ESSAY 1 ASSIMILATION OF MINORITIES

2010

2015

This article reviews the evolution of the concept of assimilation in American social science. It distinguishes assimilation from accommodation as modal adaptation outcomes of different immigrant generations, as well as various aspects that are commonly conflated by the concept (cultural adaptations, economic mobility, social acceptance into a native mainstream); discusses interrelated cultural (subtractive and additive acculturation), structural (primary and secondary integration), and psychological (identification) dimensions of the concept; and describes the process of “segmented assimilation” — how it is that different groups, in varying contexts of reception and incorporation, adapt to and are absorbed into different sectors of the society.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2009

assimilation theory has not lost its utility and evidence shows that assimilation is taking place, albeit unevenly-assimilation (warner and srole) = ethnic groups unlearning their inferior cultural traits in order to successfully learn the new way of life necessary for all acceptance-there's a correlation between the potential for assimilation with a hierarchy of racial and cultural acceptability-thesis : redefine assimilation in order to render it useful in the study of the new immigration-assimilation (park and e.w. burgress) = a process of intergeneration and fusion in which persons and groups acquire the memories, sentiments, and attitude of other persons and groups and, by sharing their experience and history, are incorporated with ten in a common cultural life-^^ does not include the erasure of all signs of ethnic origins but instead equates assimilation with the social processes that bring ethnic minorities into the mainstream-assimilation (park's 2nd definition) = the name given to the process of processes by which peoples of diverse racial origins and different cultural heritages, occupying a common territory, achieve a cultural solidarity sufficient at leaf to sustain a national existence-assimilation has come to be viewed by social scientists as a worn-out theory which imposes ethnocentric and patronizing demands on minority peoples struggling to retain their cultural and ethnic integrity-Park says that assimilation is the end-stage of a race-relations cycle of contact, competition, accommodation, and eventual assimilation which was also apparently progressive and irreversible-competition = initial unstable consequence of contact as groups struggle to gain advantage over one another-accommodation = social structure of typically unequal relations among groups and a settled understanding of group position have come into being-accommodation will eventually be undermined by the personal relationships that cross group boundaries-Milton Gordon differs b/t acculturation and structural assimilation (entry of members of an ethnic minority into primary groups relationships with the majority group)-acculturation (gordon) = the minority group's adoption of the cultural patterns of the host society, is first and inevitable-intrinsic cultural traits (vital ingredients of the group's cultural heritage) exemplified by religion, music, extrinsic tastes (tend to be products of the historical vicissitudes of the group's adjustment to the local environment)-Gordon believes acculturation was a largely one way process (except religion)-catalyst for more complete assimilation is structural assimilation (entrance of the minority group into the social cliques, clubs, and institutions of the core society at the primary group level)-hypothesized that once structural assimilation has occurred all other types will follow (prejudice and discrimination decline, intermarriage common, separate identity wane)-limitations to Gordon's theory : ambiguous as whether it applies to individuals or groups-core message : structural assimilation signals the maturity of the assimilation process-evidence : intermarriage data measures assimilation progress

Journal of Identity and Migration Studies, 2009

This article tackles the concept of "immigrant integration" as it is analyzed by different authors in the international migration field. In this article, I will use the terms "refugee" and "immigrant" as equivalent to each other due to the interchangeable character of these concepts throughout the integration literature. First, the article brings into discussion the definitional and conceptual battle around the concept of immigrant "integration", and second, it will describe and analyze cultural and social integration with their presupposing processes.

The Cambridge Handbook of Acculturation Psychology

as • sim • i • la • tion 1. The process whereby minority group gradually adopts the customs and attitudes of the prevailing culture. 1. The merging of cultural traits from distinct cultural groups When the Canadian Government took over the responsibilities of managing the Indigenous population of Canada from Britain, the stated intent of legislation and policy for years had been assimilation. There are however two definitions of assimilation, which have slightly different meaning. This paper will argue that while the first definition of assimilation was the goal of the Canadian government (to get the minority Indians to adopt the culture of the majority Euro-Canadians), a process more related to the second definition was already taking place on the prairies: the merging of cultural traits from two (or more) distinct cultural groups. This process was interrupted and prevented by Indian Act legislation and policy.

Assimilation has long been a concern of sociologists ever since the great immigration wave to the United States in the late 19th century into the early 20th. Studies have been made to determine the degree to which an immigrant has successfully assimilated into American society. Although results vary, it is general consensus that as more generations pass, the more complete the assimilation will become. As these people attempt to assimilate, they have to deal with the issues stemming from otherness, often leading to exclusion and alienation by the native population. In this paper I explore whether it is possible for someone of the first generation to successfully and fully assimilate. I argue that this is not possible without the compromising of one’s original identity; in other words, people have to lose part of themselves in order to completely fit in. As I explore this issue, I take into account three works of German literature: “A Report to an Academy” by Franz Kafka; “Aphrodite and her Poet” by Gabriele Reuter; and Das Gemeindekind by Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach. In each of these works I single out one character who exemplifies the process of assimilation and analyze whether or not they have been able to successfully assimilate based on certain criteria. I conclude that all three of these individuals failed to fully assimilate and thus maintain that it is very difficult for someone of the first generation to fully assimilate.

2011

“Assimilation,” a protean concept with an American pedigree and a checkered past, is back in vogue. But in academic and colloquial usage, in social science, public policy and popular culture, the idea and the ideal of “assimilation” have had a bumpy history. Over time the term has conflated various normative prescriptions (“e pluribus unum,” “melting pot”) and empirical descriptions (cultural adaptations, economic mobility, social acceptance by a dominant group) to make sense of the incorporation of “ethnic” difference in American life. After more than a century of use and misuse the term itself remains confusing and contentious. For a “canonical” concept, there remains surprising ambiguity as to its meaning, measurement and applicability. This essay, prepared for a Festschrift in honor of Herbert J. Gans, explores the history of the idea in American society and social science as a master frame and the teleology of Progress underlying it; considers cultural, social, legal, economic and identificational indices of intergenerational change among contemporary ethnic groups based on an array of census and survey data; and raises questions about the limitations and paradoxes of the concept itself in the study of ethnicity and inequality in American life. Despite the grand narratives of modernization which undergird the concept of assimilation, neither race nor religion nor ethnicity has vanished in American life. Linguistic “Anglicization” and other forms of acculturation do proceed rapidly, especially among immigrant children and the second generation. But alongside undeniable upward social mobility from the first to the second generation for most groups, especially the children of the poorest and least educated - though the gains appear to peak in the second generation and decline or plateau thereafter - there is compelling evidence of widening “ethclass” and legal inequalities, of new conflicts and political mobilizations around ethnic and racial issues, and of downward mobility and marginalization for vulnerable segments of these populations. An undocumented status has become a caste-like master status blocking access to the opportunity structure and paths to social mobility for millions of immigrants. A fraught concept like “assimilation,” weighted by the normative baggage of its past, seems ill-suited to grasp these complex dynamics and to focus critical attention on enduring structural inequalities and persistent ethnic and pan-ethnic formations in this “permanently unfinished” society.