The Nature of Immigrant Adaption - Essay Example

Assimilation is seen as the process by which minority groups over time adopt patterns of the dominant culture. This involves the minority group changing their modes of dress, values, language, religion and social groups in order to assimilate in to the host society. This process is also known as the ‘melting pot’ model which was first used to describe assimilation in the eighteenth and nineteenth century. The ‘melting pot’ is a metaphor to describe a heterogeneous society becoming more homogeneous by ‘melting’ together in to a harmonious whole. In order to discuss assimilation further, it is first important to understand the primary reasons as to: why people migrate, the places where people migrate to and the different type(s) of people who migrate. Once we have looked in greater depth at the issues surrounding migration can we then start to understand the theories surrounding assimilation and the reasons why these theories consistently fail to explain immigrant adaption. As Castles and Miller (2009) state: International migration is hardly ever a simple individual action in which a person decides to move in search of better life chances, pulls up his or her roots in the place of origin and quickly becomes assimilated in the new country. Much more often migration and settlement are a long drawn out process that will be played out for the rest of the migrant’s life and affect subsequent generations too. So, if this process is so complex and long lasting why do people do it? People migrate for many different reasons these include economic, social, political and environmental. The term economic migration refers to someone who is migrating for the purpose of seeking employment or better employment opportunities or to improve their financial position. ‘Economic advantage has long been one of the main stimulants to migration – both for the individual workers seeking economic betterment and for the states attracting workers to fill labour shortages and skills gaps. With globalization and the rapid growth in ease of travel, economic migration has become an increasingly significant phenomenon world-wide. The International Organisation for Migration estimates that there are 80 million economic migrants world-wide’ (Economic migration to the EU, 2005). Economic migration is the most common cause of migration. Social migration involves either moving for a better quality of life or to be closer to friends or family where as political migration refers to someone who is migrating primarily because of political interests. Political migration usually falls in to one of two classes – private or government. Private political migration usually occurs when individuals are seeking greater political liberty and to escape from state persecution and government political migration is the process which sees governments entities relocating people to geographic regions favoured by a government. Environmental causes of migration occur from natural disasters such as floods, earthquakes and droughts etc forcing people to migrate away from their homeland to seek a better quality of life. As well as the reasons mentioned above push and pull factors are also used to describe the reasons why people migrate. Push factors can be seen as the reason why people leave their homeland, these can include: high crime rates, lack of employment opportunities, drought, flooding, lack of safety, poverty and war. Pull factors describe the reasons why individuals chose their new place of residency, these include: higher employment rates, less crime, better opportunities, more wealth, political stability and a lower risk of natural disasters. As Castles and Miller (2009) explain: momentous events around the world increasingly involve international migration. A high point was the mass migration from Europe to North America from the mid 19th century until World War I. This is known as the ‘age of mass migration’. However, during the 1850s to 1914 this period was mainly one of transatlantic migration while movements that started after 1945 involved all regions of the world. In this current age, mobility has become much easier mainly due to recent political and cultural changes. Most countries experience both emigration and immigration however countries such as the United States, Canada, Argentina, New Zealand and Australia are considered classical areas of immigration. Since 1945, Northern and Western Europe have become areas of labour immigration and post 1980s Sothern European states have also become popular immigration areas. Countries such as Turkey, Jordan and Morocco are now major sources of migrant labour. Currently Africa has more refugees and internally displaced people than any other region of the world. ‘Throughout the world, long standing migratory patterns are persisting in new forms, while new flows are developing in response to economic, political and cultural change and violent conflicts’ (Castle and Miller, p.9). Migrants can be split in to five categories: settlers, contract workers, professionals, unauthorized workers and asylum seekers/refugees. Settlers are those who move to a new country with the intention of living there permanently, the majority of which are joining close family members. Most choose to move to the main settlement countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Contract workers are admitted in to another country on the agreement that they will only stay for a specific period. Some are seasonal workers while others are on longer term contracts. Professionals are often employees of transnational corporations who are moved from one country to another to work. These people are often referred to as expatriates and tend to make up a relatively small amount of migrants where as undocumented or illegal immigrants make up significantly large numbers in most immigration countries. They have usually either been smuggled in or have overstayed their visa. Asylum seekers/refugees are migrants who have left their homes to escape persecution for such reasons as race, religion or nationality etc. From reading the above it is now clear to see exactly why people migrate, some for good reasons and others not, but almost always migration happens in order for individuals to pursue a better life. Assimilation is often viewed as the opposite to multiculturalism, where as multiculturalism is the appreciation and promotion of different ethnic cultures, assimilation supports the integration of new cultures in to host societies. Straight line or linear assimilation theory see immigrants gradually becoming similar to their host society over time in such areas as behaviours and characteristics. In their 2005 review waters and Jimenez assessed that research in to assimilation can be measured from four primary benchmarks: socioeconomic status, spatial concentration, language assimilation and intermarriage. Socioeconomic status looks at educational attainment, occupation and income of immigrants. Much research has been done in to this area over the past three decades, with some research contradicting others. However, in general it is believed that over a period of time immigrants will achieve the same economic parity in earnings as native born individuals belonging to the same ethnic group. With regards to educational attainment, numerous research has suggested that ‘second generation children tend to do better than their native-born school mates in grades, rates of school retention and behavioural aspects such as homework’ (Waters & Jimenez, 2005). Out of all the ethnic groups, Chinese students do better in high school graduation rates and college attendance than any other group, including native whites. When researching spatial concentration Waters and Jimenez found that the majority of immigrants still settle in the large U.S gateway cities – Los Angeles, New York, Miami, San Francisco, Dallas and Houston. From the overall research that has been done in to spatial concentration it has been recorded that ‘Asian and Latino immigrants have moderate degrees of segregation from white Anglos much lower than the segregation that blacks experience from whites, with large numbers of current new immigrants settling in suburban areas upon initial arrival to the U.S’ (Waters & Jimenez, 2005). Language assimilation looks at immigrant’s ability to speak English and the loss of their native tongue. The research has found that the first generations make some progress in language assimilation; however they remain dominant in their native tongue. The second generation is bilingual and the third generation can speak only English. Intermarriage focuses on intimate and profound relations between people of different groups. Most of these groups that are studied are the broad racial groups – Asians, Latinos, African Americans, American Indians and Whites. Studies in to intermarriage have found that higher intermarriage rates occurs with Whites among Asians and Latinos than among Whites with blacks and that native born individuals have higher intermarriage rates than those that are foreign born. In general, linear assimilation theory sees immigrant and majority groups becoming more similar over time. It is expected that immigrants who have been living in the host society over a long period of time as well as the members of later generations will show increased similarity to the majority group than immigrants who have been there only a short while. Segmented assimilation is an off shoot of the basic concept of the idea of assimilation and is more or less applicable on the children of those individuals who were immigrants to the United States or where at least one of the parents of the child is a national of a city abroad. The reason why there is a reference to the United States is because although the idea of segmented assimilation can be applied to a variety of countries, the concept is used a lot more widely in the United States. The children who are referred to in this assimilation are more or less knows the second or the one point five generation, a term that was given by Ruben Rumbart for those children who are neither a part of the world of their birth or of their ancestors or of the new world (Rumbart, 1991). Segmented assimilation has been defined by Foner (1999) as a process falling under the umbrella of assimilation where assimilation was in a specific social part of the society. This could range from the middle class to the lower classes. Segmented assimilation was developed at a much broader level in 1993 by Portes and Zhou (1993) when they put forward the idea that the children of immigrants would go down three set paths. The first of these would be the traditional manner of assimilation which would mean that the children would be able to integrate into the white man’s middle class community. The second idea is one that would appear to be at the other end of the spectrum than the first and holds that the assimilation will be in the improvised class of society in the country and that this may well be a permanent integration to this part of society from which coming out is hard. The last category is that in which the immigrants hold on the values and ways of their own culture and strengthen it. Sociologists tend to argue that the paths can and are chosen by individuals based on a number of factors which include economic factors, the form of racial and ethnic discrimination that is being matted out to the immigrants and also, the segment of society to which the immigrants are exposed to on a daily basis is also an important point. According to Rumbaut and Portes (2001) the first path may appear to follow the straight line theory of assimilation while the second may lead to a downward road while the last can lead to ethnic awareness at a higher level (Rambaut & Portes, 2001). In the united states what is more focused on is how well the immigrants are able to get a good education and how far this education helps them to attain an occupation that is fit to be called good and how well the salary they earn is. It is clear that when there is a rough time that immigrants have to go through then education and economic reasons may well be at the core of it and this is perhaps due to the structural basis of the economy and the racism that different ethnic groups migrating may have to face. Racism was a major setback for many of the immigrants to the United States in the beginning and due to this assimilation was not easy and took a long time to take place, if it did happen at all. According to Perlmann (1988), it took the children of immigrants from Italy who migrated to the United States in and during the nineteenth century well over a hundred years to be able to break from the shackles of their lineage and make into the mainstream American system. In the United States now there are a large percentage of immigrants who are from Mexico and some are even in the country illegally. Due to the life that the Mexican immigrants were leading in their own country there was a lack of education on the part of the immigrants. Hence when they do come to the United States there is a lack of education on their part which is high in demand which it comes to the well paid jobs and it is here that immigrants fail to be able to compete with the local population. The immigrants therefore lead a life of poverty which becomes a way of life for their children as well and they continue the cycle, growing up in regions where crime prevails. There has been an argument that assimilation does not take place at one instance and neither is the process one that is single. It is an amalgamation of several processes that perhaps take place at different times and even during different years. The general idea that assimilation is that when the culture of the dominant society is taken into and integrated by an individual immigrant in his way of life is also challenged. There are times when even the third generation immigrants fail to assimilate into the united states and some say that that this may be perhaps not a lack of being able to assimilate into the society but a rather somewhat of a bumpy road to it. At times some fail to be able to make their way into the society that they migrate to but there are a few others who make their way into the mainstream American life by finding ways around the economic and social barriers that they may face. This may lead the models provided by sociologists to be considered as somewhat lacking when it comes to these particular few. Economic, racial, ethnic and cultural factors along with a few others can cause a downward mobility for the immigrants and can even be a barrier but this may only be in the case of a few. Some who face a stream of obstacles while trying to adjust to a new area may well reject the overall assimilation and learn to develop an attitude that may even push assimilation away. Segmented assimilation brings together the concept of both the classic assimilation and even the racial/ethnic disadvantage perspective. It is more important to focus on the assimilation of the children and the factors that may determine their integration into mainstream America. Children who also fall in the category of the second generation need to be assimilated so that the social economic problems that were faced by the generation before are not suffered by them. Education is a key factor to all the other points of contention and so the children need to be pushed to finish education. Many of the immigrant children fail to even finish high school at time and some drop out of college due to a lack of funds. Portes, Fernández-Kelly, and Haller state: “Children of Asian, black, mulatto, and mestizo immigrants cannot escape their ethnicity and race, as defined by the mainstream. Their enduring physical differences from whites and the equally persistent strong effects of discrimination based on those differences … throw a barrier in the path of occupational mobility and social acceptance. Immigrant children’s identities, their aspirations, and their academic performance are affected accordingly.” (Brown & Bean, 2006). The racial/ethnic disadvantage model was put forward for those situations where the chances of assimilation by immigrants are blocked by a range of factors. Glazer and Moynihans in their work Beyond the Melting Pot believe that the ethnic differences the immigrants have can be as much of a beneficial factor as it can be a burden. Difference in ethnicity can prove to be quite a resource when immigrants are attempting to achieve some goal. Glazer and Moynihan argue that there may well be some form of logic behind the determination with which the immigrants hold on to their racial and ethnic diversities. Assimilation can be blocked for immigrants and even the second and third generation due to blocks or barriers created in the educational front become difficult to overcome as there may well not be any tradition of getting higher education which is a major setback in the unites states. Then there are, once again, the economic barriers that immigrants are found behind. The previously mentioned factors are paramount to assimilation in a new country and so this is perhaps the reason why more of the works on assimilation due succumb to the fact that simply by knowing the language used in the country of immigration will not lead to assimilation. Neither will any form of familiarity with the new country, its people and its culture and peoples way of living be of any help if there are walls created that cannot be crossed. Sometime a lack of opportunities will lead the immigrants to reject assimilation themselves and this process can prove to be harmful for them in terms of socioeconomic reasons as well as a difficulty for the generation to come. As with all the other models there are ample number of problems that can be raised by critics of this model. Foremost is the argument that observers of this model over sell it and that the barriers are being projected too much while there is a complete failure to try and explain in a justifiable manner why there is sometimes mobility in certain segments of society. All the theories discussed above attempt to show in one manner or another the various behaviors that immigrants will attempt to follow in order to be incorporated in the host country to which they migrate. Theories such as these may well have been very significant to provide insight into the incorporation and assimilation of immigrants in the past. However, in the contemporary society they fail at a few certain points. One of the main faults in the theories is that the sample that it was used to project was the simple black and white model with regards to the racial as well as ethnic relationships. In the contemporary society there are individuals from various ethnicities and racial background who are making their way across borders to the United States as well as other countries. Including Latinos, Asians, Africans and people from the other countries in the American continent and none of the theories seem to be able to provide a suitable enough map to be able to gauge the pattern of assimilation for these individuals. This is a problem also because the background from which these immigrants are coming from is quite different from the Europeans who immigrated to the United States several centuries back. When looking at the theories with a critical eye it becomes evident that there is either a positive which means that the individuals have been able to successfully assimilate. There is a negative side in the case that there is a racial/ethnic disadvantage that may arise and then there is somewhat of a mixture between the two which is projected by the segmented assimilation theory. However, in the United States it becomes a difficult task to be able ot accurately access under which category the Mexican population would fall into. Cases and situations arise where the Mexicans are able to assimilate given that they spend sufficient time in the host nation and then there is racial/ethnic disadvantage which will cause them to fall short. It is difficult, with the majority of the immigrants being Mexican in America to attempt to plot the assimilation process along the lines of theories created according to the blacks and whites (Bean et al, 2007). The theories attempt to suggest that there is a close link between the race and ethnicity of an individual and how they will come out at the end in terms of economics. In the United States, with a history of racism, this may well be true as whites were better off than blacks but in the case of other ethnicities this point may not hold true. Sometimes there may be immigrants, in the case of Asians, who will be at a higher position, economically speaking, than the average middle class white man. Theories of assimilation prove beneficial to determine the manner of assimilation and perhaps integration when it comes to the immigrating population to a nation and is beneficial. Though now there is a need for changes in these theories as times have progressed and the old theories are becoming less and less significant. References House of Lords European Union Committee (2005). Economic migration to the EU [Online]. Available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeucom/58/58.pdf (Accessed 13 Dec 2010) Castles, S & Miller, M (2009) The Age of Migration (Fourth edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Waters, M & Jimenez, T (2005) Assessing Immigrant Assimilation: New Empirical and Theoretical Challenges. Annual Review of Sociology, 31. P 105-125. Bibliography Alba, R & Nee, V (1997) Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. International Migration Review, 31. P 826-874. Bean, F.D, Brown, S.K., Leach, M.A. & Bachmeier, J. (2007) Becoming U.S. Stakeholders: Legalization and Integration Among Mexican Immigrants and Their Descendents. University of California, Irvine. Brown, S.K. & Bean, F.D (2006) New Immigrants, New Models of Assimilation. Center for Research on Immigration, Population and Public Policy University of California, Irvine. Castles, S & Miller, M (2009) The Age of Migration (Fourth edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Foner, N (1999). The immigrant family: Cultural legacies and cultural changes. In C. Hirschman, P. Kasinitz & J. DeWind (ed). The handbook of international migration: The armerican experience, New York: Russel Sage Foundation, pp 257-274. Gordon, M (1964) Assimilation in American Life: The role of race, religion and national origins (Chapter 3). New York: Oxford University Press Grusky, D ( 2008) Social Stratification (third edn). Colorado: Westview Press Haralambos, M & Holborn, M (2008) Sociology Themes and Perspectives (Seventh edn). London: Harper Collins Macionis, J & Plummer, K (2008) Sociology (Fourth edn). Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd Park, R.E & Burgess, E.W (1969) Introduction to the Science of Sociology ( Chapter XI on Assimilation). Chicago: University of Chicago Press Perlmann, J. (1998) The Place of Cultural Explanations and Historical Specificity in Discussions of Modes of Incorporation and Segmented Assimilation. The Jerome Levy Economics Institute. Portes, A & Rumbaut, R.G (2001). Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation. Berkley: University of California Press. Portes, A & Zhou, M (1993). The New Second Generation: Segmented Assimilation and Its Varietns. Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 530. P 74-96. Rumbaut, R. G. (1991). Passages to America: Perspectives on the New Immigration. In: Alan Wolfe, (ed). America at Centurys End, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp208-244, 518-526. Stepick, A & Stepick, C (2010) The complexities and confusions of segmented assimilation. Ethnic and racial studies, vol. 33 No. 7. P 1149-1167. Waters, M & Jimenez, T (2005) Assessing Immigrant Assimilation: New Empirical and Theoretical Challenges. Annual Review of Sociology, 31. P 105-125. Read More