As the development of transportation and communication technology has increased in light of globalization, immigration has had a significant impact on world politics, and it has become a central theme in political discussions focusing on international relations. In light of the substantial and ongoing issue of American immigration, immigrant populations are dealing with prejudice, unfairness, and xenophobia more than ever before. Given America’s status as the great melting pot, it is one of the biggest receivers of immigrants from other countries, thus, the impact that caused by immigrants is a crucial factor that affects many aspects of the American society and economy. Despite America’s long history with immigration, research indicates that new immigrants feel less welcome than older immigrants, receiving a more sophisticated, ongoing and immersive sense of discrimination than ever before.
In order to have a better insight of the future development of this country in respect of immigration, we now should take a deeper look of the country-level immigration policy and the public attitude toward immigration-related issues. Furthermore, there has always been a raging debate in the U.S about how many immigrants should be allowed to legally enter the country, and attitudes toward immigration have shifted over recent years, but establishing precisely why is not as easy as it might seem. Are illegal immigrants really causing more crime than natives and legal immigrants? Is it really that easy to cross the border? The answers to these questions make a difference to people's attitudes toward recent immigrants.
The causes of such discrimination are myriad, and as such result from a large number of factors. Government policies and laws regarding immigration have been a substantial issue of late, particularly given President Obama’s recent sweeping amnesty for illegal immigrants within the United States (Washington Post, 2014). There is somewhat of a divide in opinion between federal and state policy regarding immigration; Texas in particular has been a hotbed of particularly anti-immigrant legislation, being at the center of the American Southwest (the area bordering Mexico from which most Mexican immigrants come to the United States) (Payan 12). There is a great deal of anti-immigrant legislation from states like Texas and Arizona, who set up Draconian measures to keep immigrants out, including abolishing previously established ‘sanctuary cities’ in Texas that allowed immigrants to work in those cities without informing the federal authorities (Payan 13). These measures and more send a message to immigrants (and native citizens) that immigrants are not wanted in America.
Government is the most direct control of international immigration; its attitude towards international immigrants could also affect the public’s attitude toward international immigrant. Currently, immigrants can enter the country legally through several routes, including family-based immigration (in which US citizens can bring family members to the United States, such as parents of children who were born in , or are otherwise, US citizens) (Immigration Policy Center, 2014). Employment-based immigration can also occur, with temporary visas granted to foreign citizens who want to work in the United States, and who can then find permanent immigration based on a quota of 140,000 visas a year (Immigration Policy Center, 2014). Refugees and asylum circumstances can also provide immigrants conditional entry into the United States, with a ceiling of 70,000 split up by region (Immigration Policy Center, 2014). With the exception of diversity visas and other methods of humanitarian relief, these are the primary methods by which legal immigration can be facilitated in the United States. Any other method amounts to illegal immigration, which sets the cultural tone for many Americans’ perceptions of immigrants who ‘buck the system.’
Significant changes in attitudes toward immigration occurred both socially and politically because of changing legislation in the 1980s. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1982 allowed illegal immigrants who did season agricultural work to get amnesty with good circumstances, in addition to granting amnesty who all illegal immigrants who had lived in the US since before 1982. However, 1992’s Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) changed the laws to deport immigrants who had stayed in the United States for more than a decade. In the mid-90s, the media discourse changed due to more media exposure to the ‘problem’ of illegal immigration, creating false dichotomies between the ‘desirable’ white-friendly immigrant and the ‘anti-citizen’ illegal immigrant. Thanks to the media and an increasing fear of Latino assimilation into American culture due to the influx of immigrants from Mexico, the narrative regarding immigration changed irrevocably (Lee and Bean 561).
Social factors play one of the most significant roles in immigrant discrimination, due to societal ignorance and stereotypes about immigrants, both legal and illegal. The prejudice, unfairness, and xenophobia that immigrants are facing reflect the ignorance of an entire society towards illegal immigrants, mostly due to their race, perceived intelligence, nationality, and intentions, among other things. Criticism of immigration and immigration policy tends to favor the characterization of immigrants under negative stereotypes, which leads to increasing xenophobia, prejudice and suspicion (Andreescu 62). Much of this stems from a certain animosity towards multiculturalism in many countries, including the US – UK attitudes toward immigration are just as, if not more, negative than those in the US, with the majority of Britons being skeptical of the benefits of immigration (Andreescu 62).
There are three major theories that underscore possible animosity towards immigrants. First, there is cultural marginality theory, in which people are more positively receptive of immigrants if they have had exposure to other cultures in the past (Andreescu 64). Many in the United States, however, have not had that same exposure, making them more resistant to change and less willing to accept new populations (Andreescu 64). The influx of immigrants tends to represent a perceived threat to the supremacy of a host nation’s language or culture; there is a fear that, the more immigrants come in, the less they will be able to move and interact freely within their own culture. This kind of ethnocentrism is more commonly found in the United States, being more of a concern than economic and material interests (Andreescu 64).
On the subject of economic concerns, economic self-interest is another possible explanation for animosity towards immigrants (Andreescu 65). Many natives to a host country, particularly in the lower class, tend to perceive immigrants as a threat to their livelihood (due to their willingness to work for employers under the table for less pay). Also, their sheer existence in the country is thought to make “more competition for housing, schools, and social services” (Andreescu 65). This particular perspective is born of the fear that immigrants will lead to economic decline both for them specifically and for the country as a whole.
In contrast with cultural marginality, however, contact theory posits that the more time spent with immigrants can lead some to have more negative perceptions of them (Andreescu 66). Casual contact with immigrants provides a breeding ground for miscommunication and language/cultural barriers which can cause embarrassment and frustration, which then fuels a lot of anti-immigrant sentiment. These instances provide evidence for individuals that an influx of immigrants would mean greater discomfort in their daily lives due to more of these encounters (Andreescu 66). To that end, they resist immigration due to that fear of greater contact with those of another culture.
The effects of this discrimination can lead to a vicious cycle that can often help to confirm stereotypes about illegal immigrants by giving them no choice but to live up to them. This is most frequently found in crime statistics, where immigrants are thought to have a substantial role in violent and nonviolent crimes throughout the United States. The image of international immigrants in the mind of native-born Americans is that of an illegal immigrant who wants to escape problems at home for an easy life in the United States; to that end, immigrants are more likely perceived to engage in criminal activity than other populations.
The effect of immigration on local economies is vast and important, and is a crucial consideration to make before any kind of sweeping policy or social change regarding immigrants. As previously mentioned, economic self-interest is a substantial factor to consider when weighing the influx of immigrants into a country – this is due to the perception of the changes in income distribution that would occur as a result of immigration (Facchini and Mayda 2). This extends to the welfare system, which immigrants are thought to utilize to a greater percentage than those who live natively in a host country (Facchini and Mayda 3). Individual opinions about migration are affected “not only by the labor market consequences of population inflows: they will also be shaped by the type of response to immigration adopted by the welfare state” (3). Apocalyptic scenarios are envisioned in those who resist immigration that are contradictory but no less terrifying: first, immigration affects the rich by creating a greater burden on the welfare state (thus taking more money from the rich through taxes), and secondly immigration affects the poor by taking up more resources within the welfare state that would otherwise go to Americans who need it. In both of these situations, fears of welfare-state influx are the chief motivators to resist immigration, to a greater extent than that of the past (Facchini and Mayda 9).
These perceptions of immigrants have increased in prevalence and severity in the United States due to a number of factors. The effects of this increased discrimination on the immigrants themselves is quite poor, as these individuals and their descendants operate at a systemic disadvantage compared to their native counterparts. Even second-generation immigrants face economic difficulties, discrimination, and subjective difficulties in understanding their own connection to their host and native cultures (Waters 795). Many of these troubles stem from the continually changing and solidifying metrics by which ‘race’ is defined in the United States, in which assimilation is much more difficult for people who look different or nonwhite. In the early 20th century, this problem was somewhat difficult with Asian, Irish and Eastern European immigrants coming to the United States during the Industrial Revolution, but their comparative ‘whiteness’ allowed them to largely overcome the racial barriers that were put in place for them when they first came to America. However, this kind of progress has not quite extended to nonwhite populations, such as Latinos, blacks, and other nationalities that look the least ‘Caucasian’ (Waters 796).
In order to combat discrimination and help resolve these barriers to citizenship for immigrants, many steps need to be taken. First, immigration reform must be facilitated in order to change the barriers for what constitutes ‘illegal’ immigration, passing legislation that allows illegal immigrants to gain amnesty if they are privy to good circumstances. Secondly, attempts must be made to open up greater dialogue between native citizens and immigrants in order to create more intimate connections between these two populations. In accordance with cultural marginality theory, providing a safe, productive exposure between natives and immigrants can foster tolerance and greater acceptance of immigrant culture, language and traditions, thus allowing the stigmatization and stereotyping of immigrants to be reduced.
Legislature that allows education-based immigration reform is also a highly positive thing; laws such as the DREAM Act permit children of immigrants to gain citizenship if they are on the path to completing a college education, and resources are given to provide them that opportunity (Morales, Herrera and Murphy 267). Undocumented youth are engaged with in order to take advantage of their work ethic and resources, rewarding them with an education, a chance to work, and legal status within American society. Education may be a significant advantage to these individuals, as this may help to alleviate some of the cultural/social fears many have about immigration by making them more assimilated into American culture.
In conclusion, the issue of immigration remains an important and influential one, but a combination of factors including outright prejudice, globalization and industrialization have led to immigrants having much more trouble fitting into modern American society today than ever before. While immigrants in all eras of American history have shown a great deal of potential in terms of what they contribute to this country, there is still a great deal of opposition from many people who view them as the ‘Other’ who are just trying to take their jobs and force native citizens to pay for their welfare. By studying several aspects that most likely to influence attitudes toward immigration, we found that immigration has increased in frequency at a steady rate for the past 50 years. Furthermore, anti-immigrant attitudes and support for restrictive immigration policies are highly correlated, and the U.S government has indeed restricted immigration directly and indirectly.
Even though immigrants have brought a significant amount of wealth and development for U.S society, native attitudes towards immigrants only get worse due to the perceived threat of taking jobs and changing their culture. Low employment rate and high crime rates are the two major issues that have been blamed on immigrants, regardless of their actual culpability in these statistics. The solution, then, is to provide further education and bring about social change to increase native acceptance and tolerance of immigrants, in order to diminish instances of prejudice and discrimination. It is only through these measures that immigrants can have an honest chance of achieving the American Dream.
Works Cited
Andreescu, Viviana. “Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Immigration Policy in United
Kingdom.” Journal of Identity and Migration Studies 5(2) (2011): 61.
Brettell, Caroline B., and Faith G. Nibbs. "Immigrant suburban settlement and the “threat” to
middle class status and identity: The case of Farmers Branch, Texas." International Migration 49.1 (2011): 1-30.
Castillo, Mario K. "Immigration Consequences: A Primer for Texas Criminal Defense Attorneys
in Light of Padilla v. Kentucky." Baylor Law Review 63.3 (2011): 587.
Facchini, Giovanni, and Anna Maria Mayda. Individual Attitudes Towards Immigrants: Welfare-
Goździak, Elżbieta M. "To dream or not to dream: The effects of immigration status,
discrimination, and parental influence on Latino children’s access to education." Migration Studies (2014): mnu021.
Immigration Policy Center. “How the United States Immigration System Works: A Fact Sheet.”
Immigration Policy Center. <http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/how-united-states-immigration-system-works-fact-sheet>.
Jones, Garett, and W. Schneider. "IQ in the production function: Evidence from immigrant
earnings." Economic Inquiry 48.3 (2010): 743-755.
Lee, Jennifer and Frank D. Bean. “Reinventing the Color Line – Immigration and America’s
New Racial/Ethnic Divide.” Social Forces 85(2) (December 2007): 561-586.
Legraine, P., & Myers, J.J. Immigrants: Your Country Needs Them. Princeton University Press,
2007.
Morales, Amanda, Socorro Herrera, and Kevin Murry. "Navigating the waves of social and
political capriciousness: Inspiring perspectives from DREAM-eligible immigrant students." Journal of Hispanic Higher Education 10.3 (2011): 266-283.
Payan, Tony. "The Immigration Debate in Texas." Research paper, James A. Baker III Institute
for Public Policy, Rice University, Houston, Texas (2013).
“President Obama’s Unilateral Action on Immigration Has No Precedent.” The Washington Post.
December 3, 2014. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obamas-unilateral-action-on-immigration-has-no-precedent/2014/12/03/3fd78650-79a3-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html>.
Sabo, Samantha, et al. "Everyday violence, structural racism and mistreatment at the US–Mexico
border." Social Science & Medicine 109 (2014): 66-74.
Takei, Isao, Rogelio Saenz, and Jing Li. "Cost of being a Mexican immigrant and being a
Mexican non-citizen in California and Texas." Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 31.1 (2009): 73-95.
Waters, Mary C. “Ethnic and Racial Identities of Second-Generation Black Immigrants in New
York City.” International Migration Review 28(4) (Winter 1994): 795-820.
