A new study from North Carolina State University which examined political activity in 52 metropolitan areas across the United States finds that practices such as protests against legislation to make life easier for illegal immigrants are likely to backfire and spur increased political action, even from legal immigrant communities.
Specifically, the researchers examined the number of protests from the immigrant community in metropolitan areas during the year 2000, to investigate the extent to which local conditions affect an immigrant community's willingness to take part in informal political action. The immigrant communities in the study reflect a range of backgrounds, including Latino, Asian American, Middle Eastern and African communities.
Clearly, there is an illegal immigration problem that needs to be addressed but since they can't vote, the researchers wanted to see how they responded.
"U.S. Census data indicate that 60 percent of the foreign-born in the U.S. are not citizens," says Dr. Kim Ebert, an assistant professor of sociology and co-author of a paper describing the research. "Non-citizens can't vote, so we wanted to determine how they are participating in political life.
"Metropolitan areas that saw high levels of anti-immigrant activity, such as anti-immigrant protests or abusive practices, were subsequently more likely to see protest activity from the immigrant community," Ebert says. "In addition, metro areas in states that passed anti-immigrant legislation often saw a short-term dampening effect on protests – but experienced significant increases in the number of political protests from immigrant communities in the long term."
So is a solution to have a protest against illegal immigrant practices and then arrest everyone who counter-protests, since the majority will be illegal? Perhaps. Another solution might be to look at metropolitan areas – the research found those with high levels of housing and employment segregation between immigrant and U.S.-born communities were also subject to more protests than areas that were more integrated - though obviously the more integrated immigrants are in the US legally.
Moreover, protest was less likely to be used as a strategy for social change in inclusionary metropolitan areas where immigrants had greater access to formal means of political and social participation via citizenship, college education and voting - again, hallmarks of legal immigrants, so why the researchers are claiming that college education for criminals would help stop illegal immigration is a puzzle.
The researchers also found that mobilization in the immigrant community was less likely to occur in metropolitan areas with higher immigrant growth rates - areas that saw significant increases in their immigrant populations between 1991 and 2000, such as Memphis, Tenn., and Greenville, N.C., did not see any immigrant protest activity, but immigrant gateway cities with modest growth rates, such as Chicago, Los Angeles and Miami, saw significantly more frequent protest activity from the immigrant community.
The researchers are currently examining longitudinal data from 1990 to 2010 to investigate how political, demographic and social changes influence immigrant organizing.
The research was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Russell Sage Foundation and the American Sociological Association.
Paper: "Beyond the Ballot: Immigrant Collective Action in Gateways and New Destinations in the United States", November 2010 Social Problems