This paper surveys the history of nativism in the United States from the late nineteenth century to the present. It compares a recent surge in nativism with earlier periods, particularly the decades leading up to the 1920s, when nativism directed against southern and eastern European, Asian, and Mexican migrants led to comprehensive legislative restrictions on immigration. It is based primarily on a review of historical literature, as well as contemporary immigration scholarship. Major findings include the following:
• There are many similarities between the nativism of the 1870–1930 period and today, particularly the focus on the purported inability of specific immigrant groups to assimilate, the misconception that they may therefore be dangerous to the native-born population, and fear that immigration threatens American workers.
• Mexican migrants in particular have been consistent targets of nativism, immigration restrictions, and deportations.
• There are also key differences between these two eras, most apparently in the targets of nativism, which today are undocumented and Muslim immigrants, and in President Trump's consistent, highly public, and widely disseminated appeals to nativist sentiment.
• Historical studies of nativism suggest that nativism does not disappear completely, but rather subsides. Furthermore, immigrants themselves can and do adopt nativist attitudes, as well as their descendants.
• Politicians, government officials, civic leaders, scholars and journalists must do more to reach sectors of society that feel most threatened by immigration.
• While eradicating nativism may be impossible, a focus on avoiding or overturning nativist immigration legislation may prove more successful.
CamposSara2014. “The Influence of Civil Society in US Immigrant Communities and the US Immigration Debate.” In International Migration, U.S. Immigration Law and Civil Society.New York: Scalabrini International Migration Network.
8.
CardosoLawrence1980. Mexican Emigration to the United States 1897–1931.Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
ChoyCatherine Ceniza2003. Empire of Care: Nursing and Migration in Filipino American History.Durham: Duke University Press.https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822384410.
11.
ClemensMichael A.LewisEthan G., and PostelHannah M.2017. “Immigration Restrictions as Active Labor Market Policy: Evidence from the Mexican Bracero Exclusion.” Working Paper 23125. Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research.https://doi.org/10.3386/w23125.
FairchildHenry Pratt1911. Greek Immigration to the United States.New Haven: Yale University Press.
16.
FuchsLawrence, and ForbesSusan Martin2003. “Immigration and U.S. History – The Evolution of the Open Society.” In Immigration and Citizenship: Process and Policy.St. Paul, MN: Thomson West.
17.
GarisRoy1927. Immigration Restriction: A Study of the Opposition to and Regulation of Immigration into the United States.New York: MacMillan Company.
GibsonCampbell J., and LennonEmily1999. “Historical Census Statistics on the Foreign-born Population of the United States: 1850–1990 [Population Division Working Paper No. 29].”Washington, D.C.: US Bureau of the Census, Population Division.https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0029/twps0029.html.
20.
GoldsteinJudith L., and PetersMargaret E.2014. “Nativism or Economic Threat: Attitudes Toward Immigrants During the Great Recession.”International Interactions: Empirical and Theoretical Research in International Relations40(3): 376–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2014.899219.
HickmanLaura J., and SuttorpMarika J.2008. “Are Deportable Aliens a Unique Threat to Public Safety? Comparing the Recidivism of Deportable and Nondeportable Aliens.”Criminology and Public Policy7(1): 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00491.x.
24.
HighamJohn1955. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860–1925.New Brunswick: Rutgers University Books.
25.
HowlandCharles, ed. 1929. Survey of American Foreign Relations.New Haven: Yale University Press.
26.
HsuMadeline2000. Dreaming of Gold, Dreaming of Home: Transnationalism and Migration Between the U.S. and South China, 1882–1943.Stanford: Stanford University Press.
27.
JacobsonMatthew Frye1999. Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigrants and the Alchemy of Race.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28.
JonesMaldwyn Allen1960. American Immigration.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. The Economic and Fiscal Consequences of Immigration.Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
ReislerMark1976. By the Sweat of their Brow: Mexican Immigrant Labor in the United States.Westport: Greenwood Press.
46.
RosalesFrancisco A.1978. “Mexican Immigration to the Urban Midwest During the 1920s.” Ph.D. diss., Indiana University.
47.
RosenblumMarc R.KandelWilliam A.SeelkeClare Ribando, and WasemRuth Ellen2012. “Mexican Migration to the United States: Policy and Trends.”Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42560.pdf.
48.
SchragPeter2010. Not Fit For Our Society: Immigration and Nativism in America.Berkeley: University of California Press.
49.
StepanNancy Leys1991. “The Hour of Eugenics”: Race, Gender, and Nation in Latin America, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
WarrenRobert, and KerwinDonald2017. “Mass Deportations Would Impoverish US Families and Create Immense Social Costs.”Journal on Migration and Human Security5(1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.14240/jmhs.v5i1.71.
