Immigration Assimilation

Immigration has a tremendous influence on the dynamics of a state, sometimes permanently transforming the demography, culture, economy, and politics of the receiving country. Today, countries like North Korea and Russia remain stagnant by these measures due to strict immigration policy and therefore extremely low immigrant traffic, whereas Western European countries are greatly impacted by immigrant populations, especially following the Syrian refugee crisis. Immigrants increasingly flock to industrialized first world countries in search of asylum and the prospect of economic stability. However, the destructive impact of immigration on global human development is made obvious through the example of the United States. In the United States, the
ethnic and cultural differences between immigrants and native citizens threaten national identity; immigrants not only displace American workers but also inflate housing costs in large cities; and at present, there is no void in American society that requires the recruitment of immigrants, making assimilation increasingly difficult. Perhaps most importantly though, “once begun, migratory flows acquire a momentum” (Massey 632), which leads to additional immigration and so on, perpetuating the disadvantages immigrants pose on the host society. The profound transformation of immigration to the United States throughout the last century is evident on the streets of America’s largest cities. Today’s immigrants bare little ethnic and cultural resemblance to European-born immigrants of the past, threatening the national identity of the United States. According to demographic projections,
Fleming 2
“Americans of European decent will become a minority in the United States sometime during the next century” (Massey 632). That is to say, European immigrants and their descendants who created the sociocultural fabric of the United States are fast becoming foreigners in certain neighborhoods and cities. In fact, this shift has already unfolded in some metropolitan areas. Most notably, in Los Angeles, the Hispanic population (47.5%) rivals that of all other ethnic groups combined; in Miami, there is an overwhelming Cuban presence; and New York houses the largest ethnic Chinese population outside Asian countries. In any country, as immigration threatens national identity and the native heritage loses its dominance in society to that of immigrants, conflict arises. In his study, “Theories of International Immigration Policy – A Comparative Analysis,” Eytan Meyers argues that “social cleavages, social unrest and industrial unrest within American society,” catalyzed by tension between ethnic and social groups, “foster fears of losing national identity and of a national breakdown” (1253). Therefore, immigration threatens a country’s national identity because of the disparities between immigrants and native-born citizens in terms of language, culture, and beliefs, which in turn creates conflict destructive to human development. Secondly, not only do immigrants displace American workers but immigration also inflates housing costs in large destination cities. While the American economy is competitive even in periods of economic prosperity, immigration only increases the ferocity of the job market. Taken from the research paper “Labor market effects of immigration in the United States and Europe” by Ira Gang and Francisco Rivera-Baitz, it is concluded that “domestic groups with human capital endowments similar to the immigrant population
Fleming 3 experience wage reductions” (173). More specifically, working class immigrants are attractive to companies as they accept cheaper wages, creating an increasingly competitive and unstable economic environment. This is also true of highly skilled immigrants, “whom possess the characteristics (occupational skills and education) necessary to compete with natives” (Bean 46). In other words, since the groups are substitutes for one another, immigrants can replace their American counterparts. Ultimately, it is this competition between immigrant and American-born citizen that has proven wildly unpopular and bias, and further, detrimental to human development. Additionally, the influx of immigrants in large cities inflates housing costs. Just as immigration leads to greater competition for jobs, immigration also increases the demand for housing in cities. For example, in Los Angeles, “rental housing experienced major price increases from 1967 to 1983” (Muller and Espenshade), which can be readily explained by high waves of immigration from Mexico. This detriment caused by immigration is felt globally. According to Albert Siaz in his paper, “Immigration and Housing Rents in American Cities,” immigration is “one of the important correlates of short- and long-term inflation of housing prices in Sydney, the main immigrant city in Australia, and [similarly] in Toronto and Vancouver, Canada” (Siaz 347). Based on this evidence, there is a direct correlation between immigration and housing prices – “immigration pushes up the demand for housing in destination areas. Rents increase in the short run, and housing prices catch up” (Siaz 363). Immigrants not only displace native-born citizens from their working environments but also inflate the cost of living in larger cities, both of which are destructive to human development.
Fleming 4
Lastly, in modern day, there is no void in American society that demands the help of immigrants, thus reducing the prospects for assimilation.
Moreover, this trend extends globally on account of overpopulation and increasingly competitive living conditions. Historically, immigration has been advantageous to human development following war or in post-industrial societies as a deliberate attempt to expand the population. In the United States, for example, “two structural conditions–the long hiatus in immigration and the economic boom that accompanied it–are primarily responsible for the remarkable assimilation of European immigrants into the United States” (Massey 643). Without these factors, assimilation of immigrants into American society would tell a dramatically different story. And in fact, “new immigrants enter a highly stratified society characterized by high income inequality and growing labor market segmentation that will provide fewer opportunities for upward mobility” (Massey 648). Not only does immigration prove detrimental to the receiving country but is also a massive risk and can have negative consequences for immigrants and their families. As evident in the United States, immigrants increasingly segregate themselves and, “national origins and geographic destinations of the new immigrants are highly concentrated, creating large foreign-language and cultural communities in many areas” (Massey 648). Such communities create a familiarity for immigrant groups but oppositely, are alien to Euro-American’s, restricting immigrants to remain inside a cultural bubble and creating tensions between ethnic
groups.
Broadly speaking, the detriment immigration poses to human development globally is only perpetuated by more immigration. As exemplified in major American cities, “networks of social ties give rise to enclave communities that act as magnets for additional
Fleming 5 immigration” (Massey 643), which threatens national identity and displaces native-born workers as well as inflates housing costs in larger cities. Also, in the presence of modern overpopulation and thus heightened competition, there is little room for immigrants, making the prospect of assimilation increasingly unattainable.