Mexican Immigration Today - Assignment Example

The debate on immigration will always have a Mexican orientation because of two reasons because Mexicans form the largest single group among the immigrants, legal and illegal included. (56 % of total illegal immigrants are Mexicans) and 2) because historically the policies of the United States lead to the annexation of Mexican areas during what is called the Texas Revolution. HISTORY: The War of 1812 fought between the United States and the British Empire came to an end in 1815, with neither side gaining much. The period after the end of the war, up to 1860, had been called the “age of Manifest Destiny”. Coined by journalist John L. O’ Sullivan, the term “Manifest Destiny” was mono dimensional in its meaning Writing in Democratic Review, on December 27, 1845, he used the term “Manifest Destiny”, to urge the United States to annex geographical areas, then under Britain and Spain, through out north of America. In the essay titled, “Annexations”, O’sullivan argued that God had destined the United States, to spread republican democracy, (“the great experiment of liberty”) through out North America. After the futile war with Britain, the United States adopted a new strategy for annexation of bordering territories. Settle down, out number the natives, index the boundaries—this was the new strategy. A typical example was the Mexican Cession. Mexico was a Spanish colony that got liberated in 1821.The New Mexican Empire inherited, Alta California, New Mexico and Texas from Spain. The new Government, virtually bankrupt and weak, was unable to control the northern territories of the country. These areas were thousands of miles away from the capital of Mexico City. Hence, the Mexican Govt. allowed a few American families to cross over and settle. What followed were huge American settlements in Texas, which became an American majority area. The Texans wanted to accede to the United States. This lead to the Texas revolution, (1835- 36) and Texas was declared as an independent republic. During the war, that followed (1846- 48 ) , between the United States and Mexico , US annexed Texas, California, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, extending it’s boarder to the Pacific Ocean. By the same time a portion of the Oregon Country, under British rule also became part of the United States. Thus during the “ Age of Manifest Destiny” , the United states expanded towards the north , up to Pacific ocean, largely defining its borders as they are today. This historical ambience will have influence on the debates on immigration. But beyond this the new debate on immigration involves issues of corporate economics, cultural apprehensions and issues of human rights. It is more complex than the debate during the times of the first generation immigrants. This point of view can be established by looking into the complexity of the immigration issue today which involves various players with varied interests .Even the supporters for the current immigration levels, consist of diverse interests. Corporate interests support the present immigration level because it provides them with cheap labour.There are ethnic lobbies not only Mexicans but other Latino groups as well because that will help them to strengthen their political bases. Even those who oppose the current level of migration have diverse interests. The extreme rightists oppose migration because they fear that non-European migration will adversely affect the American culture. Labor advocates are afraid of Americans losing jobs and the wages getting depressed due to the cheap labor of the migrants. The environmentalists oppose the current level of migration as they argue that migration at the present level will lead to an undesirable population growth. So in short, the current debate on immigration cannot be influenced by the perception of the major immigrant group (the Mexicans) or by the perception of any other single immigrant group including the other Latino groups, because the issue is more complex than what it was during the times of first generation immigrants, with players and interests so diverse and opposite to each other. America has a heritage of immigration and before 1875 there was little or no restriction on emigration. “Give me your tired, your poor /your huddled masses yearning to breath free” these are the lines of poet Emma Lazarus, herself the daughter of Portuguese Jewish immigrants that got engraved on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty. Thus the Statue of Liberty it self became a beacon of hope for the immigrants entering New York harbor on their way to Ellis Islands. The European migration continued through out the 19th Century, because of economic reasons too, as the factory owners needed workers. It was the immigration of the Irish and Italian Catholics that raised the first objection against immigration. Some, including the nativists of 1850s, even believed that the Pope was conspiring against the American democracy. It was the immigration of the Chinese that that strengthened this objection and in 1882 the Congress passed the Chinese exclusion act that that barred the immigration of the Chinese. The Mexican or the Latino immigration is a later phenomenon .About 3000 legal immigrants reach US every day according to statistics available. But the focus today on Mexicans is because there is large number of illegal immigration from that country and because the debate today is on illegal immigration. CULTURE: The debate over English enters into this issue as part of cultural apprehensions. These fears were expressed as way back as two hundred years ago by Benjamin Franklin. He feared that his home state will get over run by German immigrants. As early as in 1751 Benjamin Franklin decried the impact of German newcomers on the colony of Pennsylvania. “ Why should Palatine Boors be suffered to swam into our settlements, and by herding together establish their language and manners to the exclusion of ours. Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English become colony of Aliens who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us” (“Observations concerning the increase of mankind”, The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, Vol. 4 as quoted by Thomas Dublin in Immigrant Voices, page 4) He lamented that few of the children of the Germans would learn English .They would never adopt the language or customs. And finally he feared that Pennsylvania would get Germanized. Then the issue with the Germans was that they never intended to make United States their home. They came there to make money. And once they had made enough money they intended to go back home. So the cultural integration of these immigrants is a near impossibility. The same is the case with the Mexican Immigrants of today, especially the illegal immigrants. They cross over the border with the United States, in search of jobs, when life in their own country gets miserable. They want to make money and dream of going back home one day. As with the Germans of the yester years so also with the Mexicans of today cultural integration is a mere impossibility. His cultural aspect of the debate over immigration today again makes it different from that of the times of the first generation immigrants, who came to settle in United States and hence got culturally integrated with the dominant American culture. The nativists of 1850s feared that the stability of the American culture would get threatened by the immigrants. They were against the increasing alien influence on the American life. “Like the founding fathers, American nativists believed republics were fragile creations, endangered by diversity….. They sensibly observed that emigrants could claim American citizenship, long before they had learned the language or customs of the USA.” (Immigration and American Diversity, Donna R. Gabbacia, March 19, 2002, PP 95,) Because of this fear they demanded that Immigrants should be made to wait for 21 years for getting the citizenship as the American babies had to. Thus the debate of the nativists of the 1850s was more a scare about the stability of the republic and of the pollution of the American culture. Though American Republic had no official state religion, the nativists of 1850s tried to defend Protestantism and opposed the immigration of Irish/Italian Catholics. Compared to this the debate by today’s nativists has a racial tone. The nativists today, like the White-power Movement have a Nazi outlook. This movement has a trademark brown Nazi uniform with swastika arm band. These movements look at the immigrants as criminals, especially the illegal migrants from Mexico. “Mexican ness in the campaign is associated not just with undocumented status but with criminal behavior in other areas as well. The schema of criminality was embedded in the meta-schema of racial realism and depicted racialized characteristics that threaten the safety and power of others.” (Robin Dale Jacobson, The New Nativism PP48) The Mexicans get the centre stage of the debate because 56% of illegal migrants are Mexicans, 22% from other Latin America 13% from Asia 6% from Canada & Europe, and 3% from Africa, as per New York Times graphic link. In States like Pennsylvania where the Hispanic population is increasing, these white Nazi organizations are gaining more ground. This is leading to social tensions too. Thus the nativist debate in 1850s was more on republicanism and Protestantism and not really on racialism. The racial approach to immigration Problem raises issues of human rights too. ECONOMICS: The current debate on Immigration has got an economic perspective as well. There is a strong corporate lobby that wants the illegal emigrants to stay because they help these capitalists to make higher profits with meager wages and no other privileges. The Native Americans and the labor advocates, decry the fact that these illegal immigrants are responsible for depressing the wages. But the other side of the fact is that in the American work force, these illegal migrants fill up the jobs which the Native Americans refuse to take up, because they are unpleasant and physically demanding with bad working conditions, especially in agriculture, construction and service industries. The Pew Hispanic Centre estimates that in 2001 workers with out legal documents comprised 58% of work force in agriculture, 23.8 % in private house hold services 16.6% in business services 9.1% in restaurants and 6.4 % in construction. Most of these illegal immigrants are not educated enough to demand high wages .According to the reports of the Centre for Immigration Studies (CIS) nearly two thirds of the illegal immigrants have not earned a high school diploma., compared to 85 percent of the American population. Because of lack of education and awareness of their rights these immigrants can be employed without vacation pay or health coverage. Thus the corporate lobby prefers these illegal immigrants, as they help them amass more profit. According to some economists, without out the illegal immigrants there will be a shrinking in the work force of the United States by 3 to 4 percentages which will affect the overall economic growth rate adversely. In 2004 there was a crackdown on illegal work forces in Western United States. This led to the rotting of the lettuce crops in the field as the farmers couldn’t hire enough workers to pick the lettuce crops .The lose due to this was estimated to be $1Billion. It is these economic reasons that lead to the dichotomy of the federal Govt. going for guest worker programs while the States are strengthening the boundary patrol to stop the illegal migration. The political leadership is trying to balance between the corporate needs and demands and the ever growing general popular feelings against the immigrants. The immigration is a socio economic phenomenon and is to be understood like that, irrespective of what ever ethnic group is involved. The difference in standards of living in US and in the poor countries connected with United States economically or politically is tremendous. It is this factor that is leading to the exodus of people into U S. But with recession and more lose of jobs in U S, the immigration debate will get heated up more and may even lead to social tensions. At the same time, both the supply of immigrants and the demand for their services still remain a reality of the economy of United States. Sources cited: 1) Dublin Thomas, Immigrant Voices: New Lives in America.1773-1986, University of Illinois Press August 1, 1993. 2) Gabbacia Donna R, Immigration and American Diversity, Wiley-Blackwell, March 19, 2002. 3) Jacobson Dale Robin, The New Nativism , University of Minnesota Press, June 17, 2008 Read More