My answer to the thread title: No, there is not a problem. At least, no more of a problem with immigration than has ever existed in the history of the United States. Do I have to put up my cartoon about the Native American chief standing on the shore of America, watching the English ships come in, thinking aloud, "Not more illegal immigrants!"
That said, I don't want to get into a huge point-by-point discussion about immigration again. Didn't we just go 'round this topic a few months back? But I will quote from one of the best current sources of grounded, factually-based research on immigration in the US: A book called
Immigrant America, by the very respected sociologists Alejandro Portes and Ruben Rumbaut. They, along with Douglas Massey, are the triumvirate of scientific immigration research in this country, and while they are still academics (and I never trust any academic completely), their results stand up to as much criticism as you can hurl at them. This includes Samuel Huntington's nativist treatise,
Who are we? (he basically freaks out about America losing its so-called identity) and perhaps even George Borjas' indictment of immigration on economic grounds. There is a lot that could be said (which I already said in the earlier thread on immigration, and don't feel like typing again), but I'll stick with this simple idea from Portes & Rumbaut:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Portes & Rumbaut, 1996
Periods of high immigration are invariably marked by a tide of nativist resistance that characterizes the waves of newcomers as a threat to the integrity of national culture and a source of decay in the qualities of the native population....
The well-entrenched public view is that immigration is a consequence of the initiative of immigrants themselves, who come in search of a better life; they are allowed to settle because of the laxness of government controls and a tolerant attitude among the natives. If such an attitude disappears and the government tightens controls, immigration will certainly go away....
Such views are erroneous. Immigrant flows are initiated not solely by the desires and dreams of people in other lands but by the designs and interests of well-organized groups in the receiving country, primarily employers. Up to a point, public opposition to immigration can play into the hands of these groups by maintaining the newcomers in a vulnerable and dependent position. Similarly, governments are not omnipotent in their regulation of immigration. In particular, governmental attempts at reversing well-established immigration flows do not generally have the intended effect because of the resistance of social networks linking places of origin and destination.
|
And, if you're not too bored yet, some more quotes included by the authors in their conclusion...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Teddy Roosevelt, 1918
There can be no fifty-fifty Americanism in this country. There is room here only for 100 percent Americanism, only for those who are American and nothing else.
|
And to answer that...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ralph Linton, anthropologist, 1937
There can be no question about the average American's Americanism or his desire to preserve his precious heritage at all costs. Nevertheless, some insidious foreign ideas have already wormed into his civilization.... Thus dawn finds the unsuspecting patriot garbed in pajamas, a garment of East Indian origin.... He will begin his day with coffee, an Abyssinian plant first discovered by the Arabs.... Meanwhile, he reads the news of the day, imprinted in characters invented by ancient Semite by a process invented in Germany upon a material invented in China.
As he scans the latest editorial pointing out the dire results to our institutions of accepting foreign ideas, he will not fail to thank a Hebrew God in an Indo-European language that he is one hundred percet (decimal system invented by the Greeks) American (from Amerigo Vespucci, Italian geographer).
|