3. The People. Settlement and Immigration Mother of exiles Immigration is a central aspect of US history.

Believing in the American Dream of creating a better life for themselves, many tens of millions of people have come to live in the USA. They thus changed their homelands, America and their family histories forever. They strengthened the nation's commitment to 'the dream' and to its ideal of being a refuge for the poor and oppressed a nation of nations. radually, over the centuries of massive immigration and the struggles of ne!comers to ad"ust to American conditions, the vie! that the nature of the nation
cultures opposition behind and

!as
gained of

and
popular those Americani$e',

should !ho as

be believe !ell

composite This as the ne!comers

of vie!

many continues should

national to leave of

bac#grounds, face their !hat the homeland is

races

and cultures

acceptance.

enduring necessary

dilemma

deciding

to hold the country and its increasingly diverse population together.

Americans' %and the immigrants'& core idealism, pride, and naivety are embodied in 'mma (a$arus's sonnet 'The )e! *olossus', !hich is displayed inside the base of the S tatue of (iberty.
There is some truth to the dream. Settled peoples have been able to climb a 'ladder of ethnic succession' as ne! !aves of immigrants arrive. +or most of the foreign,born, life in the USA has meant an improvement over their situation in the 'old country', the reali$ation of modest hopes for land,or home,o!nership, for e-ample. (ater generations have en"oyed more significant socio,economic progress, though 'rags to riches' careers are rare indeed.

'The New Colossus' )ot li#e the bra$en giant of ree# fame, .ith con/uering limbs astride from land to land0 1ere at our sea,!ashed, sunset gates shall stand A mighty !oman !ith a torch, !hose flame Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name 2other of e-iles. +rom her beacon hand lo!s !orld,!ide !elcome3 her mild eyes command The air,bridged harbor that t!in cities frame. '4eep ancient lands, your storied pompT cries she .ith silent lips. ' ive me your tired, your poor, 5our huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The !retched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest,tost, to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door6'

47

1o!ever, the ne!comers have also contributed to America's history of social disorder. The meeting, conflict and mi-ing of cultures has fuelled !idespread discrimination, economic e-ploitation, anti,foreign movements and debates over e/uality, opportunity and national identity. In a country !hose history began !ith the meeting of )ative Americans and 'uropean colonists and continued 7rough the importation of African slaves and several !aves of immigrants, there has never been a single national culture. The search continues for a metaphor that captures the character of American society. Is it best understood as an Anglo,American core culture to !hich ne!comers sooner or later merge into as they assimilate8 9r should it be some form of cultural pluralism as suggested by, among other images, the metaphors of 'a melting pot', 'a salad !ith clearly identifiable ingredients', or 'a ste!' !ith those ingredients mi-ed in the sauce of a common civic culture's habits and ideals8 Some commentators re"ect both the claims of a unitary culture and of cultural pluralism, preferring instead forms of multiculturalism, in !hich multiple traditions are the ideal, and no cultural group, ho!ever old or influential historically, receives priority. Americans disagree over the nature of the process and !hat the ultimate goal should be3 the assimilation, even homogeni$ation, of ne!comers or the acceptance of a permanently pluralistic society. Early encounters between Europeans and Native Americans .hen 'uropean e-plorers and settlers encountered )ative Americans in the late :;<<s, a long history of mutual incomprehension and conflict began. These encounters amounted to a collision of !orlds. *ontacts bet!een the Americas and other continents had been so rare that plants, animals, diseases, and human societies evolved into different forms in the 'ne!' and the 'old' !orlds. 'uropeans and )ative Americans caught diseases from each other. 'uropeans survived the first contacts better, but for most of the seventeenth century !ell over half of them died from difficulties in ad"usting to the ne! environment. The )ative Americans fared far !orse3 epidemics annihilated entire native cultures. )orth America's pre,*olumbian population of :< million shran# to bet!een = and > million. The e-change of plants and animals had effects that !ere "ust as far reaching. 1orses, don#eys, sheep, pigs and co!s !ere alien creatures to )ative Americans. ?otatoes, mai$e and tobacco !ere discoveries to 'uropeans. The potato played a #ey role in the great population gro!th that brought millions of 'uropean immigrants to the USA in the :@<<s. 'uropean societies !ere so diverse that Spaniards and the 'nglish could hardly imagine living in the same place in peace. Some )ative,American cultures vie!ed other 48

indigenous peoples !ith a disli#e no less intense. 5et, each continent's diversity of cultures !ere related, even /uite similar in broad outline, !hen compared !ith cultures from the other continent. Thus, all 'uropeans tended to loo# ali#e to )ative Americans, and most 'uropeans seemed incapable of seeing )ative Americans as anything but a single people. )ative Americans !ere pantheists. They believed that the divine !as in all things and that human beings !ere no more important than any other part of the !orld. 'uropeans vie!ed human beings as the highest creation of a od !ho made all things fit a system od than bro!n, red or blac# called the reat *hain of Being. In it only angels and human beings had souls and rational intelligence0 !hite people !ere more highly favoured by people0 men ran#ed higher than !omen0 and every person had a place in a social class. The vast differences in these t!o visions led to e/ually contrasting attitudes to!ard nature, society and the individual. To the 'uropean, changing nature from a !ilderness to a garden !as one of society's chief aims. 2an did od's !or# by revealing the divine order in the !orld and e-ploiting the good things od had given him. It !as natural that time and land !ere vie!ed as commodities to be measured, bought and sold as part of the individual's pursuit of success. )ative Americans sa! nature as sacred, as something to be revered or accepted rather than changed. Theirs !as a communal life in !hich material goods as !ell as individual talents belonged to the group and !ere valued for its preservation. To 'uropeans, )ative Americans seemed la$y and !asteful of nature's potential. Aie!ing time as fluid, they had only vague concepts of the past and the future, and so seemed utterly unreliable. Because they vie!ed nature as a great mother, they could not comprehend ho! pieces of her could be sold and o!ned by individuals. +rom the first 'uropean settlement until today, the main focus in conflicts bet!een these continental culture systems has been land,o!nership. The founders The people !ho established the colonies are considered founders rather than immigrants because they created the customs, la!s and institutions to !hich later arrivals %the first immigrants& had to ad"ust. The Spanish occupied coastal +lorida, the south,!est and *alifornia in the :B<<s and :C<<s. After trying to enslave the natives, they !or#ed to convert them to *hristianity, farming and sheep,herding. As many natives re"ected this !ay of life, the Spanish colonies faced border attac#s for over =<< years. The 'nglish established their first permanent settlement at Damesto!n, Airginia in :C<E. Their monarch had no desire to rule distant colonies, so instead the *ro!n legali$ed 49

companies that undertoo# the coloni$ation of America as private commercial enterprises. Airginia's early residents !ere so preoccupied !ith a vain search for gold and a sea passage to Asian mar#ets that the colony floundered until tobacco provided a profitable e-port. Settlers !ere difficult to recruit until the company offered them free land. Then the colony e-panded rapidly, although most ne!comers !anted to be tobacco plantation o!ners, not tield!or#ers. Because of the scarcity of plantation labour, in :C:F the first African slaves !ere imported. Supported by tobacco profits, Airginia imported :,B<< free labourers a year by the :C@<s and had a population of about EB,<<< !hite Americans and :<,<<< African slaves by :E<<. In the :C><s, (ord Baltimore established 2aryland as a haven for *atholics, 'ngland's most persecuted minority. 2aryland's leadership remained *atholic for some time, but its economy and population soon resembled Airginia's. In the :CC<s, other 'nglish aristocrats financed eorgia and the *arolinas as commercial investments and e-periments in social organi$ation. .ithin a generation, these colonies too resembled Airginia, but their cash crops !ere rice and indigo. The southern settlers !arred !ith the natives !ithin a fe! years of their arrival and by the :@><s drove the )ative Americans from today's south. To escape religious oppression in 'ngland, the ?ilgrims, a small group of radical separatists from the *hurch of 'ngland, founded the first of the northern 'nglish colonies in :C=< at ?lymouth, 2assachusetts. The ?uritans, !ho established the much larger 2assachusetts Bay colony in :C><, !anted to purify the *hurch of 'ngland, not separate from it. 2ostly !ell,educated middle,class people, they emigrated for religious, political and economic reasons. In America they believed they could create a 'city on a hill' to sho! ho! 'nglish society could be reformed. To that end, over =<,<<< ?uritans migrated to 2assachusetts by the early :C;<s. By the latter :C<<s, the bay colony e-panded to the coast of present,day 2aine, s!allo!ed up ?lymouth, and spa!ned the colony of *onnecticut. +lourishing through agriculture and forestry, the )e! 'ngland colonies also became the shippers and merchants for all British America. Because of their intolerance to!ards dissenters, the ?uritans' )e! 'ngland became the most homogeneous region in the colonies. The founding of the middle colonies %)e! 5or#, )e! Dersey and ?ennsylvaniaG !as different. The earliest 'uropean communities here !ere Dutch and S!edish outposts of the fur trade that almost accidentally gre! into colonies. )e! )etherlands, along the 1udson Hiver and )e! 5or# Bay, and )e! S!eden, along the Dela!are Hiver, recruited soldiers, farmers, craftsmen, clergymen and their families to meet the needs of the fur traders !ho 50

bought pelts from the natives. )e! S!eden lasted only from :C>@ to :CBB, !hen the Dutch
anne-ed it. )e! )etherlands itself fell to the 'nglish fleet in :CC;. The Dutch maintained their culture in rural )e! 5or# and )e! Dersey for over =<< years.

They also set the precedent of toleration for many ethnic, racial and religious groups in )e! Amsterdam. Before it became )e! 5or#, the city had !hite, red, bro!n and blac# inhabitants0 institutions for *atholics, De!s and ?rotestants0 and a diversity that resulted in eighteen different languages being spo#en. Although the dominant culture in colonial )e! 5or# and )e! Dersey became 'nglish by the end of the :C<<s, the 'nglish authorities continued the tolerant traditions of the Dutch in the city. ?ennsylvania's founders !ere Iua#ers !ho floc#ed to the colony after *harles II granted the area to .illiam ?enn in :C@: as a religious refuge. As !ith the ?ilgrims and ?uritans, official 'nglish tolerance too# the form of allo!ing persecuted minorities to emigrate. ?enn's publici$ing of cheap land and religious freedom brought some :=,<<< people to the colony before :CF<. 1is toleration attracted a population !hose diversity !as matched only by )e! 5or#'s. The first wave: colonial immi ration! "#$%&"''# The founders had come for economic gain and religious freedom, but their descendants gave the first large !ave of 'uropean ne!comers a !arm !elcome only if they !ere !illing to conform to Anglo,American culture and supply needed labour. The reception that immigrants received varied according to location and the individual's /ualities, from the e-tremes of largely hostile )e! 'ngland, to the more tolerant, diverse middle colonies. It !as !ith mi-ed rural )e! 5or# settlements of north,!est 'uropeans in mind that St Dean de *revecoeur, an immigrant farmer from +rance, first stated in :E@= the idea that in America 'individuals of all nations are melted into a ne! race of man'. 1e insisted, ho!ever, that the people in this first version of the melting pot had to turn their bac#s on their homeland cultures and included only the 'uropeans in the settlements he #ne!. (i#e the colonists every!here at the time, he thought that the !hite people along the !ilderness frontier, li#e the )ative Americans, soon descended into savage barbarism, and he tolerated them primarily because they provided a protective buffer against the natives. Although conditions in their homelands also played a decisive role, this first !ave !as possible only because after :CC< the *ro!n opposed emigration from 'ngland and .ales but encouraged it from other nations. In :CC=, 4ing *harles II licensed the Hoyal African Slave *ompany as the supplier of slaves to 'nglish colonies, and during the ne-t century

51

about :;<,<<< Africans arrived after surviving the appalling conditions and brutal treatment on slave ships. The largest group of immigrants %voluntary ne!comers& !ere the Scots,Irish. .ith encouragement from the 'nglish, their ancestors left Scotland for northern Ireland in the :B<<s. 5et, roughly a /uarter of a million of them left northern Ireland after :C@< because of economic discrimination by the 'nglish. 2ost paid their passage across the Atlantic by becoming indentured servants %contracting to labour !ithout !ages for four to seven years in the coloniesJ. .hen their term of service !as finished, they usually too# their 'freedom dues' %a small sum of money and tools& and settled on the frontier !here land !as cheapest. *onstantly loo#ing for better land, the Scots,Irish are the source of the stereotype of frontier fol#, !ho feel it is time to move if they can see the smo#e from a neighbour's chimney. This moving scattered their settlements from !estern )e! 'ngland to the hill country of eorgia and made it difficult to preserve their cultural heritage. The period's =<<,<<< descendants had to learn erman immigrants aroused more opposition than the Scots, erman if their religion and culture !ere to survive in )orth Irish. The largest non,'nglish spea#ing group in the colonies, they believed their America. +or mutual support, they concentrated their settlements. In the middle colonies, erman families lived so closely together in some areas that others found it hard to settle among them. (i#e the Scots,Irish, the ermans lived on the frontier, but they usually erman,spea#ing to!ns, stayed behind !hen settlement moved farther !est. Developing stra! !as the

they #ept to themselves and sho!ed little interest in colonial politics. +or some, the final ermans' prosperity. Heno!ned for their hard !or#, caution, farming methods and concern for their property, they !ere too successful, according to their envious neighbours. Ben"amin +ran#lin e-pressed !hat many feared !hen he said they might ' ermani$e us instead of us Anglici$ing them'. In a period so near the religious !ars of the Heformation, the reception ermans met also varied according to !hether they !ere non, conformists, reformed (utherans or *atholics. 9ther smaller groups in the first !ave sho!ed contrasting !ays that immigrants could ad"ust to ne! and varied conditions. 'ngland sent some B<,<<< convicts and perhaps ><,<<< poor people as indentured servants to ease problems at home !hile supplying the labour,starved colonial economy, and these people formed an underclass that /uic#ly Americani$ed. Immigration from Ireland included thousands of single, male Irish *atholic 52

indentured servants, !ho assimilated even more rapidly than the Scots,Irish, because of religious discrimination and the difficulty of finding *atholic !ives. The Scots, perhaps because of their hatred of 'nglish attempts to suppress their culture at home, follo!ed a pattern more li#e that of the ermans, using compact settlement, religion, schooling and family net!or#s to preserve their culture for generations in rural areas. A +rench enclave persisted in South *arolina, but the +rench 1uguenots and De!s, !ho settled in port to!ns, illustrated a contrasting tendency. 'nglish colonists severely limited their civil rights and sometimes attac#ed their churches or synagogues, but accepted marriage !ith them as long as they changed their religion. As a result, their communities nearly vanished. This first !ave of immigration transformed the demography of the colonies. By :EEC 'nglish dominance had decreased from four fifths to a bare ma"ority %B= per centG of the population. The great diversity of the peoples in the country led Thomas ?aine, the colonies' most famous political agitator, to call the USA a 'nation of nations' at its founding. African,American slaves composed =< per cent of this population and !ere a ma"ority in large parts of the southern colonies. 2ost )ative,American cultures had been forced inland to or beyond the Appalachians. )on,'nglish peoples !ere a ma"ority in the coastal to!ns, ?ennsylvania, the south and parts of all the other colonies. 1o!ever, the cultural, political and economic dominance of Anglo,Americans !as clear. The second wave: the (old( immi rants! "$)%&*% Bet!een :EEC and the late :@=<s, immigration slo!ed to a tric#le. The struggle for independence and the founding of the nation !elded the colonies' diverse peoples together as Americans. The dominant Anglo,American culture and the passage of time !ea#ened the old ethnic communities. Although Dutch and erman areas of influence remained locally strong, most ethnic groups assimilated. In the :@=<s most Americans and immigrants therefore thought the situation !as unprecedented !hen the second !ave gathered strength. +e! ne!comers !ere a!are of the colonial enclaves, and Americans reacted as if the ne! ethnic districts that formed !ere completely novel. The changes occurring in 'urope and the USA also made the situation seem different. A range of factors pushed 'uropeans from their homelands. Heligious persecution drove many erman De!s to emigrate, and political unrest forced out a fe! thousand 'uropean intellectuals and political activists, but economic push factors !ere decisive for most of the northern and !estern 'uropeans !ho are commonly called the 'old' immigrants. 'urope's 53

population doubled bet!een :EB< and :@B<. In Ireland and parts of

ermany rural people

depended on the potato, !hich yielded more food per acre than grain. The rapid gro!th of cities encouraged farmers to s!itch to large,scale production based on farm machinery, the elimination of smallholdings and enclosure of common lands. .ith these changes, such a large population could not ma#e a living in the countryside. The industrial revolution and an international trade boom spread from Britain to the *ontinent and the USA during this period, but reached different regions at different times. If nearby cities offered industrial !or# or "obs in shipping, emigration rates !ere lo!er. But the population surplus from the countryside !as so large that huge numbers of people left any!ay. Stage migration %moving first to the city and, after some years, from there to a foreign country& became common.

+ollo!ing changes in the Atlantic labour mar#et, people moved to !here the "obs !ere. Steam ships and trains made migration abroad safer, faster and cheaper, and 'America letters' from family and friends in the USA gave a remar#ably accurate picture of changing economic conditions there. 9f the C< million people !ho left their homelands bet!een :@=< and :F><, t!o thirds settled in the USA. During the 'old' immigration, :B.B million people made America their home. The largest immigrant groups, in order of si$e, !ere ermans, Irish, Britons and Scandinavians, but many other peoples, including +rench *anadians, *hinese, S!iss and Dutch also came in large numbers. The factor that pulled most people to the USA !as an apparently unlimited supply of land. +e! seriously considered the claims of )ative Americans. Another pull factor !as !or#. The USA needed both s#illed and uns#illed labour. American railroad companies as !ell as state and territorial governments sent immigration agents to 'urope to recruit people !ith promises of cheap fertile farms or "obs !ith !ages much higher than they could earn at home. )e!s of boom times in the USA, land givea!ays such as the 1omestead Act of :@C=, and the discovery of gold in *alifornia brought pea#s in the rising immigration. +ettlement patterns and nativism .hile the ne!comers settled every!here, they !ere most numerous in the urban manufacturing centres of the north,east and the recently settled farmlands and frontier cities of the mid,!est and ?acific coast. The 'old' immigrants found many economic

54

niches, supplying much of the mar#et for domestic servants, mill and factory !or#ers, miners, loggers, sailors, fishermen and construction !or#ers. 2ost came !ith enough funds to travel to places !here fello! countrymen could help them ad"ust to American society, but after potato rot ruined the crop that supported Ireland's rural population, huge numbers of Irish immigrants arrived in the :@;<s and :@B<s !ith so little money that they stayed !here they landed.
British immigrants seemed nearly invisible because they spo#e 'nglish and Anglo,Americans' culture !as much li#e theirs. They also !on the gratitude of American businessmen up to the :@B<s because they brought #no!ledge of Britain's most recent machines and industrial organi$ation in their heads. .hite and ?rotestant, Scandinavians had language problems that made them seem slo! to comprehend and at times they !ere ridiculed for their homeland !ays, but they e-perienced less discrimination than some other groups. )ativism %the disli#e of people and things foreign& plagued many 'old' immigrants in spite of their apparent similarity to native, born Americans. ermans !ere !elcomed for their technical #no!ledge and industry, and admired for a culture that !as 'urope's most respected at that time. But they !ere also stereotyped as ?russian marionettes or Bavarian louts, critici$ed for clannishness, and !ere targets of temperance movements that attac#ed their habit of drin#ing in beer halls after church on Sundays. erman De!s !ere e-cluded from education, the professions and shunned in many social circles.

The Irish suffered many forms of discrimination and !ere often stereotyped as dirty, la$y and drun#en. The most serious opposition they faced, ho!ever, came from anti, *atholic bigots, !ho burned convents and churches as early as the :@><s. All the large immigrant groups found themselves involved in controversies over the control and content of the public schools, but none !ere so critical of the schools' attempts to Americani$e immigrant children as the Irish %usually through the reactions of Irish,American priests&. Anti,foreign agitation reached its first pea# in the :@B<s. Along !ith anti,*atholicism, this nativism focused on popular versions of ideas made famous by Ale-is de Toc/ueville's
American Democracy, !hich claimed that the basic social and political character of the USA !as transplanted to )e! 'ngland from the mother country. The 4no! )othing or American ?arty believed that not only the Irish, !ith their alleged loyalty to the ?ope in Home, but also all non,British immigrants, threatened this precious heritage, and so proposed tripling the time needed to gain US citi$enship and restricting immigrants' voting rights. 9n that platform, 4no! )othings !on do$ens of seats in *ongress and numerous state and local offices, especially in the north,east. Internal divisions and the coming of the *ivil .ar defused this nativist movement.

Another arose in the :@C<s in the !est and achieved its goal, the *hinese '-clusion Act, !hich ended *hinese immigration in :@@=. Hacism and the fear of unemployment and depressed !ages motivated the labour organi$ations that spearheaded the campaign. The third wave: the (new( immi rants! "$*%&"930 The 'ne!' immigration mar#ed a change in the origin of most immigrants. Around :@F< immigration from north,!est 'urope declined sharply %but did not stop&, !hile arrivals from southern and eastern 'urope rose. By :F<E, four out of five ne!comers !ere 'ne!' immigrants. Bet!een :@F< and :F:;, the volume of immigration also soared, topping a million annually several times and e/ualling the :B.B million of the old immigration in "ust

55

t!enty,four years. In numerical order, the largest 'ne!' groups !ere Italians, De!s, ?oles and 1ungarians, but many 2e-icans, Hussians, *$echs, Dapanese, +ilipinos and others also immigrated. To most Americans, the change mostly involved the feeling that the typical immigrant had become much less li#e them. The religions, languages, manners and costumes of the Slavic peoples seemed e-otic or incomprehensible. 'astern 9rthodo- De!s, the 2editerranean nationalities and Asians appeared to belong to other races. But this tidal !ave of people !as in several !ays similar to its predecessors. The basic economic push and pull factors had not changed. The commerciali$ation of farming, urbani$ation and industriali$ation had simply spread east and south. The ne! immigrants had the same dream of bettering their o!n and their children's future. (i#e the ?uritans, eastern 'uropean De!s emigrated because of religious persecution, chiefly the bloody Hussian pogroms. Transportation improvements continued, increasing the flo! of migrants. +alling train and steam,ship tic#et prices %often prepaid by relatives in America& made migration affordable even for the very poor and the young. *heap travel also permitted people to see immigration as a short,term strategy, instead of a lifelong decision. 2any ne! immigrants !ere so"ourners, 'birds of passage', !ho stayed only long enough to save money to buy land or a small business in the old country. In general, the ne! immigrants !ere younger, more often unmarried, and more li#ely to travel as individuals rather than in family groups. The opportunities in America had changed some!hat too. The closing of the frontier around :@F< signalled the end of the era of government land,givea!ays. (ess than a /uarter of the ne!comers found employment in agriculture. The Dapanese in *alifornia are the best e-ample of those !ho succeeded by buying un!anted
land and ma#ing, it productive. +our fifths of immigrants went !here the "obs !ere3 to the industries in the reat (a#es mid,!est. America had an enormous need for factory !or#ers, but due to mechani$ation, big cities of the north,east and

ree#s, ?ortuguese, Syrians,

most "obs !ere uns#illed and poorly paid.

A renewed immigration debate and immigration restriction The si$e of the ne! immigration and the altered "ob mar#et resulted in larger urban immigrant /uarters than Americans have ever seen. *rime, overcro!ding, insanitary conditions and epidemics in immigrant ghettoes caused alarm and reform before the ,ivil -ar. Now these problems seemed insurmountable, and many Americans doubted that the more e-otic' foreigners could be assimilated into society. Heactions to the situation in the cities !ere various. Heformers established 'settlement houses' and charities to help

56

immigrants ad"ust, !or#ed to Americani$e them and fought for better housing and par#s. Some sa! that the ghettos !ere important buffer $ones !here immigrants could use their mother tongues and follo! old,country traditions !hile gradually ad"usting to the USA. 9thers concluded that the ghettos proved that restrictive immigration la!s !ere needed.
In :F<F, Israel Kang!ill's play The Melting Pot populari$ed the idea that the diverse groups in the USA !ould eventually fuse many races and cultures through intermarriage and become a ne! people. To many a native,born reformer, that !as a more radical version of the melting pot than they could accept, and to them the metaphor meant that the immigrants should conform to Anglo, American culture, for their o!n good. )ativists of the time could not imagine a greater calamity than such a melting,pot 'mongreli$ation' of the !hite race. An opposing, traditional vie! !as that the USA should be an e-ample of !hat 1orace 4allen called 'cultural pluralism', the belief in a collection of cultures united by loyalty to the same political and civic ideals. But pluralists had long split over the issue of race. The founding fathers, for e-ample, made the national motto 'e pluribus unum %out of many one&, but in the )aturali$ation Act of :EF<, they permitted foreigners to become American citi$ens only if they !ere !hite.

Hestriction, even regulation of immigration, !as slo! to develop in the USA, !hich encouraged immigration and, until :@EB, only as#ed local authorities to count immigrants. +oreigners could become citi$ens in five years and vote as soon as they applied for citi$enship. +inally, in :@F:, the federal government too# responsibility for regulating immigration and the ne-t year opened 'llis Island, the famous screening depot for immigrants in )e! 5or# Bay. In the :F=<s, ho!ever, those !ho believed the USA could not successfully integrate so many immigrants !on the passage of severely restrictive, racist immigration la!s. The )ational Iuota Acts represented the clima- of a campaign for restriction that achieved its first result in :@EB, !hen the federal government began a piecemeal listing of banned groups that, in time, included convicts, prostitutes, the *hinese, lunatics, idiots, paupers, contract labourers, polygamists, political radicals, the Dapanese and illiterates. The influence of eugenics, the pseudo,scientific racism of the early
:F<<s, !hich purported to prove e-perimentally the superiority of Anglo,Sa-ons over all other 'races', !as evident in the list and later legislation. So !as the combination of +irst .orld .ar super,patriotism that demanded :<< per cent Americanism, and the ideological insecurity that gre! after the Hussian Hevolution of :F:E. +inally in :F=:, *ongress passed the first general limitation on immigration, the 'mergency Iuota Act, that drastically reduced the annual number of 'uropean ne!comers to >B@,<<< %less than a third of pre,!ar levels&, and introduced nationality quotas. 'ach 'uropean nation's allotment of immigrant visas per year e/ualled > per cent of the foreign,born in the USA from that country at the federal census of :F:<.

The dissatisfaction of restrictionists !ith this la! revealed the groups they feared most, Asians and the ne! immigrants from 'urope. In
:F=; the Asian '-clusion Act ended all immigration from Asian nations, and a )ational 9rigins Iuota Act reduced 'uropean nationality /uotas to = per cent. 2ore important, it moved the census for counting the foreign,born of each group bac# to :@F<, !hen only small numbers of 'ne!' immigrants !ere in the USA, so that their /uotas became much smaller. The :F=; Act also introduced a ne! concept, national origins /uotas, based on the accumulated part of the American population of each 'uropean national bac#ground bet!een :E,F< and :F=<, !hich cut the /uotas for all 'uropean nations but the United 4ingdom by one half to t!o thirds. In :F=F, !hen the national origins /uotas !ent into effect, Britain's !as CB,>C:, !hile Italy's, for e-ample, !as B,@<= and Syria received the minimum of :<< visas. This narro!, specifically Anglo,American definition of the national identity remained the legal frame!or# for immigration to the USA until :FCB.

-artime policies and the search for principle in immi ration policy 57

.riting immigration la! that functions as intended has proved difficult. The Iuota Acts did end the ne! immigration, and arrivals from northern and !estern 'urope did fall sharply, but immigration from the United 4ingdom also declined. 'ven the !estern 'uropean nations !ith much reduced /uotas left those unfilled. )or did *ongress guess that arrivals from 'non,/uota' nations, such as 2e-ico, and US territories, such as the ?hilippines and ?uerto Hico, !ould soar into the millions by :FC<. 'vents during these years defied governmental plans.
The depression of the :F><s put a stop to mass immigration. (ocal authorities and 'vigilantes' forcibly deported about half a million 2e-ican Americans, many of them US citi$ens, during that decade. )a$i and fascist regimes caused an enormous flo! of refugees, =B<,<<< of !hom *ongress admitted as non,/uota immigrants under special la!s. 2any more, including =<,<<< De!ish children, !ere turned a!ay because the USA !as un!illing to put aside national origins /uotas during a time of high unemployment and rising anti,Semitism.

The Second .orld .ar and the *old .ar caused several contrasting shifts in policy. The government imported temporary farm labour from 2e-ico under the 'bracero
program' due to !artime labour shortages and lifted the ban 0Ln *hinese immigration because of foreign,policy considerations. 5et it also bo!ed to panic#y racists on the !est coast, !ho feared foreign spies, and confined ::B,<<< Dapanese Americans in 'internment camps', confiscating most of their property. After the !ar, federal la! provided for the entry of families formed by US service people abroad, and several hundred thousand displaced persons %those so uprooted by the !ar that they had no homes to return toG !ere admitted by Acts of *ongress. Bet!een :F;@ and :FBF, *old .ar refugees from communist countries, li#e 1ungary and *uba, also came. The total of non,/uota immigrants for those years reached EB<,<<<, and made a moc#ery of the idea of regulating immigration according to national origins /uotas. 2oreover, during the *old .ar, !hen the USA competed !ith the USSH for the allegiance of non, aligned nations, the racist principles underlying the /uotas !ere a foreign,policy embarrassment. In :FB=, the 2c*arran,.alter Act stated that race !as no longer a reason for refusing someone an immigrant visa. Instead it started the so,called 'brain,drain' to the USA by reserving the first B< per cent of visas for each country for people !ith needed s#ills. But the la! #ept the national origins principle, gave many Third .orld countries tiny /uotas, and made communist or socialist associations a bar to immigration. ?ressure for an entirely ne! approach gre!. The Immigration Act oft :FCB provided this ne! approach, .t aMso had unforeseen conse/uences. It replaced national origins /uotas !ith hemispheric limits to annual immigration. To emphasi$e e/ual treatment, all nations in the eastern hemisphere had the same limit of =<,<<< immigrants annually. A system of preferences set principles for selecting immigrants. Heunifying families, the most important principle, reserved nearly three /uarters of immigrant visas for relatives of American citi$ens or resident aliens. Spouses, minor children and parents !ere admitted outside the limits. ro!n children, brothers and sisters !ere given special preferences.

The second principle continued the 'brain,drain' by reserving =< per cent of visas for s#illed people. Hefugees received the remaining visas. (egislation made the national limit and preference system global in the :FE<s. *ongress intended to ma#e up for past in"ustices to southern and eastern 'uropeans through 'family reunification' visas for siblings and gro!n children, !hich it hoped !ould lead to the reappearance of 'ne!' immigrants. +or ten years the plan !or#ed, but by :F@< it became clear that the family preferences benefited people from other nations much more. In :FCB 'urope and *anada provided the ma"ority of immigrants to the USA, but by :F@< less than a si-th came from those places and four fifths !ere almost e/ually divided

58

bet!een Asia and (atin America. '-pecting !estern nuclear anticipate American la!ma#ers did not anticipate ho! Third
.orld families !ould use the family reunification clauses to bring in e-tended families.

The fourth wave: "*#. to the present The :FCB la! ushered in the fourth ma"or !ave of immigration, !hich rose to a pea# in the late :FF<s and produced the highest immigration totals in American history by the end of the decade. In addition to the many immigrants allo!ed by the hemispheric limits %changed to a global total of >=<,<<< in :F@<&, the !ave has included hundreds of thousands of immediate relatives and refugees outside those limits. It has also contained millions of illegal aliens, !ho cross borders !ithout %or !ith false& papers or arrive at airports on student or tourist visas and then overstay.
Bet!een :FC< and =<<= nearly > B million people settled legally in America. The list of the ten largest nationality groups in Table >.: for :FC< sho!s only t!o (atino and no Asian immigrant groups but many 'uropean nationalities. The prominence of 2e-icans, ho!ever, foreshado!ed future trends. At the pea# of the fourth !ave in the :FF<s, some F.B million more ne!comers arrived. The second list of groups, in =<<=, after the pea# brought by the :FCB Act, reveals the la!'s une-pected benefits for the Third .orld immigrants of the fourth !ave. In =<<= three /uarters of the legally resident foreign,born in the US !ere (atino %B: per cent& or Asian %=; per cent&.

(i#e the earlier !aves of ne!comers, the fourth includes a broad range of socio, economic groups. 9ne result of saving visas for needed occupations is that a very noticeable minority are highly s#illed !or#ers, professionals %especially engineers, doctors and nurses&, and entrepreneurs !ith capital. The large ma"ority o f both legal and illegal immigrants
are similar to those !ho have arrived since the :>=<s. They are above average educationally and economically at home, but belo! average in these areas in the USA. They have come because commerciali$ation and industriali$ation %no! revolutioni$ing the Third .orld& have disrupted their traditional economies. At the socio,economic bottom of this !ave are people !ho obtain visas because they are near relatives of recent, more s#illed immigrants or !ho ta#e "obs Americans do not !ant. Among the latter are (atino !omen recruited by agencies as live,in domestic servants and nannies. Spreading the !ord about these "obs and moving into better,paid !or# once they have ac/uired more 'nglish, they bring their families and forge the lin#s in 'chain migration' based on a net!or# of female contacts. The nationalities and s#in colours of most people in this !ave are different and more various, ho!ever, and they arrive in different !ays and settle in different places. There are colonies of 1mong in 2inneapolis, Aietnamese on the 2ississippi Delta, east Indian hotel, o!ners across the Sunbelt, 2iddle,'astern 2uslims in Detroit and )e! Dersey and large concentrations of (atinos , not only in the south,!est but also in the rural south and mid,!est as !ell as the nation's big cities. These large foreign,born settlements have given rise to contemporary forms of racism and nativism. roping for !ays to ad"ust to the changes in their country's population, some Americans are again resorting to broad stereotypes.

Attitudes to immi rants: the contemporary debate In :F@=, !hen the allup 9rgani$ation as#ed Americans !hether specific ethnic groups

had been good or bad for the USA, on the !hole, the longer the group had been the country, the more favourable !as the public response. Thus, by then large ma"orities thought Irish *atholics and De!s, !ho earlier suffered from !idespread discrimination, had been good influences on the country.

59

Hacial attitudes, ho!ever, appeared to be decisive in creating long,term lo! opinions of non,!hite ethnic groups. (ess than half of the Americans /uestioned in :F@= thought Dapanese, *hinese and African Americans had favourably affected the country, and only one in five or less approved of having recent non,!hite groups, such as ?uerto Hicans, Aietnamese and 1aitians in the USA.

(arge numbers of Asian immigrants in the fourth !ave arrive !ith more capital and a higher level of education than most (atinos. Those facts and popular attitudes to!ards some Asian cultures' emphasis on respect for parents, education and hard !or# have led some media commentators to lump all Asian Americans together under the label of the 'model minority'. This ignores the large ma"ority of Asian immigrants !ho come !ith little money and education0 the problems of Asian refugees !ho have e-perienced !artime traumas0 and "ob discrimination and violence against Asian Americans. +or its o!n convenience, the federal government invented the !ord '1ispanics' to put in a single category all the *entral and South American Spanish,spea#ing cultures arriving in the USA in the fourth !ave. A handy label for official statistics, the !ord became identified !ith illegal immigrants in the popular mind because of the large number of immigrants unla!fully crossing the border !ith 2e-ico. It thus contributed to pre"udice against hugely diverse (atino populations, even though 'illegals' come from countries as diverse as Ireland and Iran. Illegal immigration causes heated debate over government policy to control entry to the USA. 9ne segment of public opinion stresses that tolerating illegal immigration encourages a general disregard for the la!, lo!ers !ages for other !or#ers, and undermines the :FCB la! that gives all nationalities an e/ual chance for immigrant visas. 9ther Americans emphasi$e that illegal immigrants ta#e "obs that US citi$ens do not !ant, are paid less than the legal minimum !age, !or# in substandard conditions, and, !hile needing the benefits of social,!elfare programmes, dare not reveal the facts of their situation for fear of being deported. The federal government responded to this ongoing debate in :F@C by passing the Immigration Heform and *ontrol Act %IH*A&. The la! attempted to minimi$e illegal immigration !hile e-pressing acceptance and giving rights to people already inside the USA. It sets fines and penalties for employers !ho hire illegal aliens and also attempts to prevent employment discrimination through rules that outla! firing or refusing to hire people because they loo# foreign. The la! offered 'amnesty' %legal immigrant statusG for illegals !ho had stayed in the USA for four years, and for some temporarily resident farm!or#ers. Almost > million people became legal immigrants through IH*A. Their improved situation !as the one great success of the legislation. It proved difficult to document evidence that employers had bro#en the la!, 60

and the number of illegals, !hich declined at first, rose again to bet!een F and :: million in a fe! years. In spite of rising reactions against immigration in the :F@<s, national policy became more liberal through the Immigration Act of :FF<. It raised the annual total of immigrant visas, the limit for individual nations and the number of asylum see#ers !ho could remain in the USA. It also removed restrictions on the entry of many groups, including homose-uals and communists, people from nations adversely affected by the :FCB la!, and additional family members, including the spouses and children of illegals given amnesty. During the economic boom of the :FF<s, the shortage of uns#illed labour made most Americans !illing to
overloo# the problem of illegal immigration.

Since :FF<, sharp differences in public attitudes to immigration have been evident. The bac#lash against the level of immigration gre! strong by the mid,:FF<s, especially in some groups in the seven states %*alifornia, )e! 5or#, )e! Dersey, +lorida, Te-as, Illinois and Ari$onaG !here over three /uarters of ne!comers settled. In *alifornia, a referendum that denied illegal immigrants educational and social services passed easily but !as bloc#ed by court challenges initiated by opponents of the measure. 2ore restrictive attitudes also found e-pression in the federal immigration and !elfare reform la!s of :FFC. These strengthened border controls against illegal immigration, made it easier to deport 'suspicious' visitors and immigrants, re/uired family in the USA to ta#e more responsibility for #eeping ne!comers off the !elfare roles, and denied
impact. legal immigrants federal !elfare benefits %illegal immigrants never received them&. *ourt cases and action by the *linton administration prevented this last provision from having much

?resident bracero

eorge .. Bush e-pressed generous attitudes to!ards some foreign !or#ers

in early =<<:, !hen he !elcomed a proposal from the ?resident of 2e-ico for a ne!
!or#er programme and amnesty la!. During the recession and the .ar on Terror that follo!ed, ho!ever, he did not implement the proposal. After the FN:: terrorist attac#s, polls sho!ed that large ma"orities of the public favoured further strengthening border controls against illegal immigration and a decrease in legal immigration. In response, the government more energetically used the provisions of the :FFC la!, and through the USA ?atriot Act of =<<= developed ne! biometric identity chec#s to regulate entry to the country, conducted intensified surveillance of the foreign,born and called in immigrants, especially Arab Americans, for /uestioning and possible detention or deportation. +ive years into the t!enty,first century, US la! still allo!ed the !orld's highest level of legal immigration, nearly a million annually, most of it non,!hite and non,.estern %culturally&. An inability or un!illingness to enforce e-isting la! resulted in the continued tolerance of additional millions of illegal immigrants, most of them (atinos. This situation suggested that in the forty years since the :FCB immigration,reform la!, Americans' self,image had become e-traordinarily inclusive !hen compared !ith the narro! Anglo,American national identity enshrined in US la! until that time. Sharp differences, nonetheless, continued to mar# American public opinion about immigration after =<<:. 2ost of the country's economic, political and cultural elites accepted high levels of legal and illegal immigration. The gen eral public, on the other hand, increasingly lin#ed immigration to concerns about national security, population gro!th, environmental problems and cultural differ ,

61

ences. 2a"orities of those polled therefore favoured more effectively restricting entrance to the country. A dramatic e-ample of this chasm in attitudes about immigration occurred in =<<;.

1aving implemented a variety of national security measures in response to the FN:: attac#s, ?resident Bush announced his support for a revised guest,!or#er,amnesty plan, similar to the one proposed by 2e-ico three years earlier. The public re"ected the idea by large margins in a series of polls, and it /uietly disappeared from the presidential agenda. In this divided climate of opinion, it !as uncertain !hether the public's concerns !ould in time bring a less generous American immigration policy. Exercises .rite short essays on the follo!ing topics. 1. '-plain !hy the encounters bet!een )ative Americans and 'uropeans !ere so disastrous. 2. Describe one or more of the four ma"or !aves of immigration and discuss causes for the #ind of reception the ne!comers received. 3. Debate !hich of the metaphors for understanding the nature of American society is most accurate and enlightening. 4. *ritically discuss the evolution of American immigration la! and the social forces that produced it.

62