Assimilation versus Immigration

Since the final decades of the twentieth century American culture has been challenged by an ever-growing economic and continuous immigration from Latin America. This immigration differs from past immigration due to a combination of illegality, scale, contiguity, regional concentration, persistence and historical presence. This particular and persistent infusion of Hispanic immigration threatens to divide the US into two peoples, two cultures, even two languages.

Continuous high immigration tends to retard the assimilation process and fosters ethnic enclaves that, all too often, accommodate semi-permanent ethnic communities These trends are exacerbated if the immigration occurs in conditions of official bilingualism and multiculturalism rather than of Americanization. Immigrants will be less likely to assimilate and more likely to retain ethnic identities and links with their places of origin.

It is well to ask at this point: what is America’s national identity? Historical roots show that culturally, linguistically and religiously, America was formed from northwestern European, Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture. So if Anglo-Protestant national culture is the defining quality in the formation of the American character, then that which threatens to alter that national culture will have profound repercussions for the character of that culture.

For the first two hundred and fifty tears of America’s growth its dynamic social structure derived from the ideological foundations of Anglo-Protestantism. After that point other influences enriched the America experience. But from America’s initial period of development came forth its distinct political culture expressed as the American Creed, embodied in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. This creed was the product of the Anglo-Protestant culture of the founding settlers. Key elements of that culture include the English language; Christianity; religious commitment; English concepts of the rule of law, including the responsibility of rulers and the rights of individuals; the dissenting Protestant values of individualism, the work ethic, the principle of merit, and equality before the law.

This imbued American culture from the start. Early visitors to America like Tocqueville were impressed by the common habits of self-reliance and voluntary co-operation that were seen everywhere. The Lewis and Clark expedition of 1803 was an exemplary manifestation of that character.

Today much of the debate about immigration looks at its economic impact. However, while that is important, the unique problems posed by Hispanic immigration are in the cultural and social context. The question now is, will the country remain one with a single national language and a core Anglo-Protestant culture or will it be transformed into a country with two peoples, two languages, and two worldviews?

The net effect of losing the American core culture and the common language may well undermine the already indeterminate American national identity which has been beset by the doctrines of unrestricted multiculturalism, political correctness, diversity; the rise of group identity over national identity; the growth of identity politics, the expanding numbers of immigrants with dual loyalties; and the growing predilection of America’s elites for transnational identities and allegiances.

If America were to be transformed into a country of two languages, two cultures, like Belgium or Canada, would it remain the nation it had become over the last two hundred and thirty years? It is well to wonder whether the United States would be what it is today if it had been settled by French or Spanish Catholics.

Whether the future course of events produces a new and better nation, posterity will show. Americans need to ask themselves whether they will take charge of their own destiny or be affected by events that, through loss of political will and national identity, spiral out of their control.

Lawrence S. Harris
© June 2007