While Professor Bruce Ledewitz’s column advocating open immigration (“Why can’t we have open immigration” Feb. 2, TribLive) is as welcome as any suggestion about the border issue, his claim that racism was the only basis for earlier restrictions lacks context.
Racism, whether labeled as nativism or eugenics, undoubtedly was part of the immigration debates from 1870 through 1924. Still other factors, like organized labor’s concerns about an increased labor supply lowering wages, as well as strike-breaking actions in the “Robber Baron” era, were also part of those debates. Such concerns were exacerbated by economic disruption and recession following World War I.
Moreover, concerns about political violence by anarchists continually grew from the Haymarket Riot, President McKinley’s assassination by a self-identified immigrant anarchist and bombs targeting, among others, the U.S. attorney general and a Supreme Court justice.
The observation that “politics make strange bedfellows” was as applicable then as today, and a coalition of interests drove the original immigration restrictions. Attributing those laws solely to racism obscures the more complicated history and inaccurately tars all advocates for immigration limits with one broad, insulting brush. Now, as then, it would seem better practice to engage the issue in all its complexities instead of merely labeling the opposition.
David Thomas
Bradfordwoods