Nativism as an American product

Ever since reading "Our Town" (NYT Mag, Aug 5, 07) last month, I have been trying to figure out why that story won't fade into the vague, vast area of "I read somewhere ..." The article details the efforts of some in Carpentersville, IL, to drive out a perceived flood of illegal Latino immigrants. As it reports, more than 40 state and local governments nationwide have "passed ordinances and legislation aimed at making life miserable for illegal immigrants in the hope that they’ll have no choice but to return to their countries of origin." (See also: "Surge in Immigration Laws Around U.S.," NYT, Aug 6, 07)

The county where I finished high school is in the middle of this sort of thing ("Hispanics in a Knot in Prince William," WaPo, Aug 3, 07), making it one of many counties in northern Virginia ("Culpeper Affirms Status of English," WaPo, Aug 8, 07; "The Face of Local Counties Shifts With Surge in Minorities," WaPo, Aug 9, 07) -- the most prosperous region in the U.S. ("Income Soaring in 'Egghead Capital,'" WaPo, Sep 2, 07) -- to target a class of the working poor.

Out here in California, there's another facet of the story: thanks to border crackdowns, not only are there fewer workers who move between Mexico and the U.S. for farm work, there's a worker shortage, period. Read "Short on Labor, Farmers in the U.S. Shift to Mexico," NYT, Sep 5, 07). Here, we learn:

[S]ome recent studies suggest that strains on the farm-labor supply are real. Stephen Levy, an economist at the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, in Palo Alto, compared unemployed Americans with illegal immigrant workers in the labor market. “The bottom line,” Mr. Levy said, “is that most unemployed workers are not available to replace fired, unauthorized immigrant workers,” in part because very few of the unemployed are in farm work.

(Another notable thing about this article is in a Freakonomics blog entry, which suggests that getting around the immigrant-labor issue by bringing the labor to the workers does not necessarily make an optimal situation for either the employer (lower productivity) or the worker (lower wages).)

So ... it's not like illegal immigrants are stealing jobs from hardworking Americans. Nobody is sure what their financial impact is on governmental services, since the studies that are out there are wildly contradictory, but nobody can honestly say illegal immigrants are a drain on the overall economy.

Yet illegal immigrants being treated as a huge threat to America. And Reason's Kerry Howley looks at why in the Sept 4, 07, piece "The Mexicans Are Coming! The Mexicans Are Coming!"

“It’s not the number of Latino and foreign born that are creating the public perception of crisis,” says (San Diego State University Sociologist Jill) Esbenshade, “it’s the increase.” Ordinances, she finds, are correlated with rapid recent increase in relatively small Latino and foreign born populations. As immigrants move beyond traditional gateway cities, like Los Angeles and New York, they're pushing into whiter climes. Big city dwellers may have an expectation of demographic dynamism, an expectation not shared in places like Tulsa, Oklahoma and Hazelton, Pennsylvania. Esbenshade’s study didn’t include state laws, but her findings may help explain why West Virginia, whose population is less than 1 percent Hispanic/Latino, is cracking down at the same time California, at 35 percent, is extending public benefits to migrant workers.

In other words, if you're not used to rubbing shoulders with other ethnic groups, you're more likely to want to crack down on their perceived invasion of your town. I guess we're not too far off from NLNA.

This conclusion isn't terribly flattering to denizens of homogeneous small towns in the U.S., is it? I am curious as to whether or not it's true -- and what other sides of the story are out there.

Comments

[Tracy]

I'm from one of the Big Six immigration states, so the "Immigrants = Bad!" doesn't rear its head here. But, "I read somewhere" that border states and the West and East Coast in general are significantly more tolerant, whereas Midwestern and Southern states -- where Latino immigrant incidence is almost nil -- are passing ordinances like it pays cash money. The article had a great bit about a hysterical response in Nebraska, where they were ready to all but put a wall up around town, based on one or two families moving in. I wish I could find the story!

But, yes, the gist was the same: that when you've grown up realizing how immigrant Mexican labor supports the economy, and when it affects you personally and directly, there is zero interest in monolingualism or shutting out Latino culture.

In a country that's barely 250 years old... i.e. all but 1% of us are immigrants somewhere down the line... I just don't get nativism. But apparently it started in the US in the 1750's when the British hated on the Pennsylvania Germans, so maybe it's unavoidable? The bootstrapping, flag-planting version of "no zealot like a convert"?

[Polly]

The whole anti-immigration thing is racism pure and simple--a bunch of dumb crackers suddenly realizing that everybody doesn't talk and act and think and look exactly like them. It infuriates me most of the time, although in my more analytical moments I wonder if there isn't something inherent in human nature that triggers this panicky "ALIENS!!!" response.

I grew up in California, and I have to point out that it's no stranger to navtivism. I'm not just talking about the Zoot Suit Riots and the Yellow Peril, but Pete Wilson and his cherished Prop 187. I think the only reason you don't see more of that kind of thing is that California Latinos vote now.

[Shotrock]

This reminds me of the joke in NYC about the reason why the only places you find chain restaurants (Applebee's, Olive Garden) is around Times Square and Penn Station. It's because the exurban, Middle America tourists need a little "comfort of the familiar" after having to deal with The Big Three:

1) Skyscrapers
2) Subways
3) BROWN PEOPLE!! OUTNUMBERING THEM!!! EEK!!!!

Seriously, I think #3 is sometimes what overwhelms them the most.

Part of the problem is that we haven't had to deal with assimilating *one* immigrant group for a long time. When it's a bunch of newcomers from all different places (Cuba, Vietnam, China, Poland) there's no sense of "invasion." What's happening with Latinos is just a replay of what happened with the Evil Papists Who Will Take Over in the 1840s and the Evil Swarthy Mediterraneans Who Will Take Over in the 1900s (see also: Yellow Peril). The country hasn't had to figure out how to handle integrating a large, single cultural group for 80 years; we've forgotten that yes, assimilation eventually does happen and the stress dissipates.

[Polly]

I saw this on the NY Times Web site and thought it was amusing: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/26/nyregion/26riverside.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all It's about these podunk towns realizing that they shouldn't have chased away large chunks of their population....