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

[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

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

no-----I am simply not stupid-------I actually did-----in the course of my life come across ITALIAN americans who had relatives active in the Mafia----and DID live in an area of the USA that had lots of "MAFIA" and even
came across the pathologist who did autopsies on the bodies fished out of the PASSAIC RIVER-----------the mafia was very circumscribed GEOGRAPHICALLY and limited in numbers ----very limited----people had to be "special" to get in. (are you jealous) ------and I just happen to know their areas of activity---------there were no five million members. It was a real group and it really was into organized crime but existed in very limited numbers. I grew up in a Nazi town-----there Italians were called
"wops" ------and the "N" word was part of normal vocabulary for the descendants of founders of the town (founded before the revolutionary war) ----Lots of DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION also stunk up the place--------thus I understand who you are-----more dangerous to society than the mafia

 

[koshergrl]

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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

 

[candycorn]

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?

no-----I am simply not stupid-------I actually did-----in the course of my life come across ITALIAN americans who had relatives active in the Mafia----and DID live in an area of the USA that had lots of "MAFIA" and even
came across the pathologist who did autopsies on the bodies fished out of the PASSAIC RIVER-----------the mafia was very circumscribed GEOGRAPHICALLY and limited in numbers ----very limited----people had to be "special" to get in. (are you jealous) ------and I just happen to know their areas of activity---------there were no five million members. It was a real group and it really was into organized crime but existed in very limited numbers. I grew up in a Nazi town-----there Italians were called
"wops" ------and the "N" word was part of normal vocabulary for the descendants of founders of the town (founded before the revolutionary war) ----Lots of DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION also stunk up the place--------thus I understand who you are-----more dangerous to society than the mafia

SO was that a yes or a no?

 

[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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

 

[koshergrl]

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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

 

[Auld Phart]

"Millions come LEGALLY to USA. Calling Illegal aliens "undocumented immigrants" is like calling heroin dealers "undocumented pharmacists.""

J Woods

 

[Papageorgio]

My wife is Italian and she had male relatives that went to "work." That was in California.

 

[Coyote]

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.

Not necessarily. Many times it was the second generation that took it upon itself to cross the cultural divides. The parents might have clung to old country ways and traditions, but the younger ones went to American schools and picked up the culture very quickly - they can't help it. Kids learn, and want to fit in. They often become the bridge between the older generation and the American culture. It's no different than today.

 

[irosie91]

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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

That's nice-----the entire country was inundated with Sicilian criminals, EVERY TOWN AND VILLAGE AND HAMLET ----any place
in which there was any fermentation going on -----(even my grandmother made wine at home----right in the heart of mafia land---
NEW YORK CITY) and she never met a mafia person

 

[koshergrl]

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.

Not necessarily. Many times it was the second generation that took it upon itself to cross the cultural divides. The parents might have clung to old country ways and traditions, but the younger ones went to American schools and picked up the culture very quickly - they can't help it. Kids learn, and want to fit in. They often become the bridge between the older generation and the American culture. It's no different than today.

Unless your parents are black. In which case you live generation after generation segregated from the rest of the US in ghettos monitored and maintained by progressive masters.

 

[dblack]

Immigrant doctors were the original impetus for the AMA and the push for regulating medicine.

 

[koshergrl]

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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

That's nice-----the entire country was inundated with Sicilian criminals, EVERY TOWN AND VILLAGE AND HAMLET ----any place
in which there was any fermentation going on -----(even my grandmother made wine at home----right in the heart of mafia land---
NEW YORK CITY) and she never met a mafia person

So? You don't understand what a still does, do you? Your grandma didn't run a still. And it's always funny when ppl from thousands of miles away think they have a better understanding of the community we live in than we do. Do some fucking research. Bootlegging under the mob was RAMPANT in the pacific NW.

 

[irosie91]

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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

oh----so you are telling me that criminals had contact with crimminals.----oh gee-----I know that. My contact with criminals was mostly when
they were handcuffed to their hospital bed rails----they were not
"controlling" my little area of the world. Just how many of your grandpa's group were doing moonshine for criminals?------enough to infiltrate the whole country? who "CONTROLLED" the stills? any
particular ethnic group? did the organized still people have a
"NAME"??? I have heard rumors (which I do not necessarily believe)
that moonshiners liked to "do away" with competition

 

[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.

Not necessarily. Many times it was the second generation that took it upon itself to cross the cultural divides. The parents might have clung to old country ways and traditions, but the younger ones went to American schools and picked up the culture very quickly - they can't help it. Kids learn, and want to fit in. They often become the bridge between the older generation and the American culture. It's no different than today.

That's pretty much what I said i think That is not happening with the more recent immigrants however. Now the various groups stay to themselves and try like hell to ignore American culture, they do have their hands out though.

 

[irosie91]

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.

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

That's nice-----the entire country was inundated with Sicilian criminals, EVERY TOWN AND VILLAGE AND HAMLET ----any place
in which there was any fermentation going on -----(even my grandmother made wine at home----right in the heart of mafia land---
NEW YORK CITY) and she never met a mafia person

So? You don't understand what a still does, do you? Your grandma didn't run a still. And it's always funny when ppl from thousands of miles away think they have a better understanding of the community we live in than we do. Do some fucking research. Bootlegging under the mob was RAMPANT in the pacific NW.

Did I say grandma had a still?------she didn't sell her little bottles of fermented grape juice either-------she was not into crime.. I am fully aware of the fact of the mafia involvement with the criminal sales of
liquor--------since most people were not INTO that sort of thing----how
does that involvement constitute MAFIA CONTROLED all over the
the whole country-----in every village and hamlet. I have some real
wild news for you-----while there may have been a personal still ---some-
where-----in just about every village and hamlet------MOST PEOPLE were
not selling the stuff. I am old enough to remember when lots of people like you decided "all college kids use drugs"

 

[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

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.

Not necessarily. Many times it was the second generation that took it upon itself to cross the cultural divides. The parents might have clung to old country ways and traditions, but the younger ones went to American schools and picked up the culture very quickly - they can't help it. Kids learn, and want to fit in. They often become the bridge between the older generation and the American culture. It's no different than today.

That's pretty much what I said i think That is not happening with the more recent immigrants however. Now the various groups stay to themselves and try like hell to ignore American culture, they do have their hands out though.

who are the "various" immigrant groups now?

 

[ClosedCaption]

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.

Not necessarily. Many times it was the second generation that took it upon itself to cross the cultural divides. The parents might have clung to old country ways and traditions, but the younger ones went to American schools and picked up the culture very quickly - they can't help it. Kids learn, and want to fit in. They often become the bridge between the older generation and the American culture. It's no different than today.

That's pretty much what I said i think That is not happening with the more recent immigrants however. Now the various groups stay to themselves and try like hell to ignore American culture, they do have their hands out though.

who are the "various" immigrant groups now?

Canadians

 

[Coyote]

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.

Not necessarily. Many times it was the second generation that took it upon itself to cross the cultural divides. The parents might have clung to old country ways and traditions, but the younger ones went to American schools and picked up the culture very quickly - they can't help it. Kids learn, and want to fit in. They often become the bridge between the older generation and the American culture. It's no different than today.

That's pretty much what I said i think That is not happening with the more recent immigrants however. Now the various groups stay to themselves and try like hell to ignore American culture, they do have their hands out though.

I'm just not so sure about that For example, prior to Obama's "Dreamer" legislation, NPR did an extensive series on the children of illegal immigrants, either American born or that came to America at a young age. They were articulate, as American in culture and values as you or I, and were working very hard for a future that was better than their parents endured. Many were going through hardship trying to get a college education. That was illegals, I doubt there is much difference between illegals and legals in that regard.

I think it's a bit of a myth that they come here to get welfare. Multiple studies have shown that immigrants are less likely collect benefits then native born Americans and work harder for their "American Dream". Perhaps because they see immigration as a valued opportunity to better their lives, and arrive with no sense of entitlement.

Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Native-Born Citizens
Evidence Shows Immigrants Come to Work, Not to Collect Welfare

 

[koshergrl]

They definitely had a nationwide presence. My grandpa lived in the coastal mtn range of Oregon...he did six months in federal prison for keeping a still on his property. The suits who told him they'd bail him out if he got caught were mafia....and didn't bail him lol. Gramma supported the fam by selling eggs and butter during his absence.

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

That's nice-----the entire country was inundated with Sicilian criminals, EVERY TOWN AND VILLAGE AND HAMLET ----any place
in which there was any fermentation going on -----(even my grandmother made wine at home----right in the heart of mafia land---
NEW YORK CITY) and she never met a mafia person

So? You don't understand what a still does, do you? Your grandma didn't run a still. And it's always funny when ppl from thousands of miles away think they have a better understanding of the community we live in than we do. Do some fucking research. Bootlegging under the mob was RAMPANT in the pacific NW.

Did I say grandma had a still?------she didn't sell her little bottles of fermented grape juice either-------she was not into crime.. I am fully aware of the fact of the mafia involvement with the criminal sales of
liquor--------since most people were not INTO that sort of thing----how
does that involvement constitute MAFIA CONTROLED all over the
the whole country-----in every village and hamlet. I have some real
wild news for you-----while there may have been a personal still ---some-
where-----in just about every village and hamlet------MOST PEOPLE were
not selling the stuff. I am old enough to remember when lots of people like you decided "all college kids use drugs"

Huh I thought you said mafia involvement was unlikely in my family situation...then offered up your gramma hooch story as an anecdote illustrating your point.

 

[irosie91]

bull shit------"they said they were "mafia" " re gandpa----you sleep with dogs you wake with fleas

Oh they were mafia. The loggers of Oregon and Washington made and ran booze for them for years.

That's nice-----the entire country was inundated with Sicilian criminals, EVERY TOWN AND VILLAGE AND HAMLET ----any place
in which there was any fermentation going on -----(even my grandmother made wine at home----right in the heart of mafia land---
NEW YORK CITY) and she never met a mafia person

So? You don't understand what a still does, do you? Your grandma didn't run a still. And it's always funny when ppl from thousands of miles away think they have a better understanding of the community we live in than we do. Do some fucking research. Bootlegging under the mob was RAMPANT in the pacific NW.

Did I say grandma had a still?------she didn't sell her little bottles of fermented grape juice either-------she was not into crime.. I am fully aware of the fact of the mafia involvement with the criminal sales of
liquor--------since most people were not INTO that sort of thing----how
does that involvement constitute MAFIA CONTROLED all over the
the whole country-----in every village and hamlet. I have some real
wild news for you-----while there may have been a personal still ---some-
where-----in just about every village and hamlet------MOST PEOPLE were
not selling the stuff. I am old enough to remember when lots of people like you decided "all college kids use drugs"

Huh I thought you said mafia involvement was unlikely in my family situation...then offered up your gramma hooch story as an anecdote illustrating your point.

I do not recall stating specifically anything about YOUR family and the mafia-----I disputed the assertion that MAFIA virtually controlled the
entire country ------at the most basic level----"every city and town".
If I had known that your family was into working stills for profit during
prohibition -----near major cities, no less, I would, certainly, not question an assertion that they came into contact with mafia-----my only contact
with mafia is a bit indirect----some distant relatives of members,
and their victims dragged into the hospital in body bags, and the
fact that they lived in those big houses in the more secluded
part of my county---------as kids a big adventure was riding one's bike
for peeking purposes. <<<other than that, mafia never touched
my life and certainly did not control it