much or as little of different cultures as they want, and altogether ignore and reject some. While it is true that there are certain areas, such as large cosmopolitan cities, where there is indeed more interaction between different cultures, these areas are still often quite segregated.

The second reading discusses, more specifically, immigration in New York City. The paper begins by discussing how different modern immigration to New York City is from the wave that came at the turn of the twentieth century. The reason for the difference is mostly because of the ethnic backgrounds of the immigrants. In the early 1900’s, most immigrants came from Europe, but now people from all over the globe come in large numbers. The reading then discussed immigrants’ connections with their home countries, and the economic outlooks of various immigrant groups. It mentioned that “Russian and European groups in New York City have among the highest levels of education” while “Latin American and Hispanic Caribbean groups” have the lowest. This causes the former groups to have a much easier time finding economic success than the latter ones. The reading also mentions some of the social challenges and prejudices that immigrants, especially dark skinned ones, face.

After living in Manhattan for a few months now, I have really been able to see what this article is talking about. As I have explored various parts of the city, I have noticed different neighborhoods with different ethnic groups, and I have also noticed that different parts of the city are like completely different worlds. Around campus, it is generally not a very wealthy area, and there usually isn’t very much going on in the community. If I go just one stop downtown on the A train, I’m in an affluent cultural hub with shining lights and plenty to do. The segregation here really is very apparent, and I think we, as a community, should aspire to lesson this phenomenon.

The final reading focuses more on second generation, young Americans who are living in New York City. The writers of this reading conducted a study on this population of people, second generation immigrants, and found that they “assimilating into American society very rapidly,” especially when it comes to language. The writers found that these second generation immigrants have little concern with the homeland of their parents, and many have not even visited. Like the previous reading, this one mentions how descendants of dark skinned immigrants report feeling discriminated against, even by the city’s police force. The reading also discusses the education of this group of people, as well as the jobs they seek. It brings up that many of the immigrant groups are struggling to succeed in the city’s system, while the higher educated Chinese and Russians are even more successful than native whites and blacks.

As someone who didn’t experience the New York City K-12 public school system, I am not looking at this issue from a place of familiarity. However, from what the reading said, it seems that something must be done to figure out why there is a difference in success between different groups of immigrants, and something should be done to address it.

The three texts, “The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity,” “The Next Generation Emerges,” and “One Out of Three: Immigrant New York in the 21^st Century,” written by Vecoli, Kasinitz, and Foner correspondingly all brought up many significant issues, themes and ideas. Coming from a family of immigrants, I can relate to many of the topics discussed by the three writers. It is interesting to read about the different perspectives surrounding assimilation of immigrants to American culture, the future of the American-born second generation, the tensions that exist with regards to immigration law reform and the effect that immigrants have had on New York City. An idea that was common in all three pieces of writing is that immigration affects both the immigrants and the place they immigrate to. Culture and tradition are part of everyone’s identity, so it is understandable that they would influence American culture. The United States is comprised of people from so many different places, with different cultures, and perspectives of life it is almost impossible to come up with a uniform outlook.

In “The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity,” Vecoli addresses immigration, starting from the immigration of the British to the New World and how the migration of different peoples over time has drastically changed American society. He mentions that, “America has always been a complex, ethnic mosaic divided into segregated, quarrelsome groups by culture, language, religion and race” (Vecoli). This phrase is true in so many ways. Although the United States prides itself in saying that all men are created equal and that everyone is welcome to join the melting pot, the reality is that there are many issues and tensions surrounding equality and acceptance of individuals as U.S. citizens. Throughout many years, different groups of people, including slaves, Native Americans, Asians, and more recently Hispanics have been stigmatized by Anglo Americans for being different and have consciously (or subconsciously) been divided into groups that struggle socioeconomically. People come to the United States from all over the world, thinking that they can make their lives better only to find out that they cannot make as much progress as they would want because of their race, ethnicity, or religious affiliation among other things. These problems make me question the effectiveness of the Enlightenment ideals that are often linked to the founding processes and the way this country functions. Different people in different periods of time will interpret ideals in ways that will be convenient to them. This is clear in the phrases, all men are created equal and life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When America’s founding fathers proclaimed these phrases to the public they were referring to liberating themselves from British oppression. They did not even think about people of African descent and whether or not they should be considered equal. However, during the Civil Rights Movement, those same phrases were used by activists to fight for black rights.

An interesting idea brought up by Vecoli is the change that has occurred in the American naturalization process. The process in the eighteenth and nineteenth century was extremely simple (if you were a WASP). However, once the waves of immigrants started to arrive, things became more complicated. America was introduced to people that had different ways of cooking, different religions, different educations and different political and economic ideologies. All of this made Americans realize that immigration and naturalization policies followed by a country are key to its understanding of self-conception as a nation. By determining whom to admit to residence and citizenship, the government defines the future ethnic and racial composition of the population. It is important to note that many Americans do not approve of unrestricted immigration because of a threat to the stability of the social order and a change in the national identity. However, in many occasions, they have allowed immigration to occur because it is convenient for them. I have family members in this country who are housekeepers and they are exploited, working more than twelve hours a day and earning less than minimum wage per hour. Why….because they are undocumented. Who benefits from this? Their bosses. This example is used to show how America has not really done anything to address immigration because the U.S. needs illegal immigration in the same way it needed slavery two hundred years ago to thrive economically. Many American citizens argue that illegal immigrants or even first generation Americans take away jobs from the market that would otherwise go to a native citizen, which is why they should be deported back to their countries and not be given residency or citizenship. But what they forget is that, they too in one way or another take advantage of the exploitation of these people and that at one point one of their ancestors was an immigrant.

The controversy surrounding the idea of assimilation of immigrants into American society has also caught my attention because it is interesting to see how some people feel that once a person moves to the U.S. he/she should stop using his/her native language, forget about their customs and traditions and adjust to American culture. But what is American culture? No two people would be able to give the same response. The fact is that the United States is like a heterogeneous mixture. It is composed of so many different ideologies. Nothing in the U.S. is unique only to it, besides its history. Holidays celebrated in the U.S. are celebrated elsewhere, languages spoken in the U.S. are spoken elsewhere, even foods cooked in the U.S. come from other places. I understand the fact that immigrants should learn the language, but only with the idea that it would make their lives easier in mind. Many do not learn not because they do not want to, but because they have other responsibilities that they must address first. In class we talked about how some believe that people who immigrated before 1965 were less lazy than immigrants today because they assimilated into society quickly and more efficiently. I think that if anything, today’s immigrants are more hardworking because they have had to abandon their homogenous country and come to a multiculturalist country, where many times they do not feel welcomed to work and make progress in life.

In “The Next Generation Emerges,” Kasinitz addresses the issue of what sort of New Yorkers immigrants are and what sort of New Yorkers they are creating. This article goes into an in-depth analysis of the American-born second generation and compares them to the generation of white and black natives. I find it interesting how something that makes New York unique is the fact that there are white and black people who are children of immigrants or immigrants themselves. I remember in kindergarten being in ESL with only white children. I could not understand why they needed help with English. I had ignorantly believed that all whites should automatically know English like I knew Spanish. But it was there that I learned otherwise. An interesting issue this article raises is the fact that Chinese and Russian Jewish second generations were more successful at graduating from college in four years and getting a good job, than their Hispanic and black colleagues. I guess it has to do with assimilation to American society in some cases. I also think that race and socioeconomic background come into play. If I come from a stable and united family unit, I will be able to succeed. However, if I come from an unstable family, I will most likely fail. Support is also very important.

In his article, Kasinitz says that “particularly the children of poor and racially stigmatized labor migrants will find themselves increasingly isolated from opportunities in the mainstream economy” (Kasinitz). I completely agree with this statement. How can a person make progress in life if he is stuck in a “rut”? Kasinitz further presents the idea that a person who is a part time student and a part time worker will take longer to graduate and have low income and weak labor attachment. This is true, people should concentrate on one thing. But sometimes the situation is such that a person is forced to work. Who can prevent that? Some have the opportunity to just study and do well, while others don’t. This creates an unpreventable disparity. Another interesting idea discussed in this text is that of “immigrant jobs” and how the second generation does not want to ever have jobs like that. I agree with this on a personal level. I admire my parents for working as hard as they do for the family’s well being but I would never want their jobs.

Some last important remarks that I would like address from this article are the fact that many people think that immigrants who grew up in the U.S. and second generation young people will never become assimilated to American society and will always have that sense of loyalty to their parents’ native country. However, like Kasinitz said in his article, research and analysis shows otherwise. As it turns out, second generation young people are doing as well as their native colleagues. They have learned the English language and the American culture and traditions. Many of them have never been to their parents’ homeland and some cannot even speak their parents’ native language. It is true that many immigration debates are only focused on recent arrivals. No one takes notice of the intergenerational progress and rapid assimilation that occurs in the majority of the cases. What makes these people different from people who had parents who were born in the U.S. is that they do not have parental and familial resources to fall back on. Members of the 1.5 generation have it even worse because they take advantage of all the educational opportunities in their reach but are denied basic rights. Many do not have a political or legal voice. Although DACA has provided help, it has not taken out all these people from their “rut.”

In “Immigrants in New York City in the New Millennium,” Foner provides a general background on the immigration of the last fifty years and the special features that New York has as an immigrant city. She points out the factors that shape the experiences of immigrants in New York and the ways that they are changing the city. She is explicit at pointing out common themes as well as differences among immigrant groups. Lastly she raises some questions about patterns in the future. In the beginning she explains where exactly people are coming from and the general reasons why they choose to migrate from their countries. An idea that I think is very interesting is the fact that many times, the U.S. grants admission to particular groups as refugees. This action makes the United States seem like a very welcoming and humanitarian nation. But once these people arrive at the U.S., they begin to see how hard it is to make progress in this nation. There are many socioeconomic barriers between a person and economic success.

When my parents immigrated to this country, they felt alone and isolated from the rest of society. The only way my parents could fill in that emptiness they had was to stay in touch with family back in Ecuador. So when I read that often times immigrants stay in touch with relatives in Foner’s text, I took it as a method used by them to remain connected with their homeland and little by little adjust to a new place. It is interesting to note how premigration values, attitudes, and customs do not go away. That is why today we still see people trying to force their children into arranged marriages or into a religion they do not necessarily agree with. Making the children follow what the parents follow gives many parents a feeling that not everything was lost when they left home. But what parents do not consider are the effects that this has on their children. I also agree with the idea that the advancement of technology has eased the assimilation process for many. Nowadays the only thing you need is a smart phone and a Wi-Fi connection, and you can see your friend on the other side of the world face to face.

Another idea that I find interesting is that it is very easy to come up with stereotypes for different things including a race’s association with certain types of jobs, ways of thinking, certain sectors of a country, etc. Sometimes I do not understand why some people associate these things with inferiority. They should be happy that they are taking small steps for a better life. The particular migration of a race to a specific area in a place is quite understandable. In the beginning and sometimes for a long period of time, people like to live amongst others that have similar ideologies as they do. Although in the long run, interacting with different people is beneficial, in the beginning it is hard to do.

The effect immigration has had on institutions in the U.S. is also very awesome. The American Catholic Church, as an example, is very diverse and liberal in many senses. It has had to make itself appealable to people that have different cultures and speak different languages. In conclusion, immigrants are not only influenced by the social, political and economic forces in New York City, but are agents of change in the city. The changes that they have brought on the city are very important and historical. Overall, it has made many New Yorkers open-minded in the sense that they can acknowledge that there is a world out there with people who are very different than they are.

The three readings were very insightful about the complex idea of immigration throughout American immigration. Although all three readings talked about the various immense waves of immigrants into America, the Vecoli reading was the most descriptive in an historical sense. The other two readings of Foner and Kasinitz talked primarily about the current issues related to Immigration today.

An interesting concept that was mentioned throughout the readings was assimilation and melting pot. But, these terms were cleverly mentioned differently between two readings particularly. In my opinion, Vecoli’s reading was very eye- opening because it was brief and concise explaining the true hardships of immigrations in the past. Vecoli’s main purpose was to identify the American identity, but he concluded that it can not be declared a single entity because it is continuously changing. However, Vecoli “clarified” that the true definition of melting pot and assimilation was to eradicate all the ethnic characteristics that made you unique, in order to “assimilate” into a person accepted by the angle-saxon white people part of the elite hegemony. Vecoli was concise in stating that the melting pot and assimilation was a complete fallacy. The immigrants were forced to change themselves in order to cope with society dominated by the white elite.

On the other hand, Kasinitz clarified the terms melting pot and assimilation in a different connotation. However, Kasinitz’s clarification resembles our current situation today. According to Kasinitz, New York is a melting pot with various ethnic groups assimilated into a conglomeration of various traditions. Despite Vecoli’s description of “false assimilation,” Kasinitz stated how New York is a mix of multiple ethnic groups, which truly comprises the true definition of melting pot, as seen today. As time has progressed, the concepts of assimilation and melting pot were finally fulfilled. As seen today with 1st generation and mostly 2nd generation immigrants, they have assimilated into the American culture by primarily learning to speak English along with other traditions they have adapted over time. But, the difference is that these immigrants can still grasp onto their ethnic backgrounds, compared to the past, when the elite white eradicated the immigrants relationship to their ethnic background to become fully incorporated into a white American.

The third reading by Foner, similar to Kasinitz, mainly emphasized the influences of immigrants on New York, and the influence of New York on the immigrants. The immigrants in the present, have assimilated into New York life seamlessly. New York, with its high demand of labor, attracts the immigrants due to its availability of jobs. But, due to recent economic hardships, it is becoming more difficult, and the problem of job shortages is still being coped with. Immigrants have impacted the NYC largely, for example Little Italy, Chinatown, etc. Immigrants also impact the public education system, especially CUNY, which does an impeccable job giving the opportunity to immigrants to get an education. Other parts of the city that are affected include hospitals, library, and museums. Ultimately, America has started opening up to multinationalism country, with immigrants coming from even more places like Central America, South America, and the Caribbean. However, incorporation of immigrants still remains a problem for both the city and the nation.

The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity by Rudolph J. Vecoli

Vecoli does an impressive job of summarizing the progression of the American Identity while also highlighting the important role immigration has played in its creation. He notes the transformation of the ideals pertaining to immigration and foreign peoples, from those surrounding the already diversified population of early America, to the enactment of immigration quota systems, to the general acceptance of pluralism. I find that Vecoli does a sound job at detailing multiple (even opposing) points of view, allowing for the reader to look at the development of an American Identity through a wide lens. The friction between strong, opposing ideals of the American Identity has existed nearly since birth of America. In fact, it is arguable that America was born from this. While England wished to maintain a strong influence (economically, politically and even socially) over the thirteen colonies, the colonists have developed their own culture, their own identity. Believing that they should live free of oppression, they decided to create a country that was rooted in that ideal. However, as the country grew, the attempt to create a singular, unique identity went against this very idea. And, as a result, different groups and sects arose, each one proposing its own sentiment on what a true American is and their plan to enforce that belief.

Thanks to this reading, I can finally place a term to my own beliefs on immigration and the American Identity: Pluralism. For a while, and even more so as I read this excerpt, I also questioned the idea of America being a “melting pot.” While a melting pot may be a concoction of various yet individual parts, its purpose is to use these parts to create something new. This is the problem with configuring a single American Identity. There is a lack of clarity on what the melting pot should create. Should there be a single American race or an overall acceptance of all races? In the end, I find myself following mainly transcultural ideals as opposed to nativist ones.

Immigrants in New York City in the New Millenium by Nancy Foner

While Vecoli’s writing focused on the effects of immigration on creating an American Identity, Foner decided to hone in on something much more local: immigration and the “New York Identity.” By that I refer to Foner’s vivid illustrations of the intertwined relationship between immigration and the culture of NYC. She begins by noting the biggest pull that NYC offered to immigrants: having friends and family members already living here. While several push factors may have existed in home countries, having familiar faces made the transition bearable and even appealing. She goes on to mention how NYC is a close knit immigrant city, with immigrants existing in families up to 3 or 4 generations ago. Immigrants, and children of immigrants, also appear widely in the city, including government positions. They are not localized. Although she does mention that certain professions are stereotypical for certain ethnicities, she also shows how newer and educated immigrants are able to attain better jobs. Various education systems, CUNY being one that is mentioned, have made this possible. Finally, a noticeable theme is how immigrants have added to the overall culture of NYC. Out of neighborhoods that house various ethnic groups, things such as the cuisine, places of worship and business have been established and enjoyed by the community.

One line from Foner truly stood out to me. It was, “New York is also appealing because outsiders do not stand out.” If one needed proof to support the “Melting Pot” idea, he or she should look toward NYC. Even though it has a distinct culture, this culture can be enjoyed by anyone, without the requirement of abandoning his or her own traditions. It seems that while an American Identity cannot be established, a New York one has.

The Next Generation Emerges by Philip Kasinitz, John H. Mollenkopf, Mary C. Waters

The city is ours for the taking, or so this excerpt suggests. Although many immigrants live in New York, the article notes that it is the second generation (or in some cases the “1.5 generation” referring to people who emigrated at a young age) who will play an influential role in this city’s future. This piece notes how the culture among this generation is unique. The generation has assimilated quickly, and even has identified themselves not merely an Americans, but also as New Yorkers. Though the generation may share a common culture, some racial separations exist, as seen through education, social and political situations. I found it interesting how cultural ideals could exist even in something as ordinary as school. While I was aware that at times, certain ethnic groups excelled over others academically, I never focused on the cultural affect. The type of school, its benefits, and even its location were subject to cultural ideals. Moving on to jobs, I found it noteworthy that children of immigrants generally do not take “immigrant jobs,” with some even refusing low wage or nonmainstream professions. I question if it is an idea that is instilled by their parents’ principles or something relating to the second-generation NYC culture. The excerpt argues that any dramatic economic turns can harshly affect the second-generation. It is an idea that I have never truly considered. Those of the second-generation who have encountered success do not truly have a safety net. Odds are they have moved on further than their parents. Cutbacks even in education can take a toll on the emerging generation.

One theme I identified throughout this reading was the parental effect on children. Although my generation will have the most influence over NYC’s future, each of us is subject to our own parent’s influence. From their personal and cultural ideals to even their legal status, parents have an affect over the decisions we make, ergo over the city.

In the first article, “The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity” by Rudolph J. Vecoli, the author focuses on how the American Identity is always changing due to the large waves of immigrants that have come from all over the world to America, the most recent one starting in the late 1960s. He talks about the different views on being a “nation” that have come over time and what it means to belong in a nation. The majority of the original colonists were Protestant Englishmen that, through Enlightenment ideals, formed the United States of America. Those that were born on American soil would have the birthright of being an American citizen, and foreigners had the option of becoming citizens through naturalization. Although this is a new and progressive idea, it was also unprogressive in the fact that these ideals only corresponded to only “a free white person.” In reality, America, from the first day, was a nation divided in groups by culture, religion, and race.

The article makes me uneasy with the fact that there have always been nativist movements that try to prevent immigrant influence on the American identity. There has been a constant cycle of hate towards new immigrants because the native’s feel that the immigrants don’t bring any good qualities with them. This happened the Irish Catholic when they came, the Chinese, Southern/Eastern Europeans, and now Latin Americans. It baffles me that people fear change in the American identity when it began as just a concept of sovereignty towards the American government. Breeding this hate towards the newcomers just increases racism and discrimination without actually trying to solve the problem. In present time, there is a lot of hate towards Latinos for taking jobs, but instead of hating Latinos, there should be a movement to prevent corporations from being allowed to abuse the workers’ legal status to acquire cheap labor without  providing them any benefits.

The studies done in “Immigrants In New York City in the New Millennium” and “The Next Generation Emerges” also interested me because of the responses that some of the 2^nd generation Americans gave. In both they stated that they wouldn’t want to work where their parents worked because of the bad conditions and bad pay. They also did not want to work in the same field because it was stereotypical for a person of their race to work there. There is a feeling of resentment to that job because it has a negative association with their race. There is also some interpersonal racism for some of African ancestry. It is painful for them to be identified by the public as “black” instead of African, Jamaican, or West Indian. It is unsettling that being perceived as this causes lackluster opportunities in education and employment. New York City may not have the most nativist ideology, but it still has prejudice and discrimination in its street, and fortunately the newest generations of Americans have been able to use this ethnic diversity to further themselves, and, at the same time, improve the city.

Through all this hate, many of these foreigners of different backgrounds have been able to rally their communities to participate in local government so that they have a voice in how they are treated. The 2^nd generation Americans are more accepting of each other and they see that having a foreign background is a positive thing. I hope that fellow children of immigrants are able to learn from the past to improve the nation that we call home, and to escape the cycle of mistreating the newest waves of immigrants. In the past, attempting to force an American identity has resulted in bad situations for whole generations of people.

Immigration has increased significantly over the years. In the mid 1900s, New York City consisted of mainly Europeans. In the 2000s, however, it consisted mainly of people from Latin America, Caribbean and Asia. Immigrants are attracted to New York due to better employment, wages and living standards. In some circumstances people are forced to migrate to other regions of the world due to political instability and oppression. For example, Liberians had to leave their homes because of the civil wars taking place.

An interesting idea about immigration is that it can never stop. Once one person immigrates to New York then his/her friends would want to follow and so on. Families and friends want to stay together so they follow each other to where ever they are going, Another factor that induces people to migrate is that there are long established ethnic communities that would welcome them. For example, West Indians settle in New York because there is a long established West Indian community.

As more and more immigrants come to New York then ethnic communities will expand. What is strange about this phenomenon is that even though there will be denser ethnic settlements there will also be a rise to polyethnic neighborhoods. This is contributed to the fact of public transit runs through most of the dense ethnic communities. This mixes all the ethnicities currently residing in New York and thus gives rise to multiethnic neighborhoods.

The government also provides services that can assist immigrants in establishing a more stable lifestyle. There are a range of social, health, and educational services. One example is CUNY. CUNY is an affordable education that is offered to basically everyone. CUNY also offers programs such as SEEK that helps families with lower income. The government is influencing immigrants to not only stay but also to contribute to the society.

Immigrants that reside in New York sometimes contribute to political affairs. For example, Mayor Bloomberg made trips to Israel and the Dominican Republic to gain votes from the immigrant population that lives in New York. Political leaders are recognizing the impact of immigrants as individuals in society due to the constant increase in the number of immigrants.

The longer immigrants stay in New York the more they adapt to the American culture. People refer this to a term called the melting pot effect  which is a mixing of a group of ethnically diverse people to form a new race, the American race. I personally, disagree with this concept because I think it is just another form of assimilating. Immigrants are slowly adapting to the American culture and with each generation they become more Americanized. But what does being American actually mean? Well, doing what an American would do. However, how do we know what a typical American would do. I think this idea of being an American is generated through the media. The media emphasizes sports like American football and foods like hamburgers. Doing all of these things does not make someone an American. I think just living in American makes you an American.

Whenever the talk of immigration and “what generation of American are you” arises, I always feel it is hard to pinpoint where my family and I fit in. Going by my father’s paternal side, I would be a sixth generation American. My great, great, great grandfather was an Irish Catholic immigrant who arrived in America right before the Civil War. His son would go on to be one of the many European immigrants who worked on the Holland Tunnel. On my mother’s side though, my grandfather emigrated from Italy to America in the 1940s. These familial ties really give me an outsider’s perspective on many of the topics mentioned throughout the three articles, mainly because I am so far removed from the effects of immigration and assimilation. The only connection I do have is that on both my parent’s sides, surnames that were too complicated were changed. I don’t have any experience with a giving up or blending of culture (depending on your point of view) since my ethnic background isn’t too close to me. When I am asked what I consider my background to be, I usually just say American.

I think my lack of background plays into what my definition of “a melting pot” is. Unlike the many attackers in the Vecoli article, I never felt a “melting pot” meant that many unique cultures were melted down to try to create one assimilated culture. Like a classmate had also mentioned, I always felt a melting pot was more of a stew, where all these different cultures would meet and exchange ideas and celebrations, further enriching each unique one. My interpretation is not based on any personal experience of my own, but more on what I have seen. Growing up in Brooklyn, I was never under the impression that certain peoples kept to themselves. I felt there were always exchanges between many different people with many different backgrounds happening on every block that I walked down. A great example of this is illustrated by Avenue U, a street that runs along through a large part of Brooklyn. If you travel far enough down Avenue U, you can see many different cultures coexisting; English storefronts shift to Chinese storefronts which continue to shift to Russian storefronts. It truly is a sight to see.

Something that caught my attention in the Nancy Foner article was how many different culturally distinct neighborhoods are only minutes away from where I live. I live in a small neighborhood in south Brooklyn that contains people of mostly Irish, Italian, German and Jewish descent. Meanwhile, a few blocks away is the neighborhood of Flatbush, which contains a large community of peoples with different Caribbean cultures. Also right near me are the neighborhoods of Sheepshead Bay and Brighton beach. According to the article, both of these neighborhoods have large communities of Russian Jews, many of which helped change and revitalize large sections of the neighborhood. I knew about these neighborhoods well before this class, but I never saw them as culturally distinct. The Russian pool halls of Brighton Beach and the “West Indian network of privatized passenger vans,” more commonly known as Dollar Vans, always felt like the normal blend of culture that is Brooklyn, New York.

Mohamed Mohamed

As an immigrant, much of what was said in the readings is very relatable. People first migrated to the New World for political, economic, and even religious reasons. The same reasons continue to drive thousands of immigrants into the United States. My grandfather first moved to the United States seeking economic stability. He managed to bring my father over a couple years later. After spending more than a decade in the States my father thought that it was time to bring the family. The initial intent was that this was just a vacation, then its back to life in Yemen. However, the educational opportunities made it clear that we settle in.

Like the readings mentioned, settling in in New York City was not difficult for us. We were quickly welcomed by Arab immigrants and were directed to apartments where we can find our communities. . We then lived in a small community that shared the same culture and religion. Our neighbors were from the same country and some were even from the same village. Our friends were of the same faith and spoke the same language. We all even had the same goal: to become important people of society and not just taxi drivers and store clerks.

One dilemma that the readings barely went over is the identity crisis that young immigrants go through. For example, the readings extensively speak about the adult immigrants and the second-generation immigrants. How the US-born immigrants are more willing to embrace an American culture while their parents still dream of going back to their mother country. However, the immigrants that came to the states at a very young age were not much represented in the texts. I first arrived to New York when I was seven years of age. Since then I never went back to where I was born. I lived most of my life in America but I still have childhood memories that make Yemen dear to me. Furthermore, I find myself trapped between being either too “Americanized” or not “American enough”. For example, when I entered the Grocery store the other day the guy on the register had a really difficult time noticing that we were from the same country. I eventually had to break the ice and said something in Arabic. His facial expression was that of disappointment. He and many other Yemenis I met think that I have lost my “true” culture and tradition and that I am too “Americanized” based on the way I dress or talk. On the other hand when people notice me praying in the park or when I have a hard time pronouncing a four syllable word I suddenly become un-American.

Nonetheless everything else said about immigrants and New York City being the most diverse place on earth was very well written. Truly as a New Yorker one must embrace and accept this diversity. It is this diversity that makes New York so great and it is this diversity that keeps attracting more immigrants.

What does it mean to be an American? That was the question that was going through my mind as I was reading the essays. To be honest, I don’t know what the real answer is, but I have thought about this question multiple times. Last year in the Arts in New York City class, I went to the Museum of Chinese in America for my final presentation. This museum has an exhibition that focuses on the Chinese American experience from early trade to today. It showed the particularly rocky experience of Chinese Americans and how they dealt with the discrimination and exclusion. One of the questions that was raised by the exhibition was, what does it mean to be an American?

“You are American by birth.” It’s a notion saying that, if a person is born on American soil, that person is automatically an American. This is a really neat concept, but this didn’t really apply to the Chinese Americans during the exclusion period. Even if they were native born, Chinese citizens had to carry their identification papers everywhere they went, or they would risk deportation. A Chinese American that was given citizenship at that time was not treated as one. It seemed really odd to me when I read that the Americans at that time were complaining about immigrant groups not assimilating when they were actively denying Chinese Americans a place in society. This discrimination and exclusion towards Chinese Americans pushed Chinese Americans to form their own communities which maintains stronger ties to their homeland than many other immigrant groups.

To the Chinese Americans, there were no melting pot. Chinese Americans were just an ingredient deemed unworthy to even enter the pot. That was until the exclusion period ended. Chinatown opened up to the rest of society and it was the first view of Chinese Americans. Chinatown was a popular destination for tourism, grocery, and “exotic” Chinese food. Chinese cuisine was changed. Dishes such as chop suey or kung pao chicken aren’t genuine Chinese food, but were created for the purpose of attracting customers. That is what I believe it means to be American. It means a group coming into a society and responding to the society to create a unique culture that incorporates both the cultures of the homeland and the new society.

Being a second-generation American myself, I found the messages in both “The Next Generation Emerges” and “Immigrants in New York City in the New Millennium” of particular interest. My dad came to America about 30 years ago from Peru in search of a more successful life and someways down the road I was born. Though I was born here and am technically American, I’ve always considered my self Peruvian when asked about. However, that’s not to say that I don’t have my own identity as an American. I feel blessed that I can have multiple identities. As the second-generation born Russian woman in Kasinitz’s article pointed out I “like being able to keep and appreciate those things in my culture that I enjoy and that I think are beautiful, and, at the same time, being able to change those thing which I think are bad.” The result is a unique blending of identities like the one that is so often glorified through the image of a melting pot.

Though I think the melting pot image is an appropriate one, I disagree with how it has developed throughout our nation’s history. As Vecoli points out in “The Significance of Immigration in the Formation of an American Identity,” all too often the idea of a melting pot has been used to strip immigrants of their identities from their home countries. Instead of mixing together all cultures into a beautiful new American culture, the melting pot is used to force the assimilation of immigrants into a culture deemed acceptable by a hegemony.

It is true, Vecoli adds, that this old image of a melting pot is begging to fade and people are immigrants are now maintaining stronger ties to their respective cultures, but the end result is not there yet. I really like the image put forth by Horace Kallen of an orchestra where “ethnic group is the natural instrument… and the harmony and dissonances and discords of them all make up the symphony of civilization.” This is the ideal future that I think we should all strive for. One of the best parts of America is this blending of cultures in a way that no other nation can hope to compete with. And it is for the reason that I can’t quite comprehend why there seems to be anxiety throughout America over the idea of a declining white majority and an increasing mixed minority. If anything, this should signify that we are finally beginning to reach this end goal of a perfectly blended culture where the distinctions between majority and minority no longer exist.

I also found it really interesting in Kasinitz’s article how he illustrated the shift of mentality from first generation immigrants to second generation immigrants. The article mentions that second generation immigrants aren’t willing to settle for the jobs currently occupied by their parents. Most second generation immigrants see those jobs as “immigrant jobs” and would rather distance themselves from that mentality. I believe that this is a good thing because it means that firstly, they no longer see themselves as immigrants but in fact Americans with a dual identity, and secondly, by not settling for mediocrity, they are setting themselves up to be something more and will most likely significantly contribute to the progression of civilization as a whole.

Its almost exciting to think that our potential as a nation has not yet been reached. There is still so much left for us to strive for in terms of society and civilization. Granted, our ancestors strayed a little off track with their efforts at assimilation, but we now have the chance to create a new American identity through a blending of various cultures where there will no longer be a majority or a minority, but instead one people.