Historian Susan F. Martin and author of “A Nation of Immigrants” chronicled US migrant labor models revealing America’s record of immigration-dependency labor favoring the work while mistreating the workers.
According to a book review published in the New York Times, Martin argues the presence of three colonial patterns with persevering application in modern views on immigration. She argues that each model was “pro-immigration but not necessarily pro-immigrant”. This view of protecting the labor over the individual is one of preserving effects over means.
Each model is named for after an original colony: Virginia, Massachussetts, and Pennsylvainia and is an illustration of the type of product our fore fathers sought to reap. Seeking workers, believers and citizens, each colonial period of immigration depicts a process where we sought to mold newcomers into the prototype immigrant.
Like our nation, Martin’s lineage finds foundation in immigration. Fearing persecution, her father arrived in the US in 1906. However, she is aware of her roots.
Nationally, there is a tendency to overlook our cultural heritage, taking exception to the rule that America was founded by immigrants.
Martin explained in the Times interview, “There’s a tendency to say that our ancestors were the good immigrants, but there are problems with the contemporary ones.”
The labor force is where this delineation becomes muddled. Favoring the work performed by those who migrate while simultaneously denying privilege is a systematic exploitation of labor. As an explanation, Martin refers to an archaic pattern.
“The high levels of tolerance for unauthorized migration represents a return to the Virginia model of disposable workers with few rights,” she contested.
These traditions seem to legitimize present day occurrences by providing a disconnect between the labor of migrant workers and the people themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment