Culling the Masses: The Democratic Origins of Racist Immigration Policy in the Americas
Author
: David scott Fitzgerald and David Cook-Martín
Subject
: Immigrants—Government policy—America—History, Racism—Political aspects—America—History, America—Race relations—Political aspects—History, America—Ethnic relations—Political aspects—History,Racist Immigration Policy America—Emigration and immigration, Government policy—History, Citizenship—America—History, Emigration and immigration law, America Politics and government, Democracy—America—History, Racist Democracy
Publisher
: Harvard University Press
Summary :Juan Bautista Alberdi, the leading Argentine intellectual
of the nineteenth century, famously observed that “in the
Americas, to govern is to populate.”1 Open immigration policies
in the nineteenth century allowed nearly anyone to walk off the
docks in Buenos Aires, Havana, New York, or Halifax. By the 1930s,
intellectuals from Argentina to Cuba had attached a qualifier to his
dictum: “to govern is to populate well.”2 The governments of every independent
country in the Americas created the legal and bureaucratic
machinery to cull only “ethnically desirable” human stock from the millions
yearning to breathe free.
The United States led the way in creating racist policies beginning
with its nationality laws in 1790 and its immigration laws in 1803.3
In his book American Ideals written in 1897, just four years before he
became president, Theodore Roosevelt praised the democratic wisdom
of the United States and the other Anglophone settler societies for
selecting immigrants on racial grounds. Like most contemporary leaders,
Roosevelt believed that Chinese deserved exclusion because they were
racially inferior and incapable of governing themselves in a democracy. He warned against the dangers of business interests attempting to attract
Chinese immigrants to work as indentured servants. In Roosevelt’s view,
Chinese were only one step up from the descendants of black slaves,
which plantation owners had imported to the detriment of free white
workers. Democracies needed racist policies to protect their citizens and
democracy itself.4
Roosevelt would have been astonished to learn that a century later, a
nearly universal consensus took it for granted that democracy and racism
cannot coexist. Racial selection of immigrants had become taboo. An
academic study of major liberal- democratic countries of immigration in
1995 declared that the “boundaries of legitimate discussion of immigration
policy are narrow, precluding argument over the ethnic composition
of migrant streams, and subjecting those who criticize liberal policies to
charges of racism.”5 The ubiquitous racist immigration and nationality
laws that Roosevelt cherished had all but disappeared, beginning with
Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Cuba in the late 1930s and early 1940s
and finally extending to the United States and Canada in the 1960s and
Australia in the 1970s. While immigration policies continue to have a
differential impact on particular national- origin groups, and discriminatory
practices persist, the history of the region plainly shows that policies
have dramatically moved in the direction of non- racial selection.
Copies :
No. |
Barcode |
Location |
No. Shelf |
Availability |
1 |
00131496 |
Perpustakaan Pusat |
|
TIDAK DIPINJAMKAN |