In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

16 Immigration and Political Incorporation in the Contemporary United States David Plotke THE POLITICAL MEANING of the large immigration to the United States in the last two decades has been vigorously debated. In this chapter, I make two main claims about its effects and significance. First, immigration at recent levels does not endanger democratic practices. Second, political incorporation is less difficult for new citizens than it was at the beginning of the twentieth century. To sustain this view, I evaluate contemporary immigration in the context of American political development . I frequently compare immigration today with its features during the last major phase of immigration early in the twentieth century. My argument moves from an account of political debates and institutions to a normative discussion . This sequence is appropriate to the subject. To make sense of immigration requires attention to normative issues about citizenship and democratic practices. These issues are a large part of the ongoing debate, which links claims about what immigrants do and what institutions require with arguments about how democratic political life ought to be conducted. I argue that the United States should continue to allow large-scale immigration at current or even higher levels. I also argue that relatively open immigration should be accompanied by policies aimed at political incorporation. This approach should be based on recognizing the democratic value of immigration as well as the crucial role of boundaries. Public debates about immigration now include arguments about immigration levels, characteristics of immigrants (country, education, skills), citizenship , economic and social change, culture, and national identity. In these debates, critics of immigration hold the initiative, even if policies continue to permit substantial new immigration.' As a result, arguments about immigration are largely negative. This dynamic leaves too little room for appreciating the value and benefits of immigration and focuses instead on just how bad the damage from immigration may be.2 Immigration brings energetic new partlClpants into American economic and social life. Although its economic effects are uneven, over time there are substantial net benefits. Socially immigration offers an opportunity for Americans to encounter other cultures and languages as significant and durable realities, not as curiosities or vacation experiences . The political case for immigration is often put defensively. It is framed as an obligation toward those in need, despite the cost. This obligation exists , but it concerns limited if important cases; it does not furnish an adequate general argument in favor of immigration. Today large numbers of immigrants and potential immigrants are leaving circumstances that are difficult but not wholly degraded or life-threatening. In political terms, liberal democrats should generally favor immigration for three reasons. First, immigration is now one of the activities that together constitute a contemporary practice of free association. If a right to free association entails the freedom of members of a polity to leave it, there must somewhere be a possibility of entry. Otherwise there would be no way to sustain the exit option. More positively, the possibility of immigration is closely connected to several elements of free association. Potential members of a polity may wish to join it. Existing members of a polity may wish to associate with prospective members. These choices do not express unconditional rights, but they have real weight in a scheme of liberal and democratic political relations. Second, immigration provides a regular means for reflecting on the meaning ofAmerican political institutions and commitments, through dialogue with those seeking to become citizens. Clearly immigration is not the only way to provide such reflection , but there are not dozens of other major possibilities, and we should welcome whatever real opportunities exist. Third, immigration directly and indirectly en- Immigration and Political Incorporation 295 courages political innovation. Immigrants may enter politics with new ideas, or at least new perspectives on prevailing practices. Less directly, the entry of new members into a system of democratic political competition will over time cause new issues to arise and challenge conventional alignments . As part of political competition, such challenges can help sustain and develop democratic practices. Immigration has political as well as social and economic advantages. These are compelling enough to make relatively open immigration policies the basic position for decent contemporary regimes. Yet the view that immigration to the United States now causes great and increasing harm drives much of our immigration debate. DEBATES ABOUT IMMIGRATION The recent immigration to the United States has been very large. Following the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, immigration went from two and a half million in the...

Share