Is Third World Immigration a Threat to America's Way of Life - Essay Example

? Institute Is Third World Immigration a Threat to America's Way of Life? Introduction America has been a beacon of hope for many people from all corners of the world for centuries. Third World Immigrants are people seeking to escape oppressive and violent political climate in their home countries. This is in order to have a chance to better their lives and that of their families. However, the American people are against immigration. This is despite the fact that American citizens are themselves descendants of immigrants. They are beneficiaries of unregulated immigration and their government, culture, and economy and lifestyle are deeply rooted in open border policy. It comes as a surprise to many then that they would deny 21st century immigrants the same benefits their 18th and 19th century ancestors enjoyed. This paper will examine the effect the third world immigrants have on America’s way of life. Analysis of the immigration issue is based on three sociological perspectives. At the functional perspective of having immigrants allowed into the country, factors such as reduced labor costs and lower consumer prices are clearly observed. The issue of immigration is marred with feelings of ethnocentrism with European descendants seeking to protect their “American culture”. This is driven by the fact that many of the immigrants are not willing to assimilate to the American way of life instead they hang onto their own culture. The paper will also look at anti-migration perspective that has many people against third world immigrants coming to America. Issue like increased pressure on welfare and the education system are leading concerns for people against opening up the American borders. The problem According to Finsterbusch, America receives both legal and illegal immigrants every year. Many of these immigrants are from third world countries including Mexico, Korea, the Caribbean and the Philippines. The number of European immigrants has reduced over the years to less than 10 percent (p.40). The immigration act of 1965 placed all immigrants at equal footing. The act made it easier for immigrants to come into the country particularly those that already had a residing family member (Finsterbusch 41). Immigrants come into the country for various reasons ranging from fleeing terrorism and tyranny to joining relatives already settled in the US. Immigrants consider America as the land of affluence in a world full of poverty. Here, they are able to earn four times what they would in their home countries (Finsterbusch 41). However, the question on everyone’s mind is what will the immigrants do to the country or for the country? In recent past, congress passed the immigration act with regulations and barriers to migration and free travel. Anyone wishing to come into the US, proper documentation is necessary. This however is a problem for many of the immigrants that are poverty-stricken and their resources do not allow them to seek legal entry hence denied entrance. Matthew Gutmann observes that the immigration policy bases its case on xenophobic confusion on matters regarding mobility of labor, the state of American welfare, economics and cultural diversity (p. 422). Immigration and labor Functionalist perspective in sociology observes that the society comprises of different parts (Kendall 287). The society is the sum of these parts and each part functions to stabilize the society. The different parts are primary institutions of the society who aim to fulfill societal needs. They also influence the shape and form of the society. Each part depends on the other part and cannot function without the other (Kendall 287). Americans who are against opening up borders argue that free immigration would destroy the ability of working class Americans to earn a living. Opening up borders to all immigrants would rob hardworking Americans their jobs. However, what Americas truly fear is that someone else will be willing to work at the same jobs for less and still be equally or more productive. Thomas Lehman in his article coming to America: the Benefits of Open Immigration compares the immigration act to trade barriers and tariffs (p.1). The policy acts as a barrier to entry of the labor commodity, which will hurt the American consumer in the same way trade barriers and tariffs on consumer goods would. Free immigration would lead to unskilled American labor having to compete for lower paying jobs with the immigrants. However, Lehman considers this unavoidable, with desirable outcome and the immigration policy based on this outcome. When the country invites competition in the labor market, the inflated labor costs are eliminated and a higher level of labor efficiency achieved. This will see the cost of labor, which in itself contributes to the cost of production, go down hence producers and entrepreneurs will be able to produce their products more efficiently (Lehman 1). Increased production efficiency will result in reduced commodity prices as manufacturers compete for the consumer’s dollar. Reduced prices will see an increase in the consumer’s purchasing power thus improving living standards for everyone involved. Small business owners have realized this hence use immigrant labor to lower operating costs hence reducing consumer prices. Small business owners have observed that their competitors knowingly or unknowingly make use of illegal immigrant’s labor that provide cheap labor enabling them undercut prices. Cheap labor is good for the consumer and the economy in general. Immigration makes the labor market more competitive hence reducing the cost of production, which translates into cheaper products. As much as the domestic laborer is forced to work at lower wages, it does not mean that he or she is worse off. What the domestic laborer loses in wages, they gain in lower priced services and goods he purchases as the consumer. In the end, everyone benefits and not at the expense of the other. Immigration and welfare The conflict perspective in sociology states that groups and individuals within a society strive to maximize their share of existing limited resources and desired by humans (Kendall 289). Considering these resources are limited, the struggle for a share of these resources leads to competition and conflict. In addition, these struggles lead to societies and institutions changing as various groups and persons come into power (Kendall 289). Anti immigrants reasons for their stance against free immigration is about the welfare system and the possibility that immigrants will abuse it (Kendall 289). They argue that immigrants only come into the country to exploit social services. Social security considered as the leading aspect that lures immigrants and not their search for economic freedom. The American society perceives immigrants as lazy, indigent, unproductive, and hence dead weight and contributes to loss of the American economy (Lehman 1). Immigrant’s reliance on social services further increases tax burden on the productive Americans. Following this reason, the borders need policing to keep away the undesirables. One area that has led to so much controversy is the education system where the schools cater to immigrant students. Mexicans form the largest number of immigrants in America and schools have had to cater for the non English-speaking students. The number of students in schools has increased further straining the already meager resources. The education system consumes the largest share of the country’s GDP each year. The average American sustains the system with their taxes. However, such arguments are wrong both theoretically and statistically. Contrary to popular opinion, immigrants do not come to abuse public welfare system. The facts are immigrants do not have much effect on the public welfare system neither do they affect wealth distribution and taxation. Lehman notes immigrants do not makes use of government services. Many immigrants are in the country illegally and would not ask for assistance from the government and risk deportation. Another fact that people do not realize is that immigrants do not receive social security despite the fact that they pay more than 77% of social security taxes. Statistics also show that native families also receive more welfare support compared to immigrant families (Lehman 1). Many would not agree with this statistics arguing that free immigration would lead to an influx of immigrants thus overloading the welfare system and leading to national debt and taxes skyrocketing. This is not to say that it could not happen. However, neither should native families expect to live off hard working Americans. Everyone should work to support his or her livelihood regardless of native or immigrants. Immigration and culture Ethnocentrism is the view that one cultural group is in a way superior to others. It is also referred to as tunnel vision; it involves judging other groups in relation to their own culture and ethnic group (Kendall 283). This is in terms of customs, behavior, religion and language. Critics against opening up of American borders are concerned of preserving the distinct “American culture” and the traditional European style heritage in market economics and government. Anti-immigrants fear that, by letting immigrant’s to come into the country without any policing will lead to sabotage of American traditions and culture. They argue that some immigrants are hostile towards the institutional framework. Gutmann states that anti-immigration advocates argue that immigrants of the 21st century do not share the same ethnic characteristics with the earlier immigrants and hence are not capable of appreciating “American way of life”(421). Gutmann gives the example of peter Brimelow from Great Britain who blames America’s entire problem on the immigrants. According to Brimelow, America’s problems are caused by immigrants who do not share earlier immigrants European cultural background specifically British. Brimelow thinks that Americans need to think again on matters regarding immigration and he even calls for “time out” from immigration (p. 422). To Brimelow, allowing immigrants into the country will turn American into an “alien nation”. This kind of argument suggests current immigrants from third world ruled by tyrannical regimes have no understanding of the traditional American institution that worked to make America such a great country. Allowing immigrants from very different ethnic and cultural background into United States could result into serious polarization of the American society, therefore, undermining sacred economic and political institutions. The above argument appears compelling. However, it is misplaced. Tradition is meaningless if the essence of that tradition is not fully understood. The America tradition has nothing to do with ethnic background of the people. The great state that America is today was built on social liberty making it one of the most coveted countries in the world (Lehman 1). The philosophy of liberty forms the foundation of American tradition, not the people and their cultural background. Coming up with policies in an effort to preserve this culture and tradition of earlier immigrants is a path to destruction of liberty (Lehman 1). The philosophy of limited government and freedom is what holds the American tradition together. This compares to a time when the government sought to prevent the influence of Catholicism by demanding all schools be public. Protestants at the time sought to use the state to eliminate catholic influence and teachings in an attempt to preserve protestant tradition. The threat on American tradition is from within and not because of immigration. Moreover, by allowing the state to gain control over every aspect of life, will erode the philosophy of freedom that forms the foundation of America. Conclusion Barring immigration into the United States is the same as establishing trading barriers, which only serves to disadvantage the people and the economy. Immigrants provide cheap labor and at the same time make products cheaper improving living standards for many Americans. Immigration leads to population growth that the native people are not able to sustain due to low birth rates. America has become a universal nation with people of different ethnicities, hues, creeds and national ancestries (Wattenberg 53). Immigration is good for United States. It helps the country grow through both skilled and unskilled labor. Much like Australia and Canada, pluralism can work in America. Works cited Finsterbusch, Kurt. Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Social Issues. Dubuque, Iowa: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2005. Print. Gutmann, Matthew C. Perspectives on Las Ame?ricas: A Reader in Culture, History, and Representation. Maden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2003. Internet resource. Kendall, Diana E. Sociology in Our Times. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cenage Learning, 2013. Print. Lehman, Thomas. Coming to America: the benefits of open immigration. The freeman ides on liberty. Vol. 45 (12). 1995. Web. Viewed on 20 April 2012. Wattenberg, Ben J. The Good News Is the Bad News Is Wrong. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1985. Print. Read More