Westmont Magazine Backstories: Beneath the Surface

Posts from the Rest of the Iceberg by Alister Chapman, Professor of History

To help people make sense of our complex world, history professor Alister Chapman has created a blog, The Rest of the Iceberg (restoftheiceberg.org). Tackling topics such as conflicts between nations, health care, soccer, the Electoral College and the wide streets in Paris, he seeks to provide clear answers to questions people ask. He dives beneath the surface to provide the often unknown backstories shaping difficult issues. “The Rest of the Iceberg will help you understand the world,” he says. “That understanding will help you engage the world’s challenges more effectively. That’s the ultimate goal.”

Have a question yourself? Submit it on the website and see if he’s addressed it. If not, it may appear in a future post.

Professor Chapman has studied immigration in his native England, which gives him a wider perspective on the situation in the United States. He addressed this topic in a Westmont Downtown Lecture in March 2019, “How Immigration Became the Dominant Political Issue of Our World” (watch the video at westmont.edu/westmont-downtown/schedule-2018-2019). He summarizes his presentation in the blog post featured below. A related entry about poverty in Latin America provides additional context on this challenging issue.

Why is Immigration Such a Big Issue?

No matter where you live, immigrants are in the news. In Germany, it’s Syrians; in Australia, Iraqis; in Bangladesh, Rohingyas; in Italy, Libyans; in Colombia, Venezuelans; in South Korea, Chinese; in the United States, Hondurans.

Immigration has become one of the major political issues of our time. It’s a large part of the explanation for Brexit and Donald Trump. Conservatives want border control (rightly). Liberals urge compassion (also rightly). But how did immigration become such a big issue in the first place?

Fifty years ago, 3 percent of people left the country where they were born, and that figure is the same today. However, as the world’s population has grown, that 3 percent has been more people: In 1960, there were 80 million migrants, but by 2015, that number was 250 million. Some countries have been affected more than others. In the United States, for example, only 5 percent of the population was foreign-born in 1970, while by 2010, it was 13 percent. Nevertheless, stories of countries suddenly swamped by new arrivals aren’t persuasive.

So why is immigration in the headlines? The explanation lies in three fears: three ways people worry that immigrants will affect their society.

The first fear is violence—that immigrants are likely to be terrorists or criminals. There’s some truth to this. In Europe, in particular, there have been acts of terror committed by Muslim immigrants in the last 20 years. However, the vast majority of Muslims aren’t violent, most immigrants aren’t Muslims, and white terrorists in Northern Ireland and Spain killed more Europeans than Muslims ever have.

It’s similar in the United States. There were 38 terrorist acts committed by Muslims from 2010-17, but 92 by members of white, far-right groups. If you have a white American neighbor on one side and an immigrant on the other, your white neighbor is twice as likely to go to jail. The fear of violence is real. But the evidence doesn’t support it.

The second fear is cultural change—that immigrants bring new food, faiths, and faces that make our communities feel different. This has obviously happened in some parts of Germany, Australia, and the United States, to give only three examples. For centuries, countries in the West cultivated the ugly idea that whites were superior to the people they dominated in the Americas, Africa and Asia. It’s no surprise, then, that whites can be anxious about how immigrants will change their culture.

This is changing, however. It started with food, as the British learned to love curries; the Germans, kebabs; and white Americans, burritos. But it now goes much further, as locals embrace sports stars, politicians, and even comedians who were born elsewhere.

The third fear is economic—that immigrants take jobs and benefits. This can happen. Yet often the jobs that immigrants take are the ones citizens don’t want. When John F. Kennedy kept migrant fruit pickers out of the United States, farmers bought machines to do the work—they didn’t hire locals. And while immigrants to Europe do benefit from state welfare systems, in the 16 years after 1995, they paid $6.4 billion more in taxes than they took in benefits.

But the economic fears are real, and understandable. There are major advantages to being a citizen of a wealthy country—a shop assistant, builder, or teacher can make more than 10 times what they would earn in a low-income country. Moreover, millions of stable, decently paid jobs have disappeared in the West, to be replaced by Walmart jobs or worse. Immigrants are a highly visible symbol of the globalization that has hurt many workers in the West.

The fear of violence. The fear of cultural change. The fear of economic impact. All are important. But none gets to the heart of why immigration gets as much attention as it does. The answer to that is politics. Put simply, attacking immigrants often wins votes. That has been true for decades. Fearful people are more likely to go out and vote. Immigration is a big political issue because politicians make it so.

There’s reason to hope this may change. When asked in 1995 whether immigrants strengthened the country through their hard work and talents, 63 percent of Americans disagreed. Asked the same question in 2016, only 27 percent did. That’s progress.

Migration won’t stop unless the world becomes much more peaceful and equal. But it’s possible that in the future, immigrants will be welcomed more warmly. More responsible politicians would be a step in the right direction.

Why is Latin America Poorer than the United States?

It is hard to believe how much richer the United States is than Latin America. Each year, the U.S. economy generates more than three times as much wealth as the 20 countries of Latin America combined. Before Columbus arrived in 1492, the largest, wealthiest, and most technologically advanced societies were in South America and modern-day Mexico. What changed? Why are garages in the United States larger than many homes in Latin America?

If you ask people this question, you are likely to hear one of two answers. The first is that the United States is the greatest country in the world—unparalleled in the inventiveness of its people and the genius of its system of government. The United States is one of the wonders of the world, the story goes, so its economic success is no surprise.

The second possible answer is very different: In this view, the United States is great because it is great at exploiting others. The charge is that in their rush to make money, the government and people of the U.S. have regularly trampled on others—including Native Americans, slaves, and other countries in the Americas.

There is truth in both explanations, but they are too simplistic. To get a full picture of why the average U.S. citizen is wealthier than their counterpart in Mexico, Argentina, or Brazil, you need to look at more than what makes the United States different. You need a panorama that takes in all the Americas.

Our best clue for why some American countries are rich and others poor comes from history. A key factor in determining the prosperity of any part of the Americas is who conquered it back in the 1500s and 1600s. Numerous European countries staked claims in the Western Hemisphere, but by 1770, two countries were dominant: Spain in the South and Britain in the North. They made colonies in their own image—with enormous consequences right up to the present day.

The most important difference between Spain and Britain was their governments. Spain had kings with absolute power, while Britain had an elected parliament. Thus, in the Americas, the Spanish king claimed the land and gave it out to loyal noblemen. The result was a society just as hierarchical and unequal as Spain’s, with nobles acting like kings. By contrast, Britain created colonies in which settlers had a say in how they were governed.

These differences determined the sort of people who came from Spain and Britain to the Americas. The Spaniards tended to be noblemen (and their servants), sent by their king to conquer and rule. They usually came without their wives and daughters, which made it hard to establish normal life. The British traveled as families, looking for a new start and new land in the New World. They still fought with their Native American neighbors but the societies they created were more stable and more equal than those in Spanish America.

These differences were accentuated by the different ways that Spanish and British colonies generated wealth. Spain controlled all the big silver mines, which made it easy to get rich quick. The British came to the Americas hoping to strike gold or at least silver, too. When they didn’t, they began the hard work of setting up farms. Over time, however, agriculture would prove more profitable than mining and more suitable for the development of strong communities.

By the late 1700s, Britain’s colonies were benefiting enormously from their links to the most powerful country in Europe. Britain was in the process of becoming the world’s first industrial society, and that would make lots of money for English speakers on both sides of the Atlantic. Spain, by contrast, had been falling behind for 200 years and had little to offer its colonies in terms of trade or technology.

Even when Latin America won its freedom from Spain in the 1820s, it remained stagnant. Powerful Spanish landowners declared their independence when the Spanish king threatened their dominant position in the New World. They had no interest in sharing their power or wealth and so led revolutions that cemented their position—and the poverty of everyone else.

Britain’s colonies in what became the United States claimed their independence on the basis that the mother country was not living up to its ideals of liberty and representative government. The United States enshrined these in its constitution and strived to embody them more perfectly. The United States also committed itself to the rule of law—a vital precondition for commercial success.

After independence, the United States benefited from its willingness to welcome immigrants. Much of the country’s economic dynamism came from people attracted to its free and open society. Many were fleeing persecution or corrupt states where their success would be thwarted or extorted.

However, there were other migrants just as central to the economic success of the United States, whose stories were ones of horror, not hope: slaves. Hundreds of thousands were bought in Africa and brought to North America.

Their importance to the economy of the United States rested largely on their work on cotton plantations. Cotton production was at the heart of the economic success of both Britain and the United States in the 1800s. In Britain, more efficient machines required more cotton to spin and weave. Entrepreneurs in the United States spotted an opportunity. Slave labor allowed them to produce cotton more cheaply than rivals in India and the Middle East. So did cheap land cleared of its native inhabitants.

Britain became the world’s wealthiest country in the 1800s. The United States took that position in the 1900s. Both profited from representative government, the rule of law, and the ingenuity and hard work of their people. But both also profited from the hard work of millions of slaves. Cotton made up more than half of the value of U.S. exports in the mid-1800s.

Slavery and Native American land were crucial for the growth of the U.S. economy, but they can’t be the most important explanation for why the United States is so much richer than Latin America, for one simple reason. Latin Americans imported even more slaves and also took others’ land— but they weren’t able to exploit these resources as effectively.

Over time, the United States industrialized, and combined with its enormous size, that was enough to overtake Britain’s economy by the 1900s. The First and Second World Wars devastated Europe but created huge demand for industrial goods produced in the United States. After World War II, the United States often used its economic dominance generously by encouraging trade and economic development. Its record wasn’t perfect—on occasion, the United States used its strength to squeeze economies in Latin America—but the United States tried to spread liberty and justice to many. Today, its society is still marred by discrimination, but it is more open and just than most. The majority of American citizens have benefited from living in the richest country in the world.

Meanwhile, industrialization and economic growth proved frustratingly slow in Latin America. Too often, governments failed to give their people a vote or their children the sort of education that would foster economic development.

Thankfully, Latin America has been doing better in recent years. There has been significant economic growth in places like Mexico, Brazil, and Uruguay. But it’s unlikely that South America will ever catch up with the United States. The gap between them grew steadily for 200 years and shows no sign of disappearing.

To read more articles, visit restoftheiceberg.org.