Bourne

The non-English American can scarcely be blamed if he sometimes thinks of the Anglo-Saxon predominance in America as little more than a predominance of priority. The Anglo-Saxon was merely the first immigrant, the first to found a colony. He has never really ceased to be the descendant of immigrants, nor has he ever succeeded in transforming that colony into a real nation, with a tenacious, richly woven fabric of native culture. Colonials from the other nations have come and settled down beside him. They found no definite native culture which should startle them out of their colonialism, and consequently they looked back to their mother-country, as the earlier Anglo-Saxon immigrant was looking back to his. What has been offered thee newcomer has been the chance to learn English, to become a citizen, to salute the flag. And those elements of our ruling classes who are responsible for the public schools, the settlements, all the organizations for amelioration in the cities, have every reason to be proud of the care and labor which they have devoted to absorbing the immigrant. His opportunities the immigrant has taken to gladly, with almost a pathetic eagerness to make his way in the new land without friction or disturbance. The common language has made not only for the necessary communication, but for all the amenities of life.

If freedom means the right to do pretty much as one pleases, so long as one does not interfere with others, the immigrant has found freedom, and the ruling element has been singularly liberal in its treatment of the invading hordes. But if freedom means a democratic cooperation in determining the ideals and purposes and industrial and social institutions of a country, then the immigrant has not been free, and the Anglo-Saxon element is guilty of just what every dominant race is guilty of in every European country: the imposition of its own culture upon the minority peoples. The fact that this imposition has been so mild and, indeed, semi-conscious does not alter its quality. And the war has brought out just the degree to which that purpose of "Americanizing," that is, "Anglo-Saxonizing," the immigrant has failed.

For the Anglo-Saxon now in his bitterness to turn upon the other peoples, talk about their "arrogance," scold them for not being melted in a pot which never existed, is to betray the unconscious purpose which lay at the bottom of his heart. It betrays too the possession of a racial jealousy similar to that of which he is now accusing the so-called "hyphenates." Let the Anglo-Saxon be proud enough of the heroic toil and heroic sacrifices which moulded the nation. But let him ask himself, if he had had to depend on the English descendants, where he would have been living to-day. To those of us who see in the exploitation of unskilled labor the strident red leit-motif of our civilization, the settling of the country presents a great social drama as the waves of immigration broke over it.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Bourne, touches upon the generations of past migrant groups and those forthcoming. To acknowledge that the first migrants were anglo-saxon and they carried no burden but to create a land that they would shape with their own previous upbringings from their mother lands is controversial as new waves of migration continue to enter the United States, under the circumstance that they have paved. However, Bourne argues that if these already established leaders are founder of institutions such as needs of institutionalized schools, settlements, or organizations to improve the way of life of the immigrant it absorbs him into believing that they are almost a blessing, therefore should love his “new land” without objection. Continuing to support his arguments as to how despite America being the land of freedom, the anglo-saxon as imposed their own culture upon the minority masses.

Bourne discuses “a melting pot that never existed” only to transcend into the hyphenated identity of the american looking to fit into a culture alienated from his own. The hyphenated American has claimed their own experience a valid form of “Americanization”. However, he critiques the Anglo-Saxon, for perhaps believing that without the migration waves that flooded at a time of a dire need of boosting the brittle economy of the nation, these waves are what shaped it. However, as Bourne suggest that exploitation of unskilled labor are recurring patterns which have constantly been the cause of turmoil in the nation.

I chose this passage because in my opinion, as the closing sentence states the exploitation of unskilled labor are extremely dependent pillars to the economy of the nation. even as the migration movements continue to overwhelm the United States, the idea of the hyphenated-American still stands as more and more immigrants settle in the nation. The Americanization process has not changed much, as newcomers are expected to learn english and participate in the institutions which are already established to “empower” themselves through the benefits that were inaccessible in their homeland, at least it is thought that way. However, in exchange the immigrant loves his “new land” without objection.