Mass Immigration Into America Has Negative Effects on Its Culture. Essay Example

demonstrates) Auster claims that influx of thousands from variable background might endanger America. He attests that the cultural left “hates America” and “wants to destroy it” and “that the left sees mass immigration from Third World countries as a handy way of achieving that”.

Auster has undermined the values of the immigrants and adopted a biased negativity towards them. By stating so, he makes an unmerited and prejudiced generalisation, suggesting that the only purpose for all migrants into America is America’s destruction. After the establishment of the 1965 Immigration Act, there has been a mass influx of immigrants into America. Auster iterates that none of “the Republican organisations” and “the conservative movement” has made “serious calls to reduce this immigration”.However, he has overlooked the fact that there has been significant objection to mass immigration.

A Wall Street Journal survey (1996) indicates that 52% of all Americans favour a five-year ban on all legal and illegal immigration to the U. S. , including 54% of all Republicans and 48% of all Democrats. Furthermore, he made an underlying assumption that no objection by these organisations indicates congruency to supporting the Anti-American movement. It is fallacious to present only these two alternatives as other possibilities exist.The Republican organisations may have no objections to the immigration as they believe that the immigrants do not pose any threat and in fact do benefit the country’s economy.

As suggested by Unz (1994), immigrants are vital not just to industries that rely on low-cost, low-skill labour. Without a constant incursion of immigrants, American highly specialised software companies, computer industries, technological institutes would lose their tremendous domination and edge.Auster also brings up the fact

that Bush actively propagates this influx, as seen in “our President embraces so-called “moderate” Muslim leaders who are allies of terrorists” and “actively promotes the growth and development of unassimilated foreign cultures in this country”. He has failed to consider that Bush, establishing friendly ties with the Muslim nations, is merely doing his job diplomatically as a political leader of the U. S. There is a subtle linkage of Spanish to the left socialist rebellious movement and also, a personal attack on President Bush.

By stating that he is their “conservative Christian President”, Auster suggests that Bush is not an ideal leader because as a Christian conservative, he should be against this leftist-originated mass immigration. Auster also expresses concerns that slowly but surely, erosion of American culture is occurring, and replaced by one that belongs to its immigrants, posing threat to national identity and unity. Auster attests that there are no protests to protect English, as opposed to Spanish, and President Bush has “even started his own bilingual tradition and delivering Spanish translation in his speeches”.He claims this necessarily means the conservative movement will not protect American culture and history. Firstly, English is protected as America’s national language.

The U. S. Senate voted on two separate amendments to make English the common unifying language of the country in 2006. Furthermore, his argument overlooks the fact that it takes more than passionate English-only protests to protect American culture. In mentioning the American notion of everyone being “same underneath his skin”, Auster emphasizes that non-discrimination of other races and nations has caused mass immigration.

Indeed, this equity to all persons regardless of race or cultural background is a sizeable

factor of attracting migrants to the U. S. In addition, he put forward that the American conservative “belief in the equal value of all cultures” and “equal rights of all individuals” would cause “people from all cultures to be allowed en masse to America”. Transformation of America through “immigration, natural reproduction and conversion” would either have an “immediate threat of mass physical destruction” or pose a “serious threat to the very survival of (American) civilisation”.His argument is an exaggerated fatalization and an appeal to fear, which Therefore, Auster fails to be objective when considering the alternatives. In conclusion, Auster has adopted a generally biased negative view of the migrants.

He has to provide more justification to substantiate his argument that ---- influences --- to a large extent. He has also neglected to ----. He should widen his perspectives to consider --. Moreover, he should not deny the alternatives hastily without examining their significance in greater detail.NPG Factsheet (1996, March) The Americans have spoken: Cut back on immigration Retrieved 12 September, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www. npg.

org/factsheets/imm_americans_spoken. html Unz, R. (1994, November 7) Value added: immigrants are a net benefit to the nation and a natural Republican constituency - if the party doesn't blow it. Retrieved 12 September, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n21_v46/ai_15930020