Developing strategies to end hunger
 

Settler, Immigrant, Alien

“What part of illegal don’t you understand?”

This question—usually launched by immigration restrictionists and aimed at immigration advocates—is a good one. The United States considers itself a country of laws, and letting people off the hook for major legal transgressions isn’t (officially) tolerated or popular.

But in assessing the status of illegal immigrants and the penalties they deserve for unlawful action, it’s helpful to consider the severity of their transgressions. What should the penalty be for crossing the border unlawfully in order to sustain your family?

We also need to consider that laws change. Immigrants’ reasons for leaving home and traveling to the United States have remained remarkably constant. End-of-the-world hysteria opposing immigration is also old. What has changed most is immigration law and how we classify newcomers.

The earliest European immigrants to North America—mostly English arriving in Virginia and New England during the early 1600s—were considered settlers in an open continent. Immigration was encouraged and restrictions about who could migrate were minimal.

In a reversal of the contemporary dynamic, these early European colonial immigrants excluded the native culture from the incipient social order and defined the colonies on their own terms, largely as the domain of English Anglo-Saxon Protestant immigrants. Restrictionists have mythologized these early immigrants and contrasted them with later waves of less desirable newcomers. But the composition of the early settlers would have horrified today’s anti-immigrant activists.

Researchers estimate that England sent 50,000 convicts to America in the 18th century and a smaller number in the 17th century. Between half and two-thirds of all early immigrants to America were indentured servants. The earliest immigrants from northwest Europe included few high-born. Most were uneducated agricultural laborers. In spite of this, they were encouraged by the British government to travel to America to labor in the South’s growing plantation economy.

Even in New England, where English immigrants typically possessed more agricultural and artisanal skills, most were defined as “ordinary workmen with moderate to low social status.” Although higher socioeconomic status migrants followed later in the 17th century, the majority of immigrants continued to be drawn from the lower social classes.

In the post-Civil War era, new and large streams of immigrants began arriving from southern and eastern Europe. The Slavs, Italians, and Jews who arrived in the United States by the millions were seen as an existential threat to the country’s Anglo-Saxon Protestant core. Groups such as the Immigration Restriction League sought to reduce immigration to prevent those deemed “undesirable … or injurious to our national character.”

Today these groups are celebrated by anti-immigration activists as “model” immigrants who followed the rules in arriving in the United States legally, unlike Latin American border-jumpers. But at the time these immigrants were portrayed as Europe’s trash being dumped on America’s shores. Public depictions of immigrants as rats and snakes were not uncommon. Immigrants were seen as harbingers of organized crime and radical political ideologies.

But even as fear of immigration grew, legal restrictions against the entry of Europeans were minimal, even for the poor. Ellis Island immigrants were so successful at adhering to U.S. immigration law largely because it barely existed. Of the 12 million immigrants who passed through Ellis Island, only 2 percent were denied entry to the United States. Upon arrival, the vast majority of immigrants — most of them poor and uneducated — spent several hours at Ellis Island before they were legally admitted to America.

The legality threshold for 19th- and 18th-century European immigrants is incomparable to the gauntlet of restrictions facing contemporary immigrants. The immigration bureaucracy has increased so that today’s immigrants—perhaps more educated and skilled than Europeans arriving a century ago—face unprecedented barriers. It can take years for a immigrant with family already in the United States to gain legal entry.

So while restrictionists state “the law is the law,” the fact is that the laws facing newcomers have changed radically. The law turns immigrants into illegal aliens and aliens into national pioneers. If we were sticking with Ellis Island Rules, most Mexican immigrants would stop at the border for a few hours before they were permitted to make their way in America with the government’s stamp of approval.

« Obama on Immigration En Arizona, la ley anti-inmigrantes es bloqueada por Washington »

Comments

Andrew, your long view of immigration lawprovides vital perspective to our nation's increasingly selective welcome towards immigrants. I would add that it surely is not a coincidence that we have imposed stricter policies especially as immigration shifts from European origins to immigration from southern nations.

Our history of war with Mexico, the annexation of Texas, etc., make the immigration of Latinos seem to some Americans to feel like an invasion. Though it's not an overt battle, our complex relationship with the southern countries resonnates with our nation's past conquest of the southwest.

Living in Southern California, the silent dialogue over control turf is readily apparent to me and to many. Latino friends smile and say, "we're taking it back." Fearful Anglos hear this and aren't as amused.

I'm sure a similar dynamic would occur if Native North Americans attempted to reclaim lands from which they were discplaced. In all these ways, immigration law is certainly a part of territorial struggles between our nations.

Andrew, thank you for this thoughtful and eloquent post. As you said, we cannot just say that the immigration debate is about upholding the law. The law has changed and it is much more difficult if not impossible for immigrants now to enter the U.S. than i was for our own forefathers. In Virginia unfortunately, there is an effort to pass an Arizona type law at the state legislature. This should be rejected in Virginia and every other state because it does nothing to fix our broken system. It also assumes that immigrants now somehow, don't follow the rules the way previous immigrants did. The real case is that there are way more rules now than in the past and it is an incomprehensible labyrinth with wait times that approach infinity.

I have posted a quote from your blog post onto our own blog at the URL below. Thanks.
http://www.learnprayblog.org/2010/07/from-settlers-to-aliens/

I think the historical context regarding immigration law presented in this short, but substantive statement provides an in depth perspective on the issues surrounding this volatile law. When you think about immigration laws in this context, you walk away knowing that this law continues to evolve and perhaps an Ellis Island approach to permitting immigrants to "make their way to America" should be considered.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341d945753ef0134859070ff970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Settler, Immigrant, Alien:

Stay Connected

Bread for the World