Conservatives Should Stand for English, Not Against Immigration
In a recent article in National Review, Jason Richwine details assimilation problems among Hispanic Americans. “They’re not just like the Irish,” he begins his essay, “or the Italians or the Poles, for that matter.” Those groups of immigrants arrived in the United States as “ethnics,” were outperformed by their children and then their grandchildren, and were eventually assimilated into American society. Hispanics, Richwine claims, are another story. Since immigrants from Latin America began arriving in waves in the United States around 1965, they have achieved much less in the way of socioeconomic status than their European immigrant counterparts from the early twentieth century. Richwine cites studies showing that second generation Hispanic immigrants significantly outperform their parents, but then progress stalls at the third generation. He also cites surveys showing that the majority of American-born Hispanics describe themselves first as “Hispanic” or “Latino,” with only 46 percent answering “American.”
Richwine’s solution, and the solution of many conservatives over the past few years, is to slow the rate of immigration to the United States — both legal and illegal. The only way to seriously tackle the problem, he claims, is to “let go of our sepia-toned memories of immigration past.” Richwine is correct to point out that there is a difference in performance between today’s Hispanic immigrants and yesterday’s Europeans, but he is wrong in his conclusion. His essay does not even begin to question the reasons for that disparity, leaving the strong implication that it is entirely a matter of culture: Hispanics are just inherently less capable of assimilating into American society than Europeans.
This is not the case. The assimilation difference between immigrants from Europe in the early twentieth century and immigrants from Latin America in the early twenty-first is not so much their nationalities as it is their eras. Immigrants have not changed. The United States has.
When European immigrants arrived in the United States a century ago, the country was guided by the same principle as every other country when it comes to immigration: “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.” This principle applied to law, traditions, customs, and most importantly, language. European immigrants assimilated and thrived in the United States for one simple reason: because they had to. They were entering a do-or-die situation, and they knew it.
Today’s Hispanic immigrants enter an America plagued by “cultural sensitivity.” We bend over backwards to make certain that immigrants don’t have to conform to our way of doing things. By Richwine’s own admission, second generation Hispanic immigrants outperform their parents at similar levels to European immigrants past. The children of immigrants want to assimilate and succeed — they always do. But instead of giving them the tools to do so, instead of giving our new immigrants training in English and in American civics, our system lumps them all together in a group, provides them with Spanish translations, adjusts its laws to reflect cultural diversity, and further divides our country in ways that it need not be divided.
The importance of language in holding a nation together cannot be understated. Language is the greatest of barriers. Liberals like to talk about cultural tolerance and understanding, but they often forget that when two cultures cannot speak the same language, they cannot understand each other. Any attempt to reform our immigration system needs to focus strongly on English education.
President Obama will most likely attempt comprehensive immigration reform sometime in the next few years. Instead of advocating killing the bill because it allows or legitimizes too many immigrants, conservatives should fight to make it truly comprehensive. Border security, tougher laws regarding employment of illegal aliens, a guest worker program, and a pathway to eventual citizenship for those illegals who wish to stay in the United States are all good and practical things, but they are all useless unless America can once again become a great “melting pot.”
During the last immigration debate, conservatives sought to kill reform with all the suicidal zeal of a Palestinian bomber. During our next immigration debate, conservatives should take the opportunity to actually stand for something — to promote the idea of making English our national language, and strengthening our educational institutions to make certain that the children of immigrants, who generally want to learn English and are statistically much more capable of doing so, are afforded the opportunities they deserve.
Related posts:
