Americans in Waiting, by Hiroshi Motomura - Book Report/Review Example

Sociology: Immigration A Review of, Americans in Waiting, by Hiroshi Motomura by School September 2016 Sociology: Immigration Immigration has been at the forefront of political debate for many years now. There are some who believe that allowing too many immigrants into the country with alter our society and in an essence America will lose what it is to be American. The opposing view, however, focuses on the notion that America was formed by a group of ‘immigrants’ and that immigration is the very foundation of what constitutes being an American. For those who adhere to the notion that immigration is the center of our society, the question then comes, when did it change? When did immigration stop being a key to our nation’s success, and start becoming an issue? Hiroshi Motomura in his book, Americans in Waiting, attempts to answer these questions and to demonstrate how this decline, in America’s view and treatment of immigration, has actually created the issues now faced. In his writing he takes his readers back, to a hundred and fifty year long span, where immigration was considered essential to the American way of life. After taking a look at a summary of this writing, an analysis of the three typologies he outlines for citizenship, and evaluating the importance of citizenship for immigration policies, perhaps a clearer picture will begin to form for what the real issue of immigration is. The book, Americans in Waiting, primarily focuses on how the view and treatment of immigration and immigrants has changed over time. By looking into America’s past the author, Hiroshi Motomura, finds a simple, yet profound connection between immigration and citizenship. This connection is that, for over one hundred and fifty years immigrants to America were immediately put on track to becoming citizens. The first way the United States accomplished this was by giving them homestead land on the western frontier. This allowed the immigrants to actually “own” a part of America so they immediately felt a connection between their land and the country they were to become a part of. They were also given diplomatic, overseas protection, so that they were free to travel abroad and had the knowledge that they would always be welcomed ‘home’. The final major way this was accomplished was by allowing them the right to vote, even as citizens-to-be. This gave them a voice in society and allowed them to feel a sense of duty and ownership to what was going on in the nation. All of these rights bestowed on the immigrant allowed them to feel a part of the community, and immigration, during that time, was viewed as just that, a transition to citizenship. Motomura states, that these immigrants were in essence considered, Americans in waiting. Motomura goes on to demonstrate in this book, however, that this view has slowly changed over the years. What was once considered essential to American policy on immigration has now all but vanished, according to him. He states that this change began to take place in the early twentieth century. It was during this time that the United States began to treat its immigrants in one of two ways: as signers of a contract that would state the terms of their stay in the country, or as associates who can earn their rights only as they slowly transition into this nation’s way of life. In this way Motomura says that immigrants were no longer viewed or treated as future citizens, or even as a part of the community. Instead they are now seen as passers through or a problem to be solved. This book gives a clear view of the history of immigration and citizenship over the past two hundred years in the United States. It concludes by revealing a clear lesson to be learned from this history, which is, only in reverting back to how immigration was handled in the past, can this nation ensure both current and future citizens feel the sense of belonging; which, is vital to full involvement in American life. Motomura outlines three major typologies of citizenship seen throughout American history: immigration as transition, immigration as contract, and immigration as affiliation. The first typology he covers is that of immigration as transition. This is the type of immigration that happened during the first one hundred and fifty or so years of American formation. This is the immigration, as outlined above, were the immigrant was given all the rights of future citizens, including the right to own land, vote, and travel. In this way the immigrant was given ownership in, and given the ability to participate in, society and eventually they assimilated into the American way of life. They would, of course, still have a formal naturalization ceremony, and it was at this time that they could decide whether or not they wanted to become a full American Citizen. If they chose to become an American Citizen then they would take an oath and continue participating as they were before. However, if they chose not to become an American Citizen then they would lose their rights that they had been practicing up to that point. Motomura does a great job of describing how this typology worked within our history. He does not, however, do a great job of demonstrating how this typology would work in society today. He does not take into account the changes America has undergone over the past two hundred years, as far as stature in the world economics, and view as a political power. The time frame in which immigration as transition mostly took place was during the formation of this nation. During that time many did migrate to America in hope of a better life, however, America was by no means a world power, so the amount of immigration was far less than what it would be today. He also did not take into account the fact that the American population has more than doubled since that time, leaving less land needing to be cultivated, or available to be just given out. The ideas presented are good; however, they could have been better presented if he had demonstrated more accurately how they might be incorporated into the needs and demands of today’s society. The next typology of citizenship discussed by Motomura is immigration as contract. This form of citizenship has developed since the turn of the twentieth century. It is with this type of citizenship that it becomes less about assimilating the immigrant in with the American people and culture, and more about whether or not they meet a certain list of standards and guidelines laid out by the government. They then also can become citizens, and remain citizens only as long as they follow this list of rules and regulations as stipulated in their contract. This includes but is not limited to things such as not joining a communist party or using public welfare. In this way those waiting to become American citizens, or immigrants, are not given any rights until the time the take their naturalization oath. So they are in society but cannot participate in voting, landownership, and more. This leaves many to form their own mini societies, within America instead of assimilating with the culture. Motomura shows how this further divides instead of unifies the peoples within the United States’ borders. Motomura also demonstrates how this places the value on rules rather than becoming part of the life, and society of America. In this way it leaves room for the ‘rules to be broken’, so immigration becomes more about how to get around the rules of becoming a citizen instead of adapting and assimilating into society. Motomura’s use of case studies to show how this typology is negatively affecting America’s society, were quiet persuasive. It became very obvious that something about the system America is currently using needs to change, however, how that change can come about was left a little unclear. The final typology Motomura discusses is immigration as affiliation. This is the view that, “the treatment of lawful immigrants and other noncitizens should depend on the ties they have formed in this country.” This view basically states the more an immigrant participates in society by: joining a church, paying taxes, and bringing up their children as Americans, the more they should be treated like Americans and given rights/citizenship. At first it is hard to see the clear distinction between this view and that of immigration as transition. Particularly toward the front of the book, Motomura does a poor job in distinguishing the difference. In the end, however, he further clarifies by introducing case laws that show how these would be treated differently in court. It showed that, immigration as affiliation places the responsibility of becoming a part of society on that of the immigrant, where as immigration as transition places the responsibility of the immigrant becoming a part of society mostly on society. Each of these, however, regards the end result of assimilation, as the ultimate goal. Upon reviewing the three typologies for citizenship Motomura brings to light, the question then becomes how important is citizenship for immigration policies? Motomura states that, “treatment of lawful immigrants is the key to debating intelligently who should be let into the United States in the first place” (6). Here I feel that Motomura makes a good argument, that we must first decide how we are to treat those who are let in, or are here, so that they can become incorporated into our society, and so that we might more accurately see how certain groups assemble into the society before we can decide who should or should not be let in. His argument also clearly demonstrates that excluding immigrants from mainstream society means that they are less likely to participate in American life. He goes further to demonstrate that this lack of participation often leads to harmful outcomes either from direct, such as a reluctance to come forward or cooperating with law enforcement, to the indirect, such as a reluctance to naturalize. However, I feel that Motomura’s arguments are not effective in demonstrating how citizenship addresses the immigration policies on illegal immigration and the issues our nation is facing with it. He also does not discuss how he expects the immigration bureaucracy to conduct the reforms in the way he proposes. After taking a look at the summary of this writing, the analysis of the three typologies he outlined for citizenship, and evaluating the importance of citizenship for immigration policies, it seems clear that a real issue with today’s immigration policies does, in fact, have a direct relationship with how immigrants are assimilated into society. Motomura’s use of United States history, coupled with current law and case studies clearly demonstrates when this problem began to arise, and how it has negatively affected the nation’s view of immigration. Though he does clearly define what needs to be changed, he does not give a clear definition of how this can be brought about in today’s society, particularly when it comes to legality. However, this is a great foundational argument, which if further investigated and developed, has the potential to create a significant impact and contribution to this countries growing immigration debate. Works Cited Motomura, Hiroshi . Americans in Waiting. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print. Read More