U.S. Immigration Debate Is a Road Well Traveled

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/07/AR2006050700721.html?sub=AR

U.S. Immigration Debate Is a Road Well Traveled
Early-20th-Century Concerns Resurface

By Michael Powell
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 8, 2006; Page A01

NEW YORK -- They were portrayed as a disreputable lot, the immigrant hordes of this great city.

The Germans refused for decades to give up their native tongue and raucous beer gardens. The Irish of Hell's Kitchen brawled and clung to political sinecures. The Jews crowded into the Lower East Side, speaking Yiddish, fomenting socialism and resisting forced assimilation. And by their sheer numbers, the immigrants depressed wages in the city.

As for the multitudes of Italians, who settled Mulberry Street, East Harlem and Canarsie? In 1970, seven decades after their arrival, Italians lagged behind every immigrant group in educational achievement.

The bitter arguments of the past echo loudly these days as Congress debates toughening the nation's immigration laws and immigrants from Latin America and Asia swell the streets of U.S. cities in protest. Most of the concerns voiced today -- that too many immigrants seek economic advantage and fail to understand democracy, that they refuse to learn English, overcrowd homes and overwhelm public services -- were heard a century ago. And there was a nub of truth to some complaints, not least that the vast influx of immigrants drove down working-class wages.

If it's not banned, it's legal. I'd assume there's no law saying that a 46-year-old man is permitted to go into a bar and buy a glass of beer; there is a law saying that a 15-year-old boy cannot. There is no law granting me permission to hug my son; there is a law prohibiting me from molesting him. But, nonetheless, it is legal for me to buy a beer and hug my son.

The Soviet system more or less assumed everything not declared legal was illegal. That's hyperbole, of course, but there were so many laws that were essentially unknown, and so many laws authorizing licit activity (instead of simply banning only illicit activity) that there's a kernel of truth to it.

.....is happening today too:spank: but with different illegal aliens.:wtf: But of course many won't admit it because they themselves are likely illegal aliens.:spank:

IF we ever solve this illegal alien issue:bounce: and return to the days of :hi:unions:loveya:, then and only then, will workers be able to demand better wages and get them.:bounce:

There were no laws against beating your wife, having children work in the mines or selling cocaine. Now there are laws.

Child labor, indentured servants and slaves also drove down working-class wages. But I wouldn't advocate a return to these forms of labor anymore than I would advocate a return to uncontrolled immigration.

Comparing two different historical periods sometimes can lead to false assumptions and false securities.

Why is it just our southern border that causes so much concern,could it be the other border is populated with persons with white skin and the southern border has all those people with brown skin trying to enter our country?,most americans(mostly white),tell you racism is not the cause for alarm,when someone tell you racism is not the cause,you can bet your last peso,racism is the cause.

I live in Vermont and can tell you that when hundreds of thousands of French Canadians came into New England about fifty years ago there was a lot of wailing about that, too.

Most of it is about the sheer quantity of immigrants coming from Mexico.

The Opinionator has another view on this same article at http://theopinionator.com/Politics/immigration_thennow1.html

the 1850s.

From http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/americavotes/know-nothing.html, a letter describing the presidential campaign platform of the American Party (better known as 'The Know-Nothings')

"1. Repeal of all naturalization laws
2. None but native Americans for office.
3. A pure American common school system.
4. War to the hilt, on political Romanism.
5. Opposition to the formation of military companies composed of foreigners.
6. The advocacy of a sound, healthy and safe nationality.
7. Hostility to all Papal influences, when brought to bear against the Republic.
8. American Institutions and American Sentiments.
9. More stringent and effective immigration laws.
10. The amplest protections to Protestant interests.
11. The doctrines of the revered Washington.
12. The sending back of all foreign _____.
13. Formation of societies to protect American interests.
14. Eternal enmity to all who attempt to carry out the principles of a foreign church on state.
15. Our country, our whole country, and nothing but our country.
16. Finally, American Laws, and American….."

The blank line in #12 is for a word that I couldn't make out.

VERY little has changed in 150+ years, other than that the anti-Catholic bigotry is a little more veiled now.