An 1896 lament about Italians and Eastern Europeans sounds eerily familiar today

[pismoe]

some talk , video on TRUMPS immigration plan --- https://www.conservativereview.com/...mps-immigration-plan-rooted-in-security-first ---

 

[Coyote]

well , you have your Opinion and I have mine . The problem is proximity of the invaders coming to the USA . Even wittle baby invaders invade , get supported by taxpayers and then eventually get a vote to gain more Welfare / support or help paid for by taxpayers . Italians couldn't easily stream into the USA in the early 1900s . Now the invaders just walk across the border Coyote !!

You call them "invaders".

I call them "people".

They are no different than the people who came over in the turn of the century. And the rhetoric is no different.

Follow the law, is that a hard concept for you?

It doesn't make them any less "people" - no different than the hoards of desperate people coming in at the turn of the century. There was no such thing as "illegal" immigration then and the zenophobic rhetoric was the same. In the end - despite the "hoards" - we are still a vibrant and rich country - richer for their contributions, legal or illegal.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

The OP is just blowing smoke with this huge fail of a point he's trying to make.
The illegal Mex's today don't go through Ellis Island or any other orderly legal system.
They sneak in, taking jobs, government benefits, keeping wages down.
When the legal ones come in, they refuse to learn the language and assimilate, and instead demand we bend over for them and all the while they complain about Americans and scream racism anytime things don't go their way.

Fuck the illegals from south of our border, brown has E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G south of the U.S. border all the way down to the southern tip of Brazil. They have more than they'll ever need already and anything more is just pure greed on their part !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Coyote]

The OP is just blowing smoke with this huge fail of a point he's trying to make.
The illegal Mex's today don't go through Ellis Island or any other orderly legal system.
They sneak in, taking jobs, government benefits, keeping wages down.
When the legal ones come in, they refuse to learn the language and assimilate, and instead demand we bend over for them and all the while they complain about Americans and scream racism anytime things don't go their way.

Fuck the illegals from south of our border, brown has E-V-E-R-Y-T-H-I-N-G south of the U.S. border all the way down to the southern tip of Brazil. They have more than they'll ever need already and anything more is just pure greed on their part !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I remember reading something recently about those jobs. A lot of them are back breaking tedious labor that Americans won't take. Some raised the pay to a competitive level (I can't remember which industry, maybe dairy) - and still, Americans woudn't take it and would rather work flipping burgers at McDonalds for the same or less pay.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America... .

Processed?

So you're trying to conflate the contest of ILLEGALS WHO ARE NOT BEING "PROCESSED" but who are coming here, INTENTIONALLY IGNORING OUR LAWS... with those who came here, comporting themselves within the immigration laws?

ROFLMNAO!

You can NOT make this crap up.

OP... PUHLEAZE.... find us an example of ANY contest of LEGAL IMMIGRATION. ANY...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

It doesn't make them any less "people" -.

Anyone here, or anywhere else arguing that Illegal Aliens aren't "people"?

.

.

.

Anyone?

.

.

.

Anyone at all?

 

[Coyote]

It doesn't make them any less "people" -.

Anyone here, or anywhere else arguing that Illegal Aliens aren't "people"?

.

.

.

Anyone?

.

.

.

Anyone at all?

"invaders"

 

[pismoe]

Coyotes post #42 , invaders Coyote , illegal aliens plus of course their wittle anchor babies .

 

[Papageorgio]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

and the point is....


they came in legally, thru an approved immigration point?


I dont' see a problem with that.

And yet THEY DID see a problem with that and used the same BS reasons many are using now.

I have no idea issue with people immigrating to this country legally. I have an issue with those here illegally.

 

[bodecea]

Those European and Italian immigrants who were dirt poor.......did their white privilege help them?????

They arrived after the civil war. Their ancestors from their homelands...obviously didn't own slaves.

How come their descendants now must hold blame for slavery and white privilege? ?????

Italians weren't considered "white" back then. The definition of "white" has never been finite.

 

[westwall]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

Soooooooo, how many people are we talking about back then? A million? Two? How about 4 million from 1880 to 1920. They comprised 10 percent of the total foreign population in the US. And....they were the Mexicans of the era. They worked cheap and took jobs away from the lower classes who couldn't work that cheaply.

However, lets' look at the differences....they almost ALL began to learn English and worked harder than hell to assimilate to the US. They didn't decide that they would only speak their native language and follow their culture instead of becoming Americans.

They adapted to the laws of the US and abandoned the laws of Italy (except for the Mafia of course, they maintained the old ways) they never once tried to push their laws on us.

Yes, superficially the two times are similar, but when you look deeper the differences are glaring.

Not really.

The first generation did not always assimilate so well. They had their own communities, even their own language papers and stores - Yiddish, Italian, Russian, Chinese - you heard of China Town and Little Italy. Typically, the second generation picked up the good language skills and the culture. They maintained many aspects of their own culture that in turn enriched ours. Each succeeding generation became more "American" - then, and now.

In terms of breaking the law...well, what is different between then and now? Who's trying to push "their laws" on us? There are criminal gangs now, but there were then: Irish, East European, Jewish, Russian, Italian....poverty breeds criminality.

The first generation did little, I will grant you. However they insisted that the younger ones learn the language and adapt to the American ways.

 

[Jroc]

well , you have your Opinion and I have mine . The problem is proximity of the invaders coming to the USA . Even wittle baby invaders invade , get supported by taxpayers and then eventually get a vote to gain more Welfare / support or help paid for by taxpayers . Italians couldn't easily stream into the USA in the early 1900s . Now the invaders just walk across the border Coyote !!

You call them "invaders".

I call them "people".

They are no different than the people who came over in the turn of the century. And the rhetoric is no different.

Follow the law, is that a hard concept for you?

It doesn't make them any less "people" - no different than the hoards of desperate people coming in at the turn of the century. There was no such thing as "illegal" immigration then and the zenophobic rhetoric was the same. In the end - despite the "hoards" - we are still a vibrant and rich country - richer for their contributions, legal or illegal.

That's idiocy, we have laws for a reason. Without them there is anarchy. You're ideology notwithstanding.

 

[koshergrl]

Of course there was illegal immigration back then...what a patently stupid comment.

 

[candycorn]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

I'm surprised you had to go back to 1896. I wonder how the "true Americans" felt about the Italian Mafia and the organized crime that basically had a foothold in every city and town in the nation during the 20's and 30's. Those who talk about crime today are profoundly ignorant of what the word means.

 

[Meathead]

In those days immigrants were vetted. There is no vetting going on on the southern border.

 

[irosie91]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

I'm surprised you had to go back to 1896. I wonder how the "true Americans" felt about the Italian Mafia and the organized crime that basically had a foothold in every city and town in the nation during the 20's and 30's. Those who talk about crime today are profoundly ignorant of what the word means.

your statement is idiotic------the "MAFIA" did not have a "foothold" in every city and town in the nation.------try to achieve sanity

 

[candycorn]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

I'm surprised you had to go back to 1896. I wonder how the "true Americans" felt about the Italian Mafia and the organized crime that basically had a foothold in every city and town in the nation during the 20's and 30's. Those who talk about crime today are profoundly ignorant of what the word means.

your statement is idiotic------the "MAFIA" did not have a "foothold" in every city and town in the nation.------try to achieve sanity

You're right; in many cases, they owned the town lock stock and barrel; corrupting both the police force and the governments of those towns.

 

[EverCurious]

1887 Chinese Exclusion Act, renewed in 1892, and made permanent in 1902. Ban on /legal/ immigration.

There is no historical allowance of "illegal aliens" who don't pay into the country. If you want to be part of America and gain all it's benefits then pay your taxes. Its really not a hard concept...

For the open borders folks:

How much of your paycheck would /you/ give up to allow /illegal/ immigrants? 10%? 20%? Citizens end up paying in about 30% of their paychecks with state and federal taxes - might get some fed back, say 5% ish. Would /you/ be willing to give up say 20-25% of your income so that someone can stay in the US illegally?

 

[irosie91]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

I'm surprised you had to go back to 1896. I wonder how the "true Americans" felt about the Italian Mafia and the organized crime that basically had a foothold in every city and town in the nation during the 20's and 30's. Those who talk about crime today are profoundly ignorant of what the word means.

your statement is idiotic------the "MAFIA" did not have a "foothold" in every city and town in the nation.------try to achieve sanity

You're right; in many cases, they owned the town lock stock and barrel; corrupting both the police force and the governments of those towns.

what is your agenda? your statement is beyond idiotic-----the mafia did not have five million members

 

[candycorn]

In 1896, Ellis Island was just four years old, but already more than 1 million immigrants had entered the United States through its port. In the coming years, the center would process 12 million people seeking a new home in America -- 69 percent of whom were from Eastern, Central, or Southern Europe. The demographics of the country were changing, much to the fear of some.

In an essay titled "Restriction of Immigration," Atlantic author Francis A. Walker took issue with the "vast throngs of ignorant and brutalized peasantry" from Europe immigrating to America. His argument: increasing foreign-born populations would put a "hopeless burden on our country," and take work away from native-born citizens. He writes:

No longer it is a matter of course that that ever industrious and temperate man can find work in the United States...When the country was flooded with ignorant and unskilled foreigners, who could do nothing but the lowest kind of labor, Americans instinctively shrank from the contact and the competition thus offered to them. So long as manual labor, in whatever field, was to be done by all, each in his place, there was no revolt at it; but when working on railroads and canals became the sign of a want of education and of a low social condition, our own people gave it up, and left it to those who were able to do that, and nothing better.

Sound familiar?

The anxiety about immigration in the early 20th century hits a lot of the same notes as the anxiety about immigration today does," says Richard Alba, distinguished professor of sociology at the CUNY Graduate Center. "It's the fear of the undermining the economic position of 'the native majority,' and also the fear of being swamped demographically by new groups that are racially and culturally different from the mainstream."



Its the same old playbook used against Irish and Italians that they are using today. I'm sure there were even manesque women like Ann Coulter talking about we need to build a fence then too


Read more From the Archives: The 'Hopeless Burden' of Immigration

I'm surprised you had to go back to 1896. I wonder how the "true Americans" felt about the Italian Mafia and the organized crime that basically had a foothold in every city and town in the nation during the 20's and 30's. Those who talk about crime today are profoundly ignorant of what the word means.

your statement is idiotic------the "MAFIA" did not have a "foothold" in every city and town in the nation.------try to achieve sanity

You're right; in many cases, they owned the town lock stock and barrel; corrupting both the police force and the governments of those towns.

what is your agenda? your statement is beyond idiotic-----the mafia did not have five million members

Do tell....you saw the employment records?