Chinese Exclusion and the Roots of National

Immigration Restriction

Political Science 61 / Chicano/Latino Studies

64October 18, 2007

Models of Minority Exclusion

1. Apartheid An official policy of racial segregation,

involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites

2. Economic and political disempowerment Taking away what has already been exercised

3. Two-tiered pluralism Pluralism—A condition in which numerous distinct

ethnic, religious, or cultural groups compete within a society

Two-tiered pluralism—Ongoing competition, but access to some opportunities/resources unavailable to certain groups

Today’s Stories1. Targeted restriction focused on one

immigrant/ethnic group serves as a foundation for a much more broadly based restriction targeting many/all populations

2. State/regional interests can shape national immigration policy when the nation’s electorate is evenly divided and one of the states with new immigrants is up for grabs

Roots of Asian Migrations to U.S.

Economic incorporation of the Western United States and chronic labor shortage

Asian migration responds to economic opportunities and economic needs California agriculture (1840s) Gold rush (1848) Hawaiian agriculture (1850s) Western railroads (1865-1880s) Scientific and technological workers (1940 - ) Family migration (1965 - )

19th Century Asian Migration

Overwhelmingly, Unskilled labor migration Almost all from China Geographically focused – Hawaii and Western U.S.

More “organized” than European migration Cost and distance created entrepreneur middlemen Popular notion of the “coolie” (contract labor), came to

be understood as new form of slavery Chinese immigrants entrepreneurial at settlement

Challenge economic opportunities of Whites Come to dominate sectors of the economy – what

would today be called the service sector

Political Apartheid and Economic

Disempowerment Statutory exclusion based on race

Naturalization (1790) In re Ah Yup (1878)

Foreign Miners Tax (1850) People v. Hall (1854)

Sustained economic segregation “Chinatowns”

Restricted Opportunities Initially Balanced with

Recruitment

Burlingame-Seward Treaty (1868) China could not restrict the emigration of

its nationals Fit with national ethos of “open borders” –

fear that other countries would restrict labor migration and slow U.S. economic development

Similar fear with Mexico in this era (that Mexico would restrict emigration)

Rapid Switch from Recruitment to

Restriction California seeks to restrict Chinese

immigration California prohibits

Chinese immigration (1858) Chinese women destined for “prostitution” (1870) Chinese living in city limits (1879) Marriage licenses between whites and

“Mongolians” (1879)

Local prejudices translate into national restrictions

Chinese Exclusion Act (1882) – Politics

Angell Treaty (1880) U.S. could restrict immigration from China

Popular roots Labor competition in California Argument that Chinese labor is un-free, as

slaves had been Regional (California) racism made national Organized labor turned against the Chinese National politics shaped by a search for

California’s electoral votes

Chinese Exclusion Act (1882)

Suspends Chinese labor immigration for 10 years Continues to allow elite migration from China: those

“proceeding to the United States … from curiosity” Held to be Constitutional—Chae Chan Ping v.

U.S. (1889) Remains in place until 1940 when war-time

imperatives allow for limited Chinese immigration

Chinese American residents of U.S. find ways to evade its restrictions

Expansion of Asian Exclusion (1880s-1940)

Chinese exclusion extended—1892, 1902, 1904 1892—Chinese in U.S. to register with government

End of Chinese immigration spurs labor recruitment in other parts of Asia

Exclusion spreads to rest of Asia Koreans 1905 Japan 1907 (“Gentleman’s Agreement”) “Geographic Barred Zone” 1917 (includes India) National Origin Quotas 1921 and 1924

Asian Immigration, 1840s-1940s

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

1840

s

1850

s

1860

s

1870

s

1880

s

1890

s

1900

s

1910

s

1920

s

1930

s

1940

s

AsiaChinaTurkeyJapan

Denial of Rights of Chinese/Asians in U.S.

Segregated schools in California & the West (1884-)

Progressive narrowing of eligibility for naturalization

Random violence against Asians/Chinatowns Aliens “ineligible for citizenship”

California prohibitions on land ownership (1913) Prohibition on stock ownership (1923)

Exception—Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. (1898), can not take citizenship away from those who have it

Apartheid at its Extreme

Japanese Internment/Executive Order 9066 (1942) 120,000 Japanese and Japanese Americans 62 percent U.S. citizens Held to be constitutional – Korematsu v.

United States (1944) Internment also a form of

political/economic disempowerment Loss of land that had to be sold quickly

Asian Restriction as the Root of Broader

Restrictions Asian exclusion begins 40-year growth in

exclusion Exclusion of single women (using notion that they

were destined for prostitution) Exclusion based on belief Exclusion based on health status Exclusion based on knowledge

National Origin Quotas (1921 and 1924) Attempt to freeze national ethnic composition in 1890 All but Northern/Western Europeans face exclusion

Spurs demand for Latino, particularly Mexican American and Puerto Rican, migration

Relevance to Contemporary Minority

Politics Root of Asian American experience is

exclusion Does this have any relevance to the vast majority

of Asian Americans who trace their U.S. roots to post-1965 immigrants?

Will this history of exclusion create the foundation for connections to African Americans and Latinos?

Narrow immigration restrictions can serve as the seed for more exclusive policies Is the U.S. now in a period similar to 1875-1924? If so, who are today’s Chinese?

Question for Next Time

How did President Johnson build a legislative coalition to pass the Voting Rights Act?