Cited page

Citations are available only to our active members. Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

X X

Cited page

Display options
Reset

American Immigration Policy, a Reappraisal

By: William S. Bernard; Carolyn Zeleny et al. | Book details

Contents
Look up
Saved work (0)

matching results for page

Page 259
Why can't I print more than one page at a time?
While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

12
Conclusions and Recommendations

A: CONCLUSIONS

I. Need for a More Liberal Immigration Policy at This Time

Two decades ago a major change was made in American immigration policy. That policy was a reversal of the Open Door under which, in one hundred years, thirty-eight million persons had crossed the Atlantic. This huge migration was an outstanding practical success, as well as a symbol to the whole world of American faith in equality and democracy. After the First World War there seemed to be cogent reasons for reducing the continuous flow of immigrants which for a decade or more previously had averaged one million a year. It is understandable that in the period of isolationism immediately following the war the pendulum with respect to immigration policy should have swung to the opposite extreme. Restrictive legislation, beginning in 1921, culminated in the quota system and the National Origins Law, which has been in effect since 1929. This law, while sharply restricting total annual quota immigration from overseas to slightly over 150,000, at the same time introduced a new and foreign principle into American life: preferential treatment for immigrants from northern and western Europe as against those from southern and eastern Europe.

With the march of events, this discriminatory feature of our immigration law has come to appear increasingly inconsistent with our democratic traditions and ideals and our responsibilities in the world. It embodies an indefensible doctrine concerning differences between various groups of people. It is based on a misreading of the history of our country which has been enriched

-259-

Select text to:

Select text to:

  • Highlight
  • Cite a passage
  • Look up a word
Learn more Close
Loading One moment ...
of 341
Highlight
Select color
Change color
Delete highlight
Cite this passage
Cite this highlight
View citation

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?