The United States: The Worlds Melting Pot - Essay Example

Running head: THE UNITED S: THE WORLD’S MELTING POT The United s: The World’s Melting Pot Put Here Put Your al Affiliation Here The United States: The World’s Melting Pot Introduction The United States has been styled a “Melting Pot.” As Herman Melville said, “We are not a narrow tribe of men … No: our blood is as the flood of the Amazon, made up of a thousand noble currents all pouring into one” (1849/2004, Chapter 33). Our nation is rich in its diversity. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the collection of peoples that have settled this country, bringing with them a wealth of cultural variety and a willing labor force. This melding of societies has influenced the formation and growth of the United States and continues to have an impact. To fully understand where we have been and where we are going, several questions present themselves. First, how did this one nation develop from so many divergent groups? How has the pattern of immigration changed and what issues does this raise? And finally, what implications does this have for the future? A Nation for All The dictionary provides two variations on the definition of the term, “melting pot” that are pertinent to this discussion. They are: 2. society composed of many different cultures: a place where people of different ethnic groups are brought together and can assimilate, especially a country that takes immigrants from many different ethnic backgrounds 3. process that creates something new: a situation or process in which distinct elements can be brought together to produce something new. (“Encarta,” 2005) Both of these apply to the United States as it was settled, and continues to be settled, by an immigrant population. Old World economic interests shaped the early days of the new continent. Until the early 1800s, the forced immigration of slaves from Africa vastly outnumbered Europeans settling the New World (Kennedy, 1996; Macionis, 200?). During the period of 1800-1881, 80 to 90 percent of the immigrants came from Europe (VanZee, 2003; Schmid, 1999). Kennedy (1996) maintains that two different “disruptions” precipitated the emigration from Europe in the 1800s. One disruption was due to population growth. It more than doubled (from 200 million to over 400 million) due to improvements in diet, sanitation, and disease control. The other unsettling influence was the effect of the Industrial Revolution. Workers, who transitioned from agrarian to industrial lives, were unsuccessful at relocating in Europe, and so migrated to the United States. Keep in mind that this inflow for foreigners was tempered by the repatriation rate, which averaged almost 40 percent (Kennedy, 1996). Immigration in the early 20th century took a new turn. The Continental frontier closed with Arizona’s admission to the Union in 1912. A quota system and, specifically, exclusion of “Orientals” in 1924 were attempts to limit immigration and maintain a superior number of Europeans over other races (Sellers, May, & McMillen, 1976). This had the effect of slowing immigration to a crawl and reducing the supply of cheap labor. The immigrants who managed entry experienced greater demand for their services and assimilated more quickly (Sellers, May, & McMillen, 1976). Assimilation: The Making of an American Evidence of our different origins still surrounds us. For example, Appalachian Bluegrass music was born out of Celtic music from Ireland and Great Britain (“Appalachian,” n.d.). We celebrate Cinco de Mayo and St. Patrick’s Day. We drink German beer and say “Gesundheit” when someone sneezes. However, generally the newcomers, or at least their offspring, gradually adapted themselves to a new world and a new national identity--being an American. Frederick Jackson Turner coined the phrase “Manifest Destiny” that referred to the inevitable settlement of the United States from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean (Flagg, 1997; Kyff, 1993). Turner also asserted that the qualities that enabled the pioneer to triumph in this westward expansion; individualism, nationalism, mobility, egalitarianism; are the impetus behind the transformation of the immigrant population into a unique American society (Flagg, 1997; Kyff, 1993). Indeed, the primitive conditions of a rough frontier acted as a great equalizer. The European conception of a graded society, with each class everlastingly performing its allotted function, vanished quickly amidst primitive surroundings that invited the humblest to move upward as well as outward. Instead of everybody being nobody, they found that anybody might become somebody. … (Schlesinger, 1949/1970, p. 528) The metamorphosis of the American was helped along by several key factors. First, the highest percentage of foreign-born people in the United States was 14.7 in 1910; thus, they were a minority that did not significantly impact the resident population (Kennedy, 1996). Additionally, the immigrants were widely dispersed across a vast geographic area and came from varied backgrounds. Mixing with other cultures and races was inevitable and they lost much of their Old World affiliation at least within a few generations (Kennedy, 1996). Immigrants and the U.S. Immigrants have had a major impact on our society. It is significant that as people flowed into the country, the borders of the country were expanding until 1912. This westward expansion accommodated the inflow and enabled the newcomers to supply the cheap labor needed by the growing economy with minimal social upheaval. Interestingly, “states with the most immigrants . . . also had per capita incomes higher than the national average—an important fact pertinent to understanding the relationship between immigration and economic vitality” (Kennedy, 1996, p. 61). Although the reward of becoming a part of a democratic society is great, it has been, and still is, fraught with difficulty. Nativism, rising from fear and hostility, causes some to use immigrants as scapegoats for the nation’s ills (Crawford, 2001; Macionis, 200?). Prejudice and discrimination have hampered peaceful coexistence among the races and impeded assimilation, causing a vicious cycle that reinforces itself and instills social inferiority (Macionis, 200?). The Change in Current Immigration Patterns Current trends in immigration have changed yet again in a startling direction. The immigration source has shifted from Europe to Latin America and Asia, with Mexico leading the way (Kennedy, 1996; Schmid, 1999). Kennedy (1996) cites the same reasons for the current migration, disruption due to population growth and industrialization, but notes some interesting differences. Today’s immigrant groups are not male and are older (65 plus), are concentrated in the richest states, and less than 20 percent enter for reasons of employment (many are spouses, children, parents, and siblings). Furthermore, large numbers of Mexican immigrants are now concentrated in two states, Texas and California, and at 28 and 31 percent of the population, respectively. Implications for the Future Our society now faces novel issues that are outside our previous experience. The inflow of older non-males raises the issue of whether non-citizens are entitled to Supplemental Security Income and other public benefits that did not exist a century ago (Kennedy, 1996). It also prompts the broader question of what rights we grant non-citizens. Additionally, technological advances may impact the future use of unskilled labor, making a more competitive environment for the foreign-born worker and hindering assimilation. Also, technology has advanced the notion of a global society, as the Internet, joint space missions, and a common European economic union bring us closer. One must wonder, too, about the influence of tighter national security and suspicion of foreigners in the wake of terrorist activity over the last few years. Perhaps the most significant development is the large percentage of and concentration of Mexican immigrants. According to Kennedy (1996): They will have sufficient coherence and critical mass in a defined region so that, if they choose, they can preserve their distinctive culture indefinitely. They could also eventually undertake to do what no previous immigrant group could have dreamed of doing: challenge the existing cultural, political, legal, commercial, and educational systems to change fundamentally not only the language but also the very institutions in which they do business. Kennedy (1996) asserts that helping these populations to assimilate is the answer to maintaining our cultural identity. However, striking the right balance is a key ingredient to maintaining a healthy inflow. “[I]f an economy is too homogenous, it will not be able to attract immigrants. … [I]f the level of immigration is not too high, then immigration also raises the net benefits to assimilation which leads to a more homogenous economy. (Durkin, 1998) In spite of cultural, religious, national, and lingual differences, the amazing people who relinquished the familiar to tackle the American frontier, whether unsettled territory of the past or contemporary urban jungle, continue to add richness and variety to the American experience. Nowhere else do so many different people come together and work for a collective good. The ongoing advocates for civil rights continue to erode the root causes of political, economic, and social stratification and promote equality among the races (Macionis, 200?). More people today are relinquishing their ties to their ancestry and are just calling themselves Americans (Nasser & Overberg, 2002). Perhaps we are one step further towards a social evolution, bringing us closer to global unity. For: There is something in the contemplation of the mode in which America has been settled, that, in a noble breast, should forever extinguish the prejudices of national dislikes. Settled by the people of all nations, all nations may claim her for their own. You can not spill a drop of American blood without spilling the blood of the whole world. … (Melville, 1849/1970, Chapter 33). References Appalacian bluegrass music. (n.d.). Alabama History Project. Retrieved December 2, 2005, from http://www.anthrosoc.rhodes.edu/alabama/Bluegrass.html. Crawford, J. (2001). Cycles of nativism in U.S. history. In Early 20th Century Immigration. Retrieved December 2, 2005 from http://fsweb.berry.edu/academic/hass/csnider/berry/hon250/immigration.htm. Durkin, J. T. Jr. (1998). Immigration, assimilation and growth. Journal of Popular Economics, 11, 273-291. El Nasser, H., & Overberg, P. (2002, June 5). More people identify themselves as just ‘American.’ USA TODAY, Retrieved December 2, 2005, from http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/06/05/census-usat.htm. Encarta Dictionary. (2005). Melting Pot. Retrieved December 2, 2005, from http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861678675/melting_pot.html. Flagg, J. B. (1997). Frederick Jackson Turner: 1861-1932. Retrieved December 3, 2005, from http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/acs/1890s/turner/turner.html. Kennedy, D. M. (1996). Can we still afford to be a nation of immigrants? The Atlantic Monthly, 278(5), 52-68. Kyff, R. (1993). Frederick Jackson Turner & the vanishing frontier. American History Illustrated, 28(3). Retrieved December 3, 2005, from http://search.epnet.com.ezproxy.jocolibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=9306180015. Macionis, J. J. (200?). Society, The Basics (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Melville, H. (2004). Redburn: His First Voyage. Retrieved December 2, 2005, from http://arthurwendover.com/arthurs/melville/8redb10.html. (Original work published 1849) Schlesinger, A. M. (1970). What then is the American, this new man? In A. G. Bogue, T. D. Phillips, & J. E. Wright (Eds.), The West of the American People, 525-530. Itasca, IL: F. E. Peacock Publishers, Inc. (Abridged from A. M. Schlesinger, Paths to the Present, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1949, pp. 1-22.) Schmid, R. E. (1999). New ingredients in America’s melting pot. Community College Week, 11(17). Retrieved December 3, 2005, from http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=1696678. Sellers, C., May, H., & McMillen, N. R. (1976). A Synopsis of American History (Vol. 26, 4th ed.). Chicago: Rand McNally. VanZee, D. (2003). Old immigration: 1800-1881. Immigration. Retrieved December 2, 2005, from http://scnc.lsd.k12.mi.us/~dvanzee/old%20immigration.htm. Read More