Examine The Puertorican Experience Of Settlement In

Examine The Puertorican Experience Of Settlement In

The USA Essay, Research Paper

Thernstrom and Orlov in The Harvard Encyclopaedia of American Ethnic Groups define the term Hispanic as & # 8220 ; an easy manner to jointly mention to a turning figure of Spanish beginning or Spanish -speaking people in the United States & # 8221 ; . The chief constituent groups of the Hispanic population of the United States are Cubans, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and to a lesser extent Dominicans, and other Central and South Americans. This umbrella term is hence used to depict dissimilar peoples from different states, with different cultural backgrounds, physical features, civilizations and socioeconomic position. This diverseness manifests itself in the diverseness of their colony. In this essay I hope to discourse the differences and similarities between the three chief Hispanic groups, the Mexicans, Cubans and Puerto Ricans and in visible radiation of this, work towards an apprehension of why the Puerto Rican experience of colony in the USA has been so markedly alone. The history of Mexican in-migration started with the invasion and appropriation of Mexico during the 1845-55 war. But since so in-migration has continued about continuously. In 1990 there were 13 million or 5.47 % of the population, Mexicans resident lawfully in the USA. Ninety per centum of the Mexican American population lived in the south West, the balance have moved in hunt of employment in the Midwest. A figure of of import factors can now be recognised. The Mexican population is now a national as opposed to a regional minority, urban instead than rural and industrial instead than agricultural. The mean Mexican is bi-lingual in Spanish and English, and was born in the US of US born parents. That is to state a 3rd coevals immigrant. Furthermore the mean Mexican is Catholic although he attends mass less often than other Catholics. By and large the mean Mexican is less good educated than norm in the US and racially is a mixture of white Spanish and Indian, although some black lineage may be present. Cubans are a far more recent immigrant group. In 1990 there were merely over a million Cubans in the USA. Ever since the 1959 revolution in Cuba there has been a steady flow of expatriates. This flow has increased well with the Cuban Missile crisis and the categorization of Cubans as political refugees. By the 1970 & # 185 ; s they were get downing to go established in southern metropoliss, being 99 % urban, and in Miami, which now has about 40 % of Cubans in the USA. Those Cubans who foremost emigrated were those wealthier Cubans who stood to lose from the revolution. This has now steadily go less the instance and now the mean Cuban is on mean likely to be less affluent than the mean American and more likely to be unemployed. A important difference is that Cuban migration to the USA was driven by a socialist province. As a consequence the Cuban migrators are efficaciously in expatriate. As a consequence of this nonvoluntary migration the desire to keep their native civilization is really strong. This is most evidently reflected in the common usage of Spanish. The size of the Cuban population in Miami is now so great that Cubans need small interaction with other cultural groups. There are Cuban telecasting and wireless Stationss, store and newspapers, and Miami is now virtually a bi-lingual metropolis. Traditional the Cuban household unit is extended and although this has declined in frequence, the household unit is normally larger than the mean atomic household. The Cuban civilization besides has resulted in small matrimony across cultural barriers. This has resulted in the care of a strong Cuban civilization. Importantly, harmonizing to the 1970 US census 95 % of Cuban Americans are white, with the balance holding some African lineage. Puerto Ricans have had citizenship of the USA since 1917 and hence in-migration to the mainland has been happening since so. Mass migration occurred in the late 1960 & # 185 ; s and 1970 & # 185 ; s as unemployment in Puerto Rica, population force per unit areas, easiness of conveyance to the US and an already established Puerto Rican community in the US provided a really alluring stimulation for migration. The Puerto Rican population in 1990 was a small under three million, about one per centum of the entire population. 69 % of Puerto Ricans are located in the North East, chiefly in New York but besides now in Detroit sand Chicago. Puerto Ricans have by and large non sought to keep their civilization in the ways that other European migrators did in the earlier half of this century. Significantly there is a ample component of African lineage in the Puerto Rican population. 7 % of Puerto Ricans in New York classified themselves as black. It is apparent that these three Hispanic groups differ culturally and in the history of their migration to the USA. Another important difference is in their socio-economic position. The Statistical Abstract of the USA ( 1993 ) gives a elaborate dislocation of changing socio-economic indexs harmonizing to cultural grouping. These indexs include educational attainment, degrees of unemployment, household position and proprietor occupied lodging. The Statistical Abstract gives informations based upon the 1990 US nose count. A step of Educational attainment is given in footings of the per centum of people, older than twenty five, who have completed high school instruction. 46.2 % of Mexicans, 59.8 % of Puerto Ricans, and 62.1 % of Cubans had completed their high school instruction or higher. In footings of unemployment, 10.7 % of Mexicans, 7.8 % of Cubans and 12.8 % of Puerto Ricans were unemployed ( Entire unemployment as a per centum of the civilian labor force ) . Cubans were on norm wealthier holding a average income of $ 31 015, compared to $ 23 714 of the Mexicans and merely $ 20 301 of the Puerto Ricans. Then eventually in footings of proprietor occupied lodging, merely 23.4 % of Puerto Ricans were proprietor residents, compared to 44.1 % of Mexicans and 53.1 % of Cubans. All these informations reflect the mean lower socio-economic position of the Puerto Rican population of the USA. This is cardinal to the account of their alone colony forms. Spanish americans throughout the USA have had really different and really curious colony experiences. However even within the Latino colony experience, Puerto Ricans have shown some alone forms. A few general observations can be made. Spanish americans are in general more unintegrated than Whites but less segregated than inkinesss. This holds for all groups nevertheless Puerto Ricans in New York are less unintegrated from inkinesss than they are from Whites. Furthermore, Hispanics are more concentrated in metropolis centre than Whites but less concentrated than inkinesss. Kantrowitz ( 1969 ) noted that Puerto Ricans in New York surrounded black ghettos, and that black Puerto Ricans were closest to the black ghetto, whilst white Puerto Ricans were closest to the border and the white vicinities. This lead Kantrowitz to propose that the Puerto Ricans formed the & # 8220 ; foothills to the black mountains & # 8221 ; . Finally, Spanish americans are all every bit segregated from each other as they are from other groups, which is surprising sing their cultu

ral similarity. The experience of Anglo and African American settlement in the USA has been very different, yet earlier theories of assimilation were based upon this Anglo experience, and suggested that a group would become more integrated with the host community and that desegregation would occur with time and with socio-economic development. Taeuber and Taeuber (1965) were the first to recognise that this theory was not universally applicable to all ethnic groups. They showed that despite socio-economic advancement and a long duration of settlement, blacks remained highly segregated. Kantrowitz further discredited this theory in noting that even culturally similar groups, such as white Protestant Norwegians and Swedes, had remained segregated from one another. The invasion and succession model was developed to explain the high levels of black segregation. This model proposed that a group which was highly segregated would move into other areas and as it did so the original group would move out. Massey and Bitterman realised that neither of the two conventional theories fitted the experience of the Puerto Rican group in the USA. Massey recognised thatb there were some unique aspects of the Puerto Rican experience. Puerto Rican settlement was characterized by high segregation form non-Hispanic whites and low segregation from blacks. Added to this was the fact that there appeared to be no link between levels of segregation and socio economic status. Peter Jackson noted perhaps the greatest oddity, the paradox that despite being highly segregated from native whites, Puerto Ricans are still less segregated from them than are blacks, even though blacks out rank them in every socio-economic aspect. Massey and Bitterman put forward three hypothesis in order to explain these anomalies. The first hypothesis was the ethnic solidarity hypothesis, in other words that the Puerto Rican group actively sought to segregate themselves. The second hypothesis is that of the Anglo prejudice hypothesis. This states that Puerto Ricans wish to assimilated but white prejudice prevents them from doing so. The final hypothesis is the racial heritage hypothesis. This suggests that because many Puerto Ricans have strong black ancestry, they do not see any stigma in locating near blacks. In doing so they become the bystander victims of white racial tension towards blacks. Massey and Bitterman used both the index of dissimilarity (id) and the P* index, which is a measure of possible contact, to investigate the first hypothesis. According to the solidarity hypothesis there should be a pattern of invasion and succession, but this invasion should only be occuring as overflow from established areas and therefore should not in any way be correlated to socio-economic status. There is substantial evidence to prove that this is not the case. Firstly invasion is occurring at twice the rate of sucession and only appears to be triggered in those census tracts which contain blacks. In these cases it is difficult to tell whether it is the blacks or the Puerto Ricans which trigger the succession. Secondly, using any of the measures of socio-econmic status, the Puerto Ricans loced in the invasion tracts are always of a higher socio-economic status than that of those to be found in the established areas. Finaly, invasion areas are not located adjacent to the established areas but are usually at some distance, suggesting that they are not spill overs from the Barrio. This evidence therefore undermines the hypothesis that Puerto Rican settlement patterns are brought about by ethnic solidarity. Evidence supporting the Anglo Predjudice model is however stronger. Firstly, if Puerto Ricans in New York are comared to Mexicans in Los Angeles it can be seen that the Puerto Ricans, it is evident that Puerto Ricans occupy only 25% of New York census tracts, whereas Mexicans occupy 77% of census tracts in Los Angeles. Even more convincing evidence is seen when considering whether invasion of an are is followed by a loss or gain in the white population of an area. When Mexicans invaded an area there was a 50/50 chance that whites would flee. In the case of Puerto Ricans, when blacks are present they only had an 11% chance of gaining anglos and a 93% chance of anglo loss without blacks present. This suggests that anglos view Puerto Ricans in the same way as they view blacks. Using discriminate function analysis Massey and Bitterman were able to highlight those features which caused Anglos to avoid Puerto Rican areas. The percentage of the Hispanic group which were black, the proximity of the nearest established Puerto Rican area and the percentage of native stock all appeared to have only the most minimal influence upon the actions of Anglos. The most important factors were proximity to the nearest black area and the socio-economic status of the Puerto Ricans. Anglos clearly avoid settlement near Puerto Ricans. However this is not due to any antipathy towards them as Puerto Ricans, their African ancestry, nor from their recent immigration. It would appear that “Anglo avoidance of Puerto Rican invasion areas stems from the relatively low social status of Puerto Ricans, and their common location near existing black neighbourhoods”. According to Massey and Bitterman therefore, it is not “Puerto Ricans that Anglos avoid, but blacks; and the fact that needs explaining is not why Anglos avoid Puerto Ricans, but why Puerto Ricans are so likely to live near blacks.” The final hypothesis is the Racial Heritage Hypothesis. One of the main elements of the ecological theory is that minority groups try convert social and status attainments into spatial distance from the ethnic enclave, and into greater assimilation into the host society. Massey and Bitterman, in their comparison of the ability of Mexicans and Puerto Ricans to convert attainments of social status into desegregation, were able to show that Mexicans were far more able to make the conversion than were Puerto Ricans. The reason for this, they believed was the negative influence of the blacks within the Puerto Rican community. They were able to show that if one were able to control the negative impact of racial heritage, the Puerto Ricans would conform to the expected pattern of desegregation with higher socio-economic status. It is therefore evident that the Hispanic population of the USA is far from homogenous. Indeed one group in particular stands out. The Puerto Ricans are substantially different to both Mexicans and Cubans and this is reflected in their unique settlement experience. The key to this difference in their spatial situation lies in two fundamental characteristics: they are poorer and they are blacker. Their low socio-economic status prevents them from being able to dra away from predominantly black areas and their racial heritage draws them strongly towards residence near and among blacks. It might therefore be concluded that the paradox of Puerto Rican segregation might have something to do with the “ambiguities of Puerto Rican ethnicity”(Jackson).