Freedom and Opportunity in America: Thesis Statement

The controversial question of whether immigration is a threat to the U.S. or not has plagued American Society ever since a huge influx of immigrants came during the 1900s. Some Americans then and now called “Nativists” who are considered to be “the most outspoken critics of immigration, feared that the American way of life and even the republic itself, was in danger from the constant stream of newcomers” (Damms and Jensen par.1). In simple terms, Nativists’ seen immigrants as a threat to U.S. Society and believed they would overpower the Anglo-Saxon race. However, the Nativist perspective is rather ignorant and filled with mythical beliefs that immigrants negatively affected the U.S. in culture, politics, and economics. A couple of beliefs that Nativists’ upheld and may still uphold, are that immigrants are trying to steal their jobs, that many had the intention of overthrowing the U.S. government, and that immigrants need to assimilate. On the contrary, immigrants historically have had more of a positive impact than a negative impact like forming new jobs, coming to the U.S. with good intentions to seek a better life and opportunities, and diversifying the U.S.

One of the most prominent beliefs of Nativists was immigrants were supposedly trying to steal jobs from them. An example of this belief being present was during the 19th century when nativists held a deep grudge towards Chinese immigrants for apparently “stealing” their jobs, due to their prominence in the American Workforce and employers hiring them in large numbers (Shi 779). The resentment towards Chinese immigrants was strong enough for Congress to permanently extend the already established Chinese exclusion act of 1882. The Chinese exclusion act states:

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That from and after the expiration of ninety days next after the passage of this Act, and until the expiration of ten years next after the passage of this Act, the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States be, and the same is hereby, suspended; and during such suspension, it shall not be lawful for any Chinese laborer to come, or, having so come after the expiration of said ninety days, to remain within the United States. (Congress par.3)

However, this belief as portrayed in the example of Nativists’ hate towards the Chinese minority group contains a fallacy. Immigrants do not steal jobs; they generate jobs for the U.S. A prime example of immigrants generating jobs in the U.S. would be through the use of businesses. In fact, historically many big-name brands are owned by immigrants. One notable big-name brand is the jean company, Levi Strauss. Levi Strauss was an American entrepreneur from Buttenheim, Bavaria (Vidar par.1) who successfully created jeans specifically for miners, which eventually came to be popular to wear in future generations to the present (Vidar par.9). Many kind things were said about him, especially after his death “on September 26, 1902” (Vidar par.7), in fact, “The San Francisco Board of Trade” said,

“the great causes of education and charity have likewise suffered a signal loss in the death of Mr. Strauss, whose splendid endowments to the University of California will be an enduring testimonial of his worth as a liberal, public-minded citizen and whose numberless unostentatious acts of charity in which neither race nor creed was recognized, exemplified his broad and generous love for and sympathy with humanity.” (qtd. in Vidar par.8).

Based on the examples and evidence provided on both the Chinese minority group and how immigrants such as Levi Strauss generated jobs by starting their own businesses, they represent how immigrants were wrongly persecuted by Nativists based on their fallacy that immigrants were trying to steal jobs. When in reality immigrants like Levi Strauss were generating jobs through companies, which opened up more job positions in both the office and factory setting. These two examples, particularly the second example, show that most immigrants expressed a strong love for not only their people but for humanity as one which was portrayed by Levi Strauss.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Besides nativist's ideological fallacy, that immigrants were trying to steal jobs. Nativists also believed that many immigrants had the desire to disestablish the American government. This belief was held strongly by many nativists, especially after the first world war when Vladimir Lenin turned Russia into a communist country, which frightened many Americans (Shi 936). This fear resulted in the belief that immigrants from Europe and other countries inspired by the event occurring in Russia had the desire to establish communism and anarchism in America. The fear of many Americans resulted in U.S. Attorney A. Mitchell Palmer (Palmer par.1) putting in place various raids to find disloyal citizens of communist and anarchist political beliefs, which resulted in many immigrants being deported back to their home countries (Shi 936). Not surprisingly his raids were filled with “poor communications, and faulty planning” (Shi 936). Nevertheless, Palmer still maintained that:

“the 'Reds' were criminal aliens, and secondly that the American Government must prevent crime, it was decided that there could be no nice distinctions drawn between the theoretical ideals of the radicals and their actual violations of our national laws. An assassin may have brilliant intellectuality, and he may be able to excuse his murder or robbery with fine oratory, but any theory which excuses crime is not wanted in America. This is no place for the criminal to flourish, nor will he do so, so long as the rights of common citizenship can be exerted to prevent him” (Palmer par.5).

Yet, the intentions of the grand majority of immigrants entering the U.S. have been to seek opportunity and a better life in the U.S. Some immigrant families affected by the Palmer raids, for example, wanted to be with their loved ones who may have been falsely accused of communist leanings and deported back to their countries. These immigrant families, in this case, went as far as writing a letter known as the “Aching Hearts of Mothers And Babes” to the government begging that they be deported along with their accused loved ones. One part of the letter stated, “Assuredly we do not overstep the bounds of sheer humanity and elementary justice when we ask…to join our men and that we are deported with them to our native land” (Caminetti par.3). This example demonstrates that families like the ones from the palmer raids were normal loving families who had no ill intentions towards America, even those accused had no harmful intentions; they were just looking for opportunity and a safe haven away from the corruption that occurs in their homelands. In fact, many immigrants came to America for more opportunities. Take Dolores Martin, for example, an immigrant who describes why she and her family decided to leave Tuy, Spain, and pursue a life in the US during the 1920s in an interview with Willa Appel. Dolores’ exact words were

“Yes, a little small town. A very, very, very small town. I remember the station there where there was a train station. And there were very very few little houses. There was a very very little town there. And it was a very, very poor town. People were very, very poor. So that's why my father and mother came to this country, to make a living, like everyone else that left their small town” (Martin pg.1).

Both Dolores’ statement and the families affected by the Palmer raids prove that the nativists’ belief that immigrants were trying to overthrow the government is false. In reality, immigrants entering the U.S. were and still are seeking a better living and opportunities away from their home countries, which could not or chose not to provide the resources for people to maintain a good living as shown in the examples above such as Communist Russia and Tuy, Spain.

Unfortunately, Nativists could not see the good intentions of immigrants and included them in their ideology of assimilation. Assimilation is the mythical belief of Nativists that minority groups should conform to American culture and forget about their foreign way in order “to save the Anglo-Saxon race from being contaminated by alien immigrants” (Shi 780). Nativists pushed this belief onto immigrants not only to preserve the Anglo-Saxon race but so that they can “successfully learn the new way of life necessary for full acceptance” (qtd. in Alba and Nee par.3). Basically, Nativists’ wanted no diversity within the country since it supposedly threatened the bloodline and society of the Anglo-Saxon race. Despite this prominent belief among Nativists’, the diversity that immigrants brought to the U.S. and still do to this day has had a positive impact on the U.S. One of the positive aspects of diversity is that it can lessen the ignorance among Americans that hold stereotypes of different minority groups. The first Lady of the United States at the time named Hillary Clinton who gave a cultural diversity speech in Samarkand, Uzbekistan, in 1997 (Clinton, title) was even taken aback by how intelligent and confident the people of Uzbekistan were while visiting and going about her political affairs in that country, she said “ I will say it when I return home I have never met with groups of young people, young men and young women who were better prepared and asked better questions than the ones I met with in both Tashkent and Bukhara” (Clinton par.1). Even though this speech did not take place on U.S. soil nor did it have anything to do with immigration or Uzbekistanis’ living in the U.S., Clinton’s statement shows that her perspective on the diverse population of Uzbekistani people has broadened and made her realize that these group of foreigners were more intelligent and well put together than she expected them to be. Moreover, her statement reveals that foreigners are prepared and intelligent individuals who just want to make the world a better place. Another positive aspect of diversity is it brings new innovations to improve the lives of many. Take co-founder of the internet search engine Google Sergey Brin a Russian immigrant and his partner Larry Page whose “enduring love for Google comes from a strong desire to create technology products that enrich millions of people’s lives in deep and meaningful ways” (Brin and Page par.1). Brin and Page’s statement displays the positive impact of immigration on innovation within American Society and around the world, which in this case is technological innovation. Both the statement of Brin and Page as well as the statement of Clinton prove that the Nativists’ belief that immigrants should assimilate into American culture is wrong. All immigrants want is to make positive contributions to America and are intelligent people.

The final analysis of the historical negative beliefs that Nativists held towards immigrants coming to the U.S. versus the positive impact that immigrants have actually made within the U.S. reveals the beliefs of Nativists are false. Immigrants were never stealing the jobs of other Americans, overthrow the government, nor did they need to assimilate into American society. Immigrants, if anything formed new jobs, had good intentions of coming to the U.S. seeking a better life and new opportunities, as well as diversifying the U.S. These positive impacts still hold true even in today’s time as billions of immigrants enter the U.S.