The USA - Is it still the "melting pot"?

I believe the US is, more than ever, a melting pot.
The difference is that the new ingredients to the pot make a different mix, with a different flavor.

Do the groups that migrate to the US really retain their cultural identity? I'm not so sure. They create a new, hybrid, identity, as they interact with the rest of the nation. Some elements are kept, others vanish; others yet are becoming part of the American culture.

I've been a-thinkin' and a-thinkin' on this one since you posted. I think you tipped your hand a little bit by your usage of "overcome":



Why does cultural heritage need to be overcome?

I get antsy about any implication that groups should let go of their cultural heritage. Part of that is seeing how my grandparents tried so hard to assimilate, and my father grew up feeling ashamed of his Jewishness. Part of that is my participation in the Deaf community, where, until every American is fluent in ASL, true assimilation is impossible.

I have heard it said that the U.S. is no longer a melting pot, but a salad bowl. In decades past, immigrants wanted to become Americanized as quickly as possible, with their mother culture secondary. Now, apparently, there are many groups that wish to maintain their foreign culture within the American culture.

"Overcoming" something isn't a a bad thing. In this context it just means that they see themselves as "Americans" first. People use terms like "Mexican-American" or "African-American" all the time but the words "Mexican" and "African" are adjectives that describe the type of American. The trend I commented on is the idea that instead of being a "Mexican-American" they are a "Mexican that lives in America" (often with US Citzenship..).

Maintaining a connection with one's cultural heritage is different than bringing that cultural heritage with you in it's entirety and expecting everyone else to accomodate it. It isn't a matter of language. It's a mindset.

I've never thought of America as a melting pot. It's always been a salad bowl to me.

Brazil is a melting pot (all the way down to skin color). America isn't.

As to people wanting to keep their own culture I think it's always been that way. "China towns" are not new inventions. Immigrants have always caught flak for being different, be they Italians of the past or hispanics of the present.

Incidentally I think worrying about American culture is a grand waste of time. Step out of America and tell me out culture is in danger. ;-) There has never been such a powerful culture in the history of the world. I inlcude the Romans, English, and Greeks in that.

But everyone seems worried baout their culture. In America people see red when seeing SPanish, everywhere else people bemoan American culture and it's grip on their lives. I don't see what the big deal is. It's not possible to control humans.

edit: Who cares if they bring their culture and refuse to adapt? What right does anyone have to dictate how others lead their lives?

edit 2: I don't think immigrants expect anyone to adapt. Thye are just living their lives and it's human nature to resist change. The humans who complain about it are exhibiting the same trait.

I personally think it's more tasteful to "do as Romans" when "in Rome" but I think it's downright disgusting to see people try to enforce it.

Fruit salad perhaps Craven considering the election results. But I agree with you that the US is not a melting pot and that some people are way to concerned about preserving their way of life of above all else. In the US right now it seems we are in a period of exclusion. We don't even want government to govern. We want every one to be outside the special interest groups that we are not in.

Trivia - The US did not have an illegal alien problem until in the mid 70s the Congress changed the laws regarding Mexicans coming to this country to work. It was allowed up until that time. Once Mexicans were blocked from working in the US (California, Arizona, Colorado, Texas) and US citizens would not do those jobs we got an illegal alien problem, sheesh.

We have a grand history of restrictive to racist immigration laws and it's not a new thing.

The 17th century was an age of white farmers who spoke English and were devout Protestants. That was the last time America was homogeneous.

In the 18th century German immigration began to worry native-born Americans. They were nervous about being able to absorb the foreign-speaking immigrants.

In the 19th century the wave of Irish Catholics made Americans antsy about the "impending disintegration" of the Anglo-Protestant culture. The Irish were persecuted (sometimes with the sanction of law).

By 1880 many Italians, Greeks, Turks, Russians, Slavs and Jews were arriving rekindling the fears of the "dissolution" of the American Identity.

The Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in1882, halting Chinese immigration to the U.S. for 10 years. Throughout the 1920s this act was regularly renewed.

In 1924 America feared the "dissolution of Congress passed the Johnson-Reed act limiting the immigration to 154,000 persons annually and also placed quotas on nationalities, favoring North European "stock" over the South Europeans (Slavic etc). The excuse given was that the whiter Northern Europeans would make "better Americans" and quotas based on race were not repealed until 1965.

The 90's brought attempts at legislation that are reminiscent of the nativist 1920s.

(dates and quotes taken from an essay by Dr Alan Axelrod)

My high school Civics teacher was an immigrant. Born in the part of Arabia now called Iraq. He had been raised in London had an English passport but his family was kept out of the US for years because in the 50s there were limits on visas according to contry of birth. Finally they did get here and Mr. Deddah went on the become a California State Senator. Two good friends of mine in my early school day, a brother and sister, both Mexicans were dropped into my kindergarten class with out even being able to speak English, no ESL at that time was available. Billy was two years older than his sister Martha but they entered the school system in the same grade. Billy did move on up. Billy now teachs drama at San Diego State University and directs most of the Shaekspear plays at the Old Globe in San Diego. Martha is a sucessful microbioligist. Lucky dogs they are fluent in English and Sapnish. The only noticable change is we call Billy William now they are still great folks, they always were.

I'd disagree with Axelrod's last sentence there Craven. All the earlier examples given were situations where people were trying to prevent (or slow) the mixing of peoples of various ethinc backgrounds.

In the last few decades we've reversed that. Instead people are trying to maintain a seperate ethnic identity instead of mixing.

I didn't quote him verbatim, he actually said a bit more. He said (more or less) that the locally generated attempts at legislation recalled nativist fears of the 20s ("locally" being the word I omitted).

I suspect he means things like proposition 187 (if my memory serves me) in California and such. It's subject to your interpretation but I staged a walkout of school (with the support of every one of my teachers) when that was an issue. I do find that kind of law very xenophobic and it to me is as nativist as the time would permit. But like I said, nativism is hard to quantify so it's a judgement call, I believe that it was born of the desire of some Californians to keep Mexicans out of California but simply couched in terms of economy. This is just my opinion and I don't speak for Axelrod on that.

I understand what he's saying but it's a different subject. What I brought up and the articles I linked to mention is the desire of those who come to the US to remain "non-Americans" (for lack of a better term..). What would be anyone's point in fully and permenantly immigrating to another country but not wanting to integrate with the people that are already there?

In that I agree completely (my tirade about imigration laws was in reference to them only having existed in recent years).

But to end my digression I agree with the notion that it is pointless to emmigrate and not "do as the Romans". In every country I have lived I do my best to adapt myself instead of wishing that others adapt to me. I learn their national anthems (though I despise such simplism) and learn to be a part of their culture.

Even so, I run across the occasional dolt who doesn't like me blemishing his culture with my American presence.

If I am speaking English to a foreign friend sometimes people will verbally accost me for not speaking their language. I have always learned as much of the native language as I can in every place I've been but with English speakers it's very uncomfortable to speak other language (even if both are fluent in that language, it's like playing golf with a handicap).

The reasons for the ill will is usually based on simple xenophobia, they think that the invasion of American culture in their land is the end of all things indigenous (I agree that our culture is pervasive but it's usually not due to American actions but rather lack of an effort at counter-culture on their part).

Another think that irks them sis imply not being able to understand what I am saying (even if my conversation is private and they are just strangers on the street), it insults them on some level.

There was a Seinfeld about this, the hairdressers would bad-mouth the Americans in aforeign language and Elaine took a translator to catch them.

This happens sometimes (I never do it because the whole world and their cousin bob speak English) but most of the time it's a simplistic and unwarranted fear.

I think that reasons like that make people hostile when they see foreign cultures, language is the biggest divider there is so I understand that. But I also understand that language is the operating system of the brain, and Windows users don't often switch to Macs do they?

Sure, if you work at a job that only uses Macs it's smart to adapt. That's why I think it's simple common sense to do as the Romans in Rome, but at the same time the hostility that some people who are earnestly trying to adapt revolts me.

Seeing people scream at an someone who is learning English "You are in my country now speaaaak ENGLISH!" is off putting to me. I've seen similar attitudes in many countries and for naught. I understand how it would be better for them to do their best to adapt but think some of the hostility toward those who are slow to adapt is unwarranted.

I don't really know if new inmigrants in the US want to remain "non-Americans" (I think that after a generation the melting is done, sometimes, before that).

What I want to stress, and it's clearly the case of chicanos, is that they may want to keep the roots, but their new country changes their ways, Most chicanos are not Mexican anymore. They have created a hybrid.

While many Americans feel they're interacting with Mexicans who think Mexican; us Mexicans feel we're interacting with Chicanos who think Chicano (and it really takes most Mexicans almost no time to americanize and chicanos).

Mexico has had a big cultural shift in the last few decades. When I was a child, Chicanos were "pochos", some kind of cultural traitors. Now they are respected as members or a different, but sister culture, with shared roots.

When I look around, I see people who embrace their cultural background. And, usually, that cultural background is composed of 2 or more ethnicities.

I think that due to the fact that immigrants to America have now spanned the globe and have blended with others here already we now have multi generational and cultural individuals who are true 'melting-pot' Americans who still embrace their roots, all of them, and their environments as well.
The areas of America which can generate a cultural background without taking into consideration ethnic background is HUGE.
While I think a melting pot this still is, its more now the background and diversity of the people in combination with the environments rather than specific to each group as in the past.
I believe that people are much more aware of their cultural backgrounds, and those new to the country simply embrace their background more tightly until they become more familiar and comfortable with the area, etc which, like in the past might take another generation to assist them.

Here's my observation as a 67 year old Japanese American. When we were children growing up in Sacramento, our area of the city was made up of minorities with a sprinkling of whites. All our teachers were in public school were white. We did not socialize with the other minorities, but especially with the Chinese. To make a long story short, our family is made up of many different cultures and races, including Chinese, Polynesian, German, Italian, Mexican, black, English, Irish, and I'm not sure how many more. One of my life's best friend was a Chinese, born in Shanghai, educated in Tibet and India, but escaped to Hong Kong with his family during the Cultural Revolution. I've known him for 44 years, but he passed away last September. When we have our New Year's celebration at our home every year, we have Chinese and Japanese relatives and friends that come over. We had 25 guests this year. It's definitely a "melting pot." c.i.

I don't know the actual life in the USA to judge this.

However, as far as I've leanrt by talks to US-Americans visiting Germany, media etc.,
any new immigrant groups now want to maintain at least part of their old identities and the older ethnic groups are trying to rediscover theirs.

Which is to be seen elsewhere in the world.

This is the most enlightened discussion on this subject I have come across on any forum. Everyone here made some points I can accept. I think Craven is closest to my point of view. As a Hienz 57 mongrel, I have always proudly looked to my salad bowl ancestors and would not want to be a 'pure' this or that.

edgar, In actuality, we are all decendents from Africa. Salad bowl or no salad bowl, we all come from the same gene pool. c.i.