What Bobby Jindal Gets Wrong About Assimilation, And Why It Matters

National Journal

By Matt Vasilogambros

September 9, 2015

What Bobby Jindal Gets Wrong About Assimilation, And Why It Matters

There’s an in­va­sion hap­pen­ing in the United States. At least, that’s what Bobby Jin­dal is warn­ing in his cam­paign stump speeches and tele­vi­sion ap­pear­ances these days.

“Im­mig­ra­tion without as­sim­il­a­tion is in­va­sion,” the Re­pub­lic­an hope­ful re­peats, and re­peats of­ten.

As­sim­il­a­tion is a strong sen­ti­ment, es­pe­cially com­ing from the son of two im­mig­rants. “Learn Eng­lish and ad­opt our val­ues,” says Jin­dal, who is polling at less than 1 per­cent.

But in­vok­ing as­sim­il­a­tion in a polit­ic­al con­text has deep­er im­plic­a­tions. It’s a poin­ted at­tempt to po­lar­ize voters along the is­sue of an emer­ging mul­ti­eth­nic so­ci­ety.

As­sim­il­a­tion harks back to the days of im­mig­rants re­fus­ing to speak their nat­ive lan­guage to their chil­dren out of fear of pre­ju­dice. Be­come Amer­ic­an, or what some people think is Amer­ic­an, it de­mands.

“It really is a eu­phem­ism for brown people to be­come like Amer­ic­ans now,” says Cesar Var­gas, the first un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rant to be­come a law­yer in New York.

In a Re­pub­lic­an pres­id­en­tial primary dom­in­ated by a deaf­en­ing anti-im­mig­rant gushes of front-run­ner Don­ald Trump, minor can­did­ates are try­ing any­thing they can to get a foothold. This is Jin­dal’s mis­taken at­tempt.

But invoking assimilation in a political context has deeper implications. It’s a pointed attempt to polarize voters along the issue of an emerging multiethnic society. ”

The alarm in his one-liner is base­less, says Mi­chael Fix, the pres­id­ent of the Mi­gra­tion Policy In­sti­tute, since there is no crisis of large en­claves of im­mig­rants not learn­ing Eng­lish, en­ter­ing the work­force, or join­ing so­ci­ety.

“His state­ment by de­fault is that this isn’t hap­pen­ing,” says Fix. “The evid­ence isn’t there for that, by and large. We want people to come here and speak Eng­lish, and not live in se­greg­ated com­munit­ies, and ad­opt demo­crat­ic norms, and par­ti­cip­ate in civic life. We want all of those things, and all of those things are hap­pen­ing.”

Jin­dal’s word choice is also at is­sue here. We should not strive for as­sim­il­a­tion, Fix says, but for in­teg­ra­tion. Im­mig­rants can take on all of these per­sonae and also hold on to their cul­ture and lan­guage.

“The core idea of as­sim­il­a­tion is they be­come like us,” he says. “The core idea of in­teg­ra­tion is we be­come sim­il­ar. We come to re­semble one an­oth­er. It’s two dir­ec­tions, not one dir­ec­tion.”

In­teg­ra­tion is pro­ceed­ing power­fully across the coun­try, as is evid­ent by the suc­cess of the second gen­er­a­tion, who his­tor­ic­ally has high­er edu­ca­tion­al at­tain­ment and job suc­cess. Span­ish and oth­er for­eign lan­guages are also largely gone by the second gen­er­a­tion and com­pletely by the third gen­er­a­tion, trends show.

Jin­dal’s tenu­ous state­ment is less so­ci­olo­gic­al and fact-based, and more rhet­or­ic­al. Var­gas, who is a co­dir­ect­or of the ad­vocacy group Dream Ac­tion Co­ali­tion, says it’s tap­ping in­to a fear of early state Re­pub­lic­an primary voters, who are more White than the rest of the coun­try.

“It goes back to ex­ploit­ing a fear of the new demo­graph­ics and the new chan­ging Amer­ica,” he says, “and less about the U.S. need­ing to pro­mote unity through Eng­lish and cer­tain tra­di­tions.”

Jin­dal may think there’s an in­va­sion. But cul­tur­al white­wash­ers have already lost that ar­gu­ment.

For more information, go to:  www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com