Anthropology essay final

Latino people are among the most populous society of the country.--- subtitles need revises to be more concise to the paragraph topics, delete irrelevant sentences. Recommendations of the subtitle should have the meaning of : Until recently, Latino are lumped into a huge group analytics, but in recent they have diversity beneath it. They came from diverse nationality, racial diverse. There are a lot of people who come from the different country. THE SUBTITLE NEED TO REVISE WITH IDEAS SHOWS ABOVE, BUT NEED TO REWARD IT.

According to issued article, initial conclusions that the Latino or Hispanic community is formally the second most populous society of the country including 50.5 million or 16.3 %, of the population of United States of America (Rumbaut, Pigments of our imagination: On the racialization and racial identities of “Hispanics” and “Latinos”). This data, while engaging, proposes several issues, such as where do Hispanics or Latino originate from, who are those Latino or Hispanics, and, further importantly, whereby does their unique ethnic state in U. S. manage their state and cultural clout? Latino is presently the most populous ethnic society in the U. S. Therefore, it is importantessential that each segment of U. S. community completely assume this group as a heterogeneous group. As a very popular book regarding Latino or Hispanic, it states that as Latino people at that millennial time, and also for parts of the ruling African American and Anglo societies, democratic culture holds the central frame in conflicts across determining the purpose. Within the spell, ceremonial, and metaphorical range of traditional culture, stories are created regarding the part Latino people will not or will perform as part of the public figure ."(DON’T DO ITALICS NEEDS TO REVISE AS CITATION MARK OR PARAPHRASE) AND PROFESSOR COMMENTS: … and there are some other quotes here that I don’t really understand why they are included. I think you should try to paraphrase them to see if you can put them into your own words – if they still fit then, then use them but don’t include quotes if they don’t have a purpose! (Unit 3, Kibria, Bowman and O'Leary, n.d.).

Many such as the African-American and Asian communities, (who have extended been a point in the top of identifiers of combined -race, as well as recently migrated black people from the Caribbean Islanders and Africa), the Hispanic classification will surely suffer the corresponding racial, social, and political difficulties.

Latino people are comescame with many cultures (TOPIC SENTENCES NEED TO CLEAR AND SHORT CONCISE)

And allow us not to ignore regarding color. As another issue preceding that described, Hispanics or Latino people in the country of America are yet demanded to distinguish themselves through the race. Comprehensive data knowledge more than 50 % of Hispanic or Latino people consider themselves as white while just 2.7 % classified themselves as black people. A still more modest % of people consider themselves as American Indian (Rumbaut, Pigments of our imagination: On the racialization and racial identities of “Hispanics” and “Latinos”). This is why I consider Hispanic or Latino as a heterogeneous group not a homogeneous group.

According to a research, black and white Hispanic people and as well as Hispanic people who state that they belong to any other race, receive varying levels of payment or salaries and remain in isolated communities based on the color of the skin  (José A. Cobas, Jorge, and Joe, 2010). Hispanic or Latino people who represent themselves as white people typically have greater profits, earnings or salaries and the most profound rate of unemployment while Hispanic or Latino people who represent themselves as black people typically have lower salaries, profits, or earnings and a greater percentage of unemployment. This is why I consider Hispanic or Latino as a heterogeneous group, not a homogeneous group.

Hispanic or Latino people have constitutional class, color, and intra-racial discrimination problems amongst themselves, that possess endured previous to their entry in the country like America (José A. Cobas, Jorge, and Joe, 2010). Presently, certain problems may just be strengthened in the so-called community of post-racial as researchers and policy-makers ignore everything that and protest to tag and describe Hispanic or Latino people in one central spot as a homogeneous group. This is why I consider Hispanic or Latino as a heterogeneous group, not a homogeneous group. (QUOTATION NEEDS WHEN CITE NEW IDEAS)

Latino people have DIVERSE POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE

if we discuss politically, although there is an application to handle Hispanic or Latino people as a member of a homogeneous group, Hispanic or Latino people can't be placed into great tents of voters of Democratic and Republican. Cuban people manage to place more extra to the power whereas Mexican people favor extra to the democratic. Between the Hispanic majorities, 54 % as Democratic voters, 14 % classified as Republican voters, 18 % as self-governing and 7 % as different (Rumbaut, Pigments of our imagination: On the racialization and racial identities of “Hispanics” and “Latinos”). This is why I consider Hispanic or Latino as a heterogeneous group not a homogeneous group. For instance, though Puerto Rican people may be sensitive to the situation of problems of the migration, as the residents of the United States of America. The large preponderance of this society may not respond as individually affected as Mexican people and different Hispanics from South American. The identical could be stated for Cuban American people, whose emigrant situation has not significantly constrained them to vote except the Party of Republican.

Indeed mostly it is considered that Latino or Hispanic is the homogeneous group in the United States of America. The history of Hispanics and Latinos in the U. S. is wide-varying, crossing stronger than 400 years and the diverging day the U. S, further, but recently there are many issues rises that focuses on the heterogeneity of the Latino or Hispanic group in the United States of America. There are many differences and conflicts on many matters among the members of the Latino group i.e. Mexicans, Cubans, and Spanish.

Myth 2

It is widely known that the United State is a country which possesses a number ofseveral nations and races immigrated from many other countries and regions around the world, and Latino immigrants are one of the most importantcritical components. However, a common myth about Latino immigration is that all the immigrants from Latin America are just regarded as coming to the United StateStates to take advantage of the US advanced economic system. In my personal viewpoint, I do not completely agree with this myth, and I will discuss and explain it from three aspects with evidencesevidence and data from the course materials in the rest of the essay. Finally, a strongdefinite conclusion containing not only the main points addressed, but also some deeper thinking on this topic based on my personal experiences will be presented.

By 1998 the United States possessed over 25 million immigrants in total, where over 50 percent are from Latin America (Suárez-Orozco, 2000, p. 1), which means Latino immigrants hashave become the largestmost substantial part of American immigration since the end of the last century. Admittedly, most of Latino immigrants, especially Mexican immigrants who suffered from famine and poverty entered the United States to seek economic opportunities and better life in the early stage of the 20th century. For example, the US’s greathigh demand for labor in the agricultural, transportation, and construction offered plenty of job opportunities for Mexican immigrants between 1900 and 1929 (Gutierrez, 2004, p. 44). However, I do not think that all of Latino immigrants just came to the United States to take advantage of its wonderfulpleasant economic environment, because I believe some of them also have made greatsignificant contributions to the development of the US’s economy, politics, and culture or just entered this country for some other purposes.

Latinos have contributed to the economic and political developments of the U.S.

Although most Latino immigrants entered the United States for its advanced economic system and higher living standard, Latino labor have also made greata significant contribution to the economic development of the US in the 20th century. It is reported that employers in the United States began to employ more and more Mexican migrant workers in a broad range of occupations in agriculture, mining, transportation, and construction from 1890s, which provided importantnecessary labor force for the development of the US’s economy the 20th century (Gutierrez, 2004, p. 45). In other words, the promotion of US’s economy in the last century also benefited a lot from Latino labors who came to seek job opportunities. Additionally, in California, the southern state with the highest number of Latino immigrants (exceeding one-third of the state’s total population recent year), the sharply rising demographic weight of Latino children is witnessed with every passing year. Surprisingly, the economy of this state that has largest number of Latino immigrants in the whole country accounts for one-seventh of the total economic output of the United State (Gutierrez, 2004, p. 9), which suggests that the greattremendous economic growth of some southern states including California, is associated with their populations with high proportion of Latinos who may stronglyactively promote the growth.

On the other hand, Latino immigrants, especially Mexican Americans, also impacted the US’s politics to some extend thoughextent through the influence of Latino politics is relatively limited. For instance, the great supports and votes from Mexican Americans in Texas and Illinois helped John Kennedy defeat his opponent, Richard Nixon, which brought Kennedy with victory in these two states in 1960 (Gutierrez, 2004, p. 421). Recently, as it reported that Mexican Americans are becoming increasingly relevant actors with more influence in the US’s politics (Suárez-Orozco, 2000, p. 11),) because it is understandable that millions of Mexican immigrants living in the United States possess great political value for many politicians.

Transnational culture communication between the U.S. and Latin America

It is claimed that Latino immigrants have been establishing a new transnationally culture framework between Latin America and the U.S, which are beneficial for both areas. In recent years, the development of new information technologies produces a more massive contactscontact of people, information, and culture between the United States and countries of Latino immigrants than before (Suárez-Orozco, 2000, p. 10), which means immigrants play an importantessential role in culture communication and trade between two regions. Furthermore, the continuous migratory flow from Latino countries protects social practices, culture identity between two countries. For example, in certain areassome regions of the Southwest of the US, Latino immigration is generating Spanish-speaking mass media producing new market dynamics, and new cultural identities, which is also beneficial to the richness and diversity of American culture (Suárez-Orozco, 2000, p. 10). In this regard, recent study has claimed the concept of “social remittances” that offer a distinct form of social communication between migrants living in the United StateStates and those who remain at home and contribute to hybrid cultures (Lima, 2010, p. 5).

On the other hand, forms of expressive culture, including arts, film, music, and literature have greatlysignificantly impacted by Latino immigration in the history of American culture (Gutierrez, 2004, p. 355). Therefore, it is undoubted that immigrants hashave made great contributions to cultural communication and fusion which is a crucial step in the process of globalization. The evidencesevidence above indicated that Latino immigrants not only bring new vitality to American culture, but also promote contacts of people, information, and culture between these two regions.

Other reasons for Latino immigration

Last but not least, some survey reports show that there is a small part of Latino immigrants entering the United StateStates for reasonspurposes other than economy, such as wars and political factors. In fact, before the 1860s, Cuban immigrates in the United States who were almost white and professional merchants conducted business and were generally richwealthy citizens (García, 2004, p. 145). However, a larger number of Cuban immigration happened during the final decades of the nineteenth century due to the Ten Years’ War, where the major industry and society of Cuban were nearly destroyed (García, 2004, p. 146). As a result, Political turmoil and high unemployment pushed thousands of Cubans of all races and social classes to the United States. In addition, Some Cuban alsoAlso, some Cubans came as political exiles, because they victimized by the gangsterismoviolence so prevalent in Cuban politics after 1930 (García, 2004, p. 147). Apart from Cuban immigrates, many other Central American immigrates (over two-thirds of them), including those from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua, also entered the United States to flee violence, persecution, and wars in their own homelands during the 1980s (Chinchilla & Hamilton, 2004, p. 188).

In summary, although I agree that a huge number of Latino immigrants who entered the United StateStates from the beginning of the last century certainly took advantage of US’s good economic resources and environment, and thus benefited a lot from that, I would argue that 1) The large number of Latino immigration also contributed to the promotion of US’s economy with its great labor and exerted a non-negligible influence on US’s political situation. In additionAlso, 2) in recent years, new Latino immigrants have been establishing new transnationally cultural bridge between Latin America and the U.S, which not only promotes the development of U.S’s culture, but also facilitates the massiveextensive contacts of people, information, and culture between these two regions. Finally, 3) it is reported that a small part of Latino immigrants entered the United StateStates because of other factors or reasons other than economy. For instance, a huge number of Cuban immigration happened due to the Ten Years’ War (1868–1878), political turmoil, and political exiles. As far as I am concerned, itIt is unwise to observe a thing or phenomenon only from one specific angle, otherwise. Otherwise, we may be blinded or fooled. Likewise, the interaction between Latino immigrants and the United States that possesses a mass number of immigrants is complicated,; thus it is appropriate to analysisanalyze this issue more comprehensively.

Myth 3

There are various factors/evidences that refute the Latino invasion of America claim. Latino immigrants are invited and recruited by American employers.In addition to the myth claiming that Latinos came into the United States to take advantage of the advanced economic status that the country enjoyed, several scholars assert that Latinos established and grew their numbers by invading the US as undocumented immigrants. In contrast, Latinos came into the United States as employment recruits. They were viewed as a cheap source of labor by American employers as they would be paid peanuts and outside the books. Before the 1920s, Mexicans were viewed as a conquered native population. They were initially racially defined as white and immigration was allowed. However, in practice they were excluded from acquiring citizenship or immigrating in the proper mannerproperly through several mechanisms such as literacy tests and the ban on contract labour. labor.

Illegal entry was eventually made a felony in 1929 and Mexicans became linked to illegal immigration in rapid fashion. The official numbers stated that the number of deported Mexicans rose from approximately 846 in 1920 to 8,348 after ten years. During the latter stages of the 19th century, the regional political economy in the United States (specifically in the South West Area) was made up of railroads, mining, agriculture, and ranching. These activities relied heavily on Mexican labourlabor and its active recruitment. Mexicans were often encouraged to travel across the border in order to work without any form of authorization or official documentation. Seasonal labourlabor demands and the selective enforcement of the law in the form of border patrol officers repressing Mexican workers from time to time led to a “revolving door” type situation where large scale importation of labourlabor would be concurrent with mass deportations (Genova, 2014).

The Latino community have been negatively portrayed as border crossers when, in some situations, they classify as unauthorized workers or visa overstayersover stayers. In some situationscases, they might be entering the country legitimately through the airport and passed through customs. However, it has been made harder for those within the country to legitimize their stay. There are rigorous steps that need to be undertaken, and the legal ambiguity of some areas makes it even harder. The basic unauthorized immigrant has stayed within the US for nearly 15 years. This figure has risen over the years as a result of the improvement of border patrol technology and resources (Chavez, 2008).

These changes make it harder for one to move around even within the US, leading to longermore extended stays. Moreover, the probability of one return within two years of entering the US on their first trip has continuously shrankshrunk over the years as more and more people are finding it harder to acquire legitimacy within the country (Kanstroom, 2007).

The number of immigrants had sharply declined by the onset of the 1960s, while the number of illegal immigrants skyrocketed. This was brought about by the immigrant nationality acts that had a strict policy whichthat was used to limit and restrain the number of immigrants that were entering the United States. This meant that people who wanted to enter the country to seek jobs, shelter and even political protection could only do so through lawful identification. The number of immigrants was directly affected by the policy and overtime these people were shaped by it. 1965 was unique in that there were no more national origins imposed on the immigrants. Instead, the global quota system replaced it. Quotas were placed on western hemisphere migration for the first time in history. TotalThe total number of migrants was 120,000, with 20,000 coming from each country. Immigration opportunities for Africans and Asians were improved while migration from Mexico, Latin America, and the Caribbean was restricted in a severe manner (Kibria, Bowman, & O'Leary, 2014).

Deportations of undocumented Mexicans rose by approximately 40% to 151,000 in 1968. This figure continued to rise rapidly after the quota mentioned above was implemented. In 2976, INS deported 781,000 Mexicans from the country while the total number of apprehensions for those who came from other parts of the world were below 100,000 annually. The INS’ activities heavily contributed to the false narrative that Mexicans account for most, if not all, of the “illegal aliens”..” Due to these activities, the border between the United States and Mexico played the role of the theatre of an enforcement crisis. Mexicans were then converted into the poster child for migrant illegality”. Illegal migration became the focal point and the thorn in America’s side that immigration policy sought to solve through key changes. Major shifts intin the family immigration system combined with the appallingly low rates of Mexican naturalization only served to make matters worse. In addition to this, backlogs in application processing only served to add ontoto the plight that Mexicans were experiencing.

Additional reforms began to take place in 1986. This is the immigration reform and control act. It brought about two kinds of amnesty, border enforcement, and employer sanctions. This period was a major turning point for legalization programs. SAW and general legalization were introduced. SAW or Special Agricultural Workers encompassed certain number of days that were worked in agriculture during a specified period of time. General legalization was based on the time one had concurrently accumulated as a resident. Furthermore, in order to achieve this target/goal, one had to prove that he/she is a person of good moral character. This led to the Mexican population splitting due to legalities. Some posed legal status as well as citizenship, which afforded them access to family legalization while the rest and all incoming migrants were left trudging through their status as illegals”. In some cases, they possessed liminal legality through DACA. Additionally, immobility was a by-product of all the reforms and legal action. This greatly restricted movement for these people and it became increasingly difficult for them to earn a living.

The 1990 immigration brought about several changes, such as the raising of the total immigration cap to 700,000 from 500,000. TPS Status was created, and employment-based visas were doubled. However, the worst was yet to come. In 1996, IIRIRA was introduced, and this became one of the most punitive reforms in history. Border police were granted special powers to expel people without court proceedings. Furthermore, aggravated felonies with regard toconcerning immigration cases were redefined. It is noteworthy that these changes were enacted for noncitizens only. Greater restrictions were placed on relief from removal, as well.

These reforms deeply affected the Mexican people as it became increasingly difficult for them to make their way to the United States. They switched their crossing spots to more dangerous areas to evade scrutiny after the California border was reinforced. The death rate from suffocation, hear exhaustion, unknown casescauses, and drowning rapidly increased from 1993 onwards. The Mexican people who were already in the US were put under pressure as well, and some laws that were enacted basically encouraged people to evade the scrutiny of the law lest they get expelled if their status is not legitimate (Genova, 2014).

All these laws and activities made it increasingly difficult for Mexicans to make it into the United States, although immigrants from other areas had it easier.more accessible. The major consequence of the militarization of the border is the rise in the number of illegals” or undocumented people staying longer wherever they are. Long term settlement was basically encouraged and fostered because of all that was taking place. Statistically, there are quite a number ofmany border crossers and unlawful immigrants from Asian nations who do not receive the amount of negative press that Mexicans do. Though, statistics from 1995 and previous years in the 20th century show that Latino immigrants are in plenty, the strict policies that were put in place have restricted the number of immigrants within the country. It is quite difficult for one to immigrate in a legal waylegally and the laws/documentation are quite vague at times, and this makes it difficult for professionals like lawyers to interpret them. It is also quite hard for one to legalize their status within the US once they are already there. Some children have had to end their quest for education at the high school level due to their illegal status which prevents them from properly proceeding to college in the proper way. There are also permanent bans or yearly bans that are placed legal immigration depending on the severity of one’s case (Kanstroom, 2007).

In conclusion, the narrative that there is a great invasion of America across the border by unlawful Latino immigrants is false. However, media sources perpetuate this myth to the public, and a large percentage believe it due to the high level of impressionability that the general public possesspossesses. Media plays a key role in the spread of this false news and even though proof exists that this is not the case. History has been twisted to favourfavor the oppressor as measures have been put into place to thwart and combat the immigration of Mexicans while those from other nations especially European nations are welcomed and afforded liberties that the Mexicans do not have even though they have been dwelling in North America for hundreds of years (Kanstroom, 2007).

In summary, it is clear that the sentiments from social critics concerning Latino or Hispanic groups are erroneously founded and this essay has passionately debunked popular opinions concerning the Latinos as a heterogeneous group, economic opportunist and invaders. Alongside supporting evidence, it is safe to say that the Latino group falls under the heterogeneous category. Additionally, the fast growing Latino population is the cornerstone of high labor participation which has led to remarkable economic growth.

References

Aparicio, F. R. (2004). U.S. Latino Expressive Cultures. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 355-390). New York: Columbia University Press.

Chinchilla, N. S. & Hamilton, N. (2004) Central American Immigrants: Diverse Populations, Changing Communities. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 187-228). New York: Columbia University Press.

Desipio, L. (2004). The Pressures of Perpetual Promise: Latinos and Politics, 1960–2003. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 421-466). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gutiérrez, D. G. (2004). Introduction. Demography and the Shifting Boundaries of “Community”: Reflections on “U.S. Latinos” and the Evolution of Latino Studies. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 1-42). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gutiérrez, D. G. (2004). Globalization, Labor Migration, and the Demographic Revolution: Ethnic Mexicans in the Late Twentieth Century. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 43-86). New York: Columbia University Press.

García, M. C. (2004). Exiles, Immigrants, and Transnationals: The Cuban Communities of the United States. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 146-187). New York: Columbia University Press.

Lima, A. (2010). Transnationalism: A New Mode of Immigrant Integration. The Mauricio Gastón Institute for Latino Community Development and Public Policy. University of Massachusetts Boston.

Suárez-Orozco, M. M. (2000). Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Assimilation But Were Afraid To Ask. In S. R. Graubard (Ed.), The End of Tolerance: Engaging Cultural Differences (pp. 1-30). Boston: The MIT Press.

Aparicio, F. R. (2004). U.S. Latino Expressive Cultures. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 355-390). New York: Columbia University Press.

Chinchilla, N. S. & Hamilton, N. (2004) Central American Immigrants: Diverse Populations, Changing Communities. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 187-228). New York: Columbia University Press.

Desipio, L. (2004). The Pressures of Perpetual Promise: Latinos and Politics, 1960–2003. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 421-466). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gutiérrez, D. G. (2004). Introduction. Demography and the Shifting Boundaries of “Community”: Reflections on “U.S. Latinos” and the Evolution of Latino Studies. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 1-42). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gutiérrez, D. G. (2004). Globalization, Labor Migration, and the Demographic Revolution: Ethnic Mexicans in the Late Twentieth Century. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 43-86). New York: Columbia University Press.

García, M. C. (2004). Exiles, Immigrants, and Transnationals: The Cuban Communities of the United States. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 146-187). New York: Columbia University Press.

Lima, A. (2010). Transnationalism: A New Mode of Immigrant Integration. The Mauricio Gastón Institute for Latino Community Development and Public Policy. University of Massachusetts Boston.

Suárez-Orozco, M. M. (2000). Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Assimilation But Were Afraid To Ask. In S. R. Graubard (Ed.), The End of Tolerance: Engaging Cultural Differences (pp. 1-30). Boston: The MIT Press.

Aparicio, F. R. (2004). U.S. Latino Expressive Cultures. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 355-390). New York: Columbia University Press.

Chinchilla, N. S. & Hamilton, N. (2004) Central American Immigrants: Diverse Populations, Changing Communities. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 187-228). New York: Columbia University Press.

Desipio, L. (2004). The Pressures of Perpetual Promise: Latinos and Politics, 1960–2003. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 421-466). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gutiérrez, D. G. (2004). Introduction. Demography and the Shifting Boundaries of “Community”: Reflections on “U.S. Latinos” and the Evolution of Latino Studies. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 1-42). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gutiérrez, D. G. (2004). Globalization, Labor Migration, and the Demographic Revolution: Ethnic Mexicans in the Late Twentieth Century. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 43-86). New York: Columbia University Press.

García, M. C. (2004). Exiles, Immigrants, and Transnationals: The Cuban Communities of the United States. In D. G. Gutiérrez (Ed.), The Columbia History Of Latinos In The United States Since 1960 (pp. 146-187). New York: Columbia University Press.

Lima, A. (2010). Transnationalism: A New Mode of Immigrant Integration. The Mauricio Gastón Institute for Latino Community Development and Public Policy. University of Massachusetts Boston.

Suárez-Orozco, M. M. (2000). Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Assimilation But Were Afraid To Ask. In S. R. Graubard (Ed.), The End of Tolerance: Engaging Cultural Differences (pp. 1-30). Boston: The MIT Press.

Chavez, L. R. (2008). The Latino Threat. Google Books. Genova, D. (2014). Immigration Reform and the production of Immigrant illegality. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kanstroom, D. (2007). Deportation Nation: Outsiders in American History. Harvard University Press. Kibria, N., Bowman, C., & O'Leary, M. (2014). Race and Immigration. Policy Press.