December 7th,
September 11th And Immigrant Assimilation
By
Lance T. Izumi
A few years ago, after writing an
article on the high crime rate among illegal
immigrants in California, I received an irate phone
call from an immigrant who, although claiming to be
a naturalized citizen, kept referring to “you
Yankees.” As a third-generation Japanese American,
I’m a “Yankee” if that means that I’m an American.
So was that immigrant naturalized citizen, but
though he may have been a
citizen on paper, he was not an American in his
heart.
Remembering that incident got me to thinking about
Pearl Harbor. September 11, 2001 was a second Pearl
Harbor—a vicious sneak attack that killed thousands of
Americans. While the attacks may be similar, however,
the general reaction of Japanese Americans in 1941 and
those of
Muslim Americans nearly sixty years later to the
tragedies of the day have been very different. This is
not surprising, though, considering our politically
correct emphasis on multiculturalism over immigrant
assimilation.
After Japanese warplanes attacked Pearl Harbor on
December 7, 1941, thousands of Japanese Americans ended
up being interned in camps for the duration of World War
II. Despite the abridgement of their constitutional
rights, the vast majority of Japanese Americans remained
strongly loyal to the United States. As one wartime
Japanese American said, “Yes, the United States did make
a mistake [about the internment] but we felt it was our
country–right and wrong.”
Such pro-U.S. sentiment among Japanese Americans was
due, in large part, to the strong assimilation process
that existed before the war. Rather than today’s
multiculturalism, which believes that all cultures are
equally good and which Balkanizes immigrants and
separates them from historic American culture, immigrant
Japanese and their children were expected to become
mainstream Americans. Japanese-American community
leaders and organizations emphasized this goal. A 1942
Japanese-American creed stated: “I believe in
[America’s] institutions, ideals and traditions; I glory
in her heritage; I boast of her history; I trust in her
future. Because I believe in America, and I trust she
believes in me, and because I have received innumerable
benefits from her, I pledge myself to do honor to her at
all times and in all places.” The result of this
assimilation process was a sincere and deep patriotism
on the part of most Japanese Americans.
Perhaps the most visible sign of this patriotism was
the willingness of legions of young Japanese-American
men to join specially formed combat units of the U.S.
Army. The
442nd Regimental Combat Team, composed of Japanese
Americans, became the most highly decorated unit of the
war for its bravery in the European theater. It’s worth
noting that many Japanese Americans had wanted to fight
against Japan. One Japanese-American recruit said, “I
was excited and felt we were going to the Pacific
Theater at that time. I talked to a number of officers
and enlisted men of Japanese American ancestry about the
possibility of going to the Far East. No one had any
objections. We were ready to go.”
Contrast those sentiments with the pronouncements and
actions of Muslim American spokesmen and groups in the
wake of the September 11th attack by Muslim
terrorists, many of whom had illegally immigrated to the
U.S.. There have been no stirring pleas for
young Muslim Americans to enlist in the American
military or organizing of patriotic rallies in Muslim
communities. Indeed, on a recent segment of 60
Minutes, a supposedly moderate Muslim American
cleric, citing U.S. foreign policies, accused the U.S.
of being an “accessory” to the terrorist attacks in New
York and Washington.
Although condemning terrorism in general, officials
for key Muslim American groups like the Council on
American Islamic Relations (CAIR) have been hesitant to
condemn Osama bin Laden, the all but certain mastermind
behind the September 11 terror attacks. This is
unsurprising given that CAIR and other Muslim groups
such as the American Muslim Council (AMC) have in the
past
refused to condemn known Islamic terrorist
organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah and have
criticized the conviction of the Islamic extremists who
bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. Adopting the
strategy of other ethnic-based groups, CAIR and AMC
prefer to fight
perceived biases against Muslims in American society
rather than making immigrant Muslims better Americans.
As so many officials from George W. Bush on downward
have pointed out, most Muslim Americans are decent
law-abiding people. But today’s multiculturalist ethos
doesn’t seek immigrant assimilation or require
immigrants to be patriotic. The natural result is that
many immigrants are not assimilated and have little
feelings of patriotism. In a survey of Muslims in Los
Angeles County, Kambiz GhaneaBasiri, a fellow of
Harvard’s Center for the Study of World Religions, found
that “a significant number of Muslims, particularly
immigrant Muslims, do not have close ties or loyalty to
the United States.” Indeed, he
found that 12 out of 15 immigrants feel more
allegiance to a foreign country than to the United
States. Thomas Sowell has
warned that immigrants “may be hijacked by those
activists who are ideologically committed to keeping
them speaking foreign languages, loyal to foreign values
and—if possible—taught to feel
historic grievances against the country that is
welcoming them today.”
All this is not to single out immigrant Muslims for
potential disloyalty to the United States. Remember the
infamous incident in Los Angeles several years ago when
tens of thousands of immigrant
Mexicans booed and hurled abuse on the U.S. national
soccer team in a match against Mexico.
The real problem, then, is twofold. First, America’s
immigration system annually allows in tens of thousands
of immigrants, many of them illegal, with little regard
for their economic productivity, their social pasts, or
their interest in assimilating into mainstream American
culture. The second problem is the complete lack of will
to limit immigration and ensure immigrant assimilation.
Writing earlier this year, famed Harvard political
scientist Samuel Huntington
said that modern immigrants to the United States
maintain dual identities, so much so that Mexican
presidential candidates now campaign for votes and money
in Los Angeles. In view of today’s unending flow of
immigrants, Huntington says that the U.S. cannot assume
that because it was successful at assimilation in the
past it will be successful in the future.
Indeed, until we free ourselves of the constraints of
multiculturalist dogma, and reaffirm the central
importance of historic American culture and immigrant
assimilation into that culture, we will face an
immigrant situation that is not only a social problem,
but also a national security risk.
Lance Izumi is a Senior Fellow in California
Studies at the
Pacific Research Institute.
October 17,
2001