In twenty-first century America, the issue of immigration, particularly Mexican immigration (both “legal” and “illegal”) is ever-present in political, economic and social discourse. “The issue of immigration touches the Mexican-origin population more than any other ethnic group in the United States,” (Jiminez 2007, 599). With such attention focused on this particular ethnic group, it is interesting to consider the tribal, cultural, racial, ethnic, and national identity of this group. How do Mexican immigrants express their identity in the above-stated terms? What is the nature of Mexican immigrant communities? In what way are Mexican immigrants experiencing social exclusion both within their communities and in the larger U.S. culture? How do these identity features affect the way in which public discussion of Mexican immigration is carried out?
Mexican immigration has been constant for almost the past one hundred, “creating a present-day Mexican-origin population that is a mix of individuals from different generations and who descend from different immigration waves,” (Jiminez 2007, 599). Further, Mexicans constitute “nearly 30 percent of all immigrants,” and “Mexican immigrants make up the largest share of the foreign-born population,” (Jiminez 2007, 600). The Mexican immigration population is further defined by the fact “the majority of Mexican immigrants enter the United States without authorization, and Mexican immigrants comprise the greatest proportion of
all unauthorized immigrants,” (Jiminez 2007, 600). All of these factors contribute to the Mexican immigrant’s sense of identity and the way in which the larger population identifies Mexican immigrants.
In the current political climate, Mexican immigrants have been accused of stealing jobs from “regular” Americans, criminal activity, and exploitation of U.S., and state and local, government services. Most of these accusations have been debunked by facts, but the negative stereotypes are still propagated mostly by politicians seeking to exploit the fears of American citizens in a period of severe economic uncertainty. The result is a vivid sense of marginalization and discrimination among Mexican immigrants. Further:
What is driving the political controversy is not so much the presence of unauthorized immigrants from Mexico and Latin America as their desire to settle, form families and establish communities in the places where they work. There would not be such heated public debate and widespread opposition to
undocumented immigration if immigrants stayed in their place as low-wage temporary labourers. The problems arise because they are sending their children medical care in hospitals and clinics. (Jiminez 2007, 601)
The above passage is significant in several ways. First, it establishes that Mexican immigrants do not wish to simply be transient laborers; but rather, they wish to follow the social/cultural tradition of community in places where they want to live. This desire is, of course, part of the long history of the immigrant experience in American from all countries. Secondly, Mexican immigrants are seeking to be upwardly mobile – a fundamental part of the “American Dream” – and are experiencing backlash for wanting to fulfill this dream. Elpidio Villarreal, a lawyer from Connecticut, speaks of his family’s history and drive for upward mobility. Again, in the American immigrant tradition, upward mobility is manifest over generations. He discusses how his “late grandmother, Elena Villarreal, who came to this country as a refugee from political violence during the Mexican Civil War, had 11 children--nine sons--one of whom died in childhood. Six of her sons served in this country's armed forces. My uncles have fistfuls of medals to prove their bravery” He further points out the connection between upward mobility and assimilation – another important component of the general American immigrant experience:
Americanization is relentless. According to a study published last month in the Population & Development Review, by the third generation, the grandchildren of the original immigrants, only 17 percent of Mexican Americans speak fluent Spanish. By the fourth generation, the generation represented by my children, only 5 percent do.
Regardless of ability to speak Spanish, by the third generation, 96 percent of Mexican Americans prefer to speak English at home. I am not saying this is an unalloyed good thing, only that it is inevitable.
My grandparents spoke very little English. My parents are bilingual. I am ashamed to admit my Spanish is pretty poor. And my children speak only the Spanish they've learned in school. It is only a question of time. (Villarreal, E. 2006, 784-787) Villarrel’s experience is both an indication of the Mexican immigrants “inevitable” assimilation and an indication that this kind of assimilation and resulting upward mobility (Villarrel himself is a lawyer) is available to Mexican immigrants even in the face of the discrimination and xenophobia that is a mark of the current political climate. Presently, and not only in border states, strong efforts are being made to deny Mexican immigrants access to schools, housing and health care. For some immigrants these realities combined with new state laws to identify and deport undocumented immigrants have lead to the recent phenomenon of large numbers of Mexicans moving back to Mexico. It is important to point out, though, that this part of the Mexican immigrant experience is once again not unique. Over the course of American immigrant history, large numbers of immigrants returned to their native countries finding the American Dream as chimeral and out of reach.
For the Mexican immigrant, then, self-identification as an “American” in which immigrants speak English and lose their Spanish speaking ability, for example, is an important factor in their positive immigrant experience. Interestingly, this feature has lead to a cultural rift between Mexican-Americans and recent Mexican immigrants. “Because of their large numbers and high level of unauthorized status, Mexican immigrants are a lightening rod for policy debates about immigration and recent nativist backlash,” (Jiminez 2007, 604). At the same time “many Mexican Americans exhibit significant signs of assimilation as measured by education,” but “the continuous and heavy influx of Mexican immigrants and their concentration in low-wage, low-status jobs contributes to their high visibility in the U.S. racial and ethnic landscape,” (Jiminez 2007, 604). Jiminez goes on to further point out that: ”Mexican Americans voice discontent about cultural differences between themselves and their immigrant co-ethnics. Mexican Americans point out that immigrants do not assimilate fast enough, and have made Mexican-Americans feel culturally inferior by ridiculing them for their subpar Spanish-speaking abilities,” (2007,604). While Mexican Americans may resent their being viewed as culturally inauthentic as Mexicans by new immigrants, they are more concerned over the impact the presence of new Mexican immigrants has on the perception of all people in the U.S. of Mexican descent.
Instead, the costs that Mexican Americans perceive arise from the belief that what happens among their immigrant co-ethnics reflects poorly on all people of Mexican descent. Many said that Mexican immigrants have a largely negative influence on the overall image of Mexican-origin individuals, and pointed to the national and local media as a root cause. On one hand, anti- Mexican immigrant nativism makes U.S. society an unwelcoming place for Mexican immigrants. Americans socially shun Mexican immigrants because of their unauthorized status and belief that they contribute to economic and cultural degradation. As a result, Mexican Americans opine that their immigrant coethnics threaten the status of all people of Mexican descent. (Jiminez 2007, 610)
One interesting feature of Mexican immigrant feature is the changing role of the father in the family. These changes were taking place in the U.S., but are now also being noticed back in Mexico. This means that the cultural identity of Mexican immigrants impacts the cultural identity of native Mexicans. The stereotype that has existed regarding the Mexican male is one of an authoritarian figure who is uninvolved in family life. This fits into the more general stereotype of Mexican males in the U.S. as being irresponsible and even dangerous. Studies show that in fact the opposite is true. “For instance, researchers have found that Latino fathers are more physically involved, monitor their children more, and provide more consistent discipline than similar groups of European American fathers,” (Behnke, Taylor, & Parra-Cardona 2008, 2). Further, Mexican fathers tend to be “warmer, more engaged, and less controlling than Asian American, European American, and African American fathers.” Mexican fathers are “engaged in fathering roles such as teacher, playmate, and emotional supporter, “and they are as involved in child care and other domestic labor as European American fathers,” (Behnke, Taylor, & Parra-Cardona 2008, 2). It is true that the typical Mexican immigrant male tends to be younger, and therefore, less wedded to traditional Mexican role identities, but it is also true that the experience of living in the U.S. and the challenges immigrants face affects male behavior concerning his family. American xenophobia and racism is a threat. The father thus seeks to protect his family, as well as insulate it from perceived danger.
At the same time, while Mexican males in the U.S. may be more responsible fathers, they are also given to more extra-marital sexual activity. “Mexicans residing in the United States exhibit heightened exposure to risk, including casual and, among men, commercial partners. The enhanced risks associated with migration vary systematically by gender and marital status and are accompanied by variation in attitudes toward sexuality, with the U.S. context associated with higher tolerance for infidelity and biological explanations of sexuality,” (Parrado and Flippen 2010, 175-195) .
In general, it can be said that Mexican immigrants, while proud of their national identity and culture, seek to assimilate into U.S. culture as much as any other immigrant group, to be participating, responsible members of society, and to have equal access to opportunities in education and work. Unfortunately, just like the experience of immigrant groups throughout American history, Mexicans are experiencing barriers to acceptance and full participation in American society. “The issue at stake is that of immigrants’ membership in the local society and access to the social and cultural resources that would make this possible. While US economic and immigration policies aim to keep Mexican workers in the position of temporary labourers with limited rights, immigrants aim to be recognized as citizens, as members of families, communities and society, rather than simply as units of labour,” (RacialOdem 2008, 359-380).
Elena Villarreal points out that the “Underlying the ongoing debate over immigration is one central idea--that somehow the current wave of Mexican immigrants coming to this country is fundamentally different from prior waves of immigrants,” ( 2006, 784-787). She states Mexicans are perceived as being “different" for two main reasons:
(1) They are disloyal. They allegedly remain loyal to Mexico and harbor a desire
very least, culturally and linguistically--the so called La Reconquista.
(2) They refuse to assimilate. In particular, we are told that they are not learning
English and will never learn it, and they will never succeed in America. (2006, 784-787) The first reason stated above is an hysterical, reactionary point-of-view with no basis in fact. It is a far-fetched political tactic to try to appeal to irrational fear among U.S. voters. Mexican Americans, such as Villarreal, find this reason downright offensive: “Mexican Americans have won proportionately more Congressional Medals of Honor than any other ethnic group in the nation's history. Next time you catch the Honor Roll of the Dead on the PBS Nightly News Hour notice how many of the names and faces are Mexican, or other Hispanic. These Mexican Americans sure have a peculiar way of demonstrating their disloyalty,” (2006, 784-787)
The second reason had already been disproven by evidence presented above. It is true that Mexican immigrants take pride in displaying the flag of Mexico, enjoy their native cuisine, and integrate their native rituals into the celebrations of American holidays. But hasn’t every American immigrant group done this? The language issue is also presented as an example of Mexican immigrants’ reluctance to assimilate. Yet, the evidence presented above shows that in fact that Mexican immigrants do learn English, and second and third generation Mexican immigrants even lose their Spanish-speaking abilities. As Villarreal points out: “In this world, at this point in its history, NO ONE can withstand the overpowering force of the English language. It is everywhere and it is 24/7. TV and American pop culture are the great assimilators--final proof that the world really is flat. I know wealthy people in Lima who complain that they can barely get their children to speak Spanish, so besotted are they with American culture,” (2006, 784-787). She goes on to point out, “My grandparents spoke very little English. My parents are bilingual. I am ashamed to admit my Spanish is pretty poor. And my children speak only the Spanish they've learned in school. It is only a question of time,” (2006, 784-787).
There are more examples of assimilation. Juan Gutierrez a Mexican immigrant and chairman, president and C.E.O. of Kemron, an environmental services company in Vienna, Va., tells his story of successful assimilation to The New York Times:
In 1983, the president of Wapora, an environmental consulting firm owned by Kemron, approached my chief financial officer about my interest in buying Wapora from its parent. I discovered that both companies were in financial difficulty, but saw a great business opportunity. I took the risk and acquired Kemron, and with it Wapora. I placed the company into bankruptcy the next day and started rebuilding. Today, we have about 175 employees, five offices and various projects around the country and in Puerto Rico. Kemron cleans many types of contaminated sites. We helped clean the Hart Senate Office Building when anthrax was found there in 2001, and were involved in the cleanup of the BP oil spill in Louisiana and in the environmental cleanup in Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina. (Gutierrez 2012, 8).
Gutierrez’s success story, and the nature of it, is a profound piece of assimilation evidence. Not only is his business highly successful (a very “American” success story), but the kind of work he and his business does is deeply rooted in U.S. affairs, aiding in disasters, and helping to keep the country safe and the environment clean.
L. Martinez told his story to Newsday. Martinez is concerned that “the current economic climate and growing anti-immigrant sentiments in the United States likely aren't the only factors fueling the Mexican immigration slowdown,” (Martinez 2011). He points out, though, that there exists a generational divide regarding Mexicans’ views on coming to the U.S. His relatives, who came to the U.S. in the 1950s and 1960s successfully assimilated into American society, found good jobs and felt that they were better off than if they had stayed in Mexico. “But today, not one of my nieces or nephews _ or the nieces and nephews of my friends and acquaintances _ think of the United States as the promised land for jobs and opportunities,” (2011). It seems this shift in attitude could very well be due to the current anti-immigration fervor in the U.S., as much as the economic slowdown.
In conclusion, many Mexican immigrants have been able to successfully assimilate into American culture, live decent lives, and retain their cultural heritage – at least for a generation or two. However, present-day politics, combined with bad economic conditions, have led to a reduction in Mexican immigration and even a tangible migration back to Mexico. Yet, for the Mexican immigrant, just as for every immigrant group before them, the dream still lives. Perhaps Elpidio Villarreal sums this up best:
I do sometimes wonder what my grandfather must have been thinking as he crossed the Rio Grande into a strange new land, just as I sometimes wonder what my Uncle Lupe must have been thinking as he felt his landing boat bump against the beaches of France. I am sure they were both afraid. But both of them found the courage and the strength to keep moving forward--as we all mustThey led hard and unsentimental lives, as did all my grandparents and their children. But, in the end, they found a home here. This country was brave and strong enough to give their descendents a chance to succeed or fail--their own chance to Achieve the Dream. (2006, 784-787).
Behnke, A. O., Taylor, B. A., & Parra-Cardona, J. (2008). "I Hardly Understand English, But": Mexican Origin Fathers Describe Their Commitment as Fathers despite the challenges of immigration. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 39 (2).
Gutierrez, J. (2012, April 15). Cotton Fields and Brownfields. New York Times. p. 8.
Jiménez, T. R. (2007). Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Mexican Immigration: The Mexican-American Perspective. Social Science Quarterly (Blackwell Publishing Limited), 88(3), 599-618. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2007.00474.x
Martinez, L. (2011, July 11). Mexican immigration surprise. Newsday, (Melville, NY).
Parrado, E. A., & Flippen, C. A. (2010). Migration and Sexuality: A Comparison of Mexicans in Sending and Receiving Communities. Journal Of Social Issues, 66(1), 175-195. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01639.x
RacialOdem, M. E. (2008). SUBALTERN IMMIGRANTS. Interventions: The International Journal Of Postcolonial Studies, 10(3), 359-380. doi:10.1080/13698010802444959
Villarreal, E. (2006). Keeping True to Our Fundamental Values. Vital Speeches Of The Day, 72(26), 784-787.
