Ravinder Kaur Who Says You Re A Dane Summary

Mawi Asgedom, an author, public speaker, and a refugee from Ethiopian origin, in his TEDXGRANTPARK talk, How Immigrants Make America Great (2016), addresses the topic of immigration in the United States of America and argues that immigrants make America “more safer and prosperous” and bring “stronger values” because they are simply living in the nation. He backs up this claim by doing the following: first, he refers to examples on how immigrants make sacrifices to make this country safe; next, he gives staggering statistics on the percentage of immigrants living in America today; last, he provides many cases of companies founded by immigrants that creates thousands of jobs for Americans. Mawi Asgedom, an immigrant himself, wishes to convey to readers the importance of how the “bedrock values” of immigrants, which are generosity and entrepreneurship, make them a “10” and how immigrants make America’s economy better overall. The author’s audience likely consists of those interested in immigration policies as is evident through his references to the immigration statistics and the response of the increased job market here in the United States due to the immigrants; he addresses readers with a tone that is very formal and serious but adds some humor to capture his audience, the viewers of TEDXGRANTPARK and other interested in the approach to immigration in the United States.

Giving into the demands of upset citizens, different political parties began to campaign with planks in their platforms dedicated to legally destroying immigration. The Austrian Freedom Party, for instance, campaigned to increase the amount of laws that prevent immigration and to make it more difficult for non-Austrians to live and work amongst the Austrian people (Doc 6). By creating a platform to change a country’s laws, it is clear Europeans were so upset with immigration that they wanted to make fundamental changes in their governments’ policies. People were unhappy with how their society was transforming and they wanted to put official rules in place that would allow Europe to return to its former state. Enoch Powell, a member of the Conservative Party, brought this common desire to light by explaining that people did not want to live in a country filled with immigrants, so action needed to be taken in order to curb the high immigration levels (Doc 2). The fact that many Europeans wanted politicians to take a stand against immigration shows how upset people were with the rising numbers of immigration, which became roughly 500,000 immigrants per year. By involving the government, European citizens were able to project their anti-immigration sentiment into the rest of the continent. Involving politicians and political parties shows how adament some Europeans were about keeping foreigners out of

In the United States, the cliché of a nation of immigrants is often invoked. Indeed, very few Americans can trace their ancestry to what is now the United States, and the origins of its immigrants have changed many times in American history. Despite the identity of an immigrant nation, changes in the origins of immigrants have often been met with resistance. What began with white, western European settlers fleeing religious persecution morphed into a multicultural nation as immigrants from countries across the globe came to the U.S. in increasing numbers. Like the colonial immigrants before them, these new immigrants sailed to the Americas to gain freedom, flee poverty and

    For thousands of years people have left their home country in search of a land of milk and honey. Immigrants today still equate the country they are immigrating to with the Promised Land or the land of milk and honey. While many times this Promised Land dream comes true, other times the reality is much different than the dream. Immigration is not always a perfect journey. There are many reasons why families immigrate and there are perception differences about immigration and the New World that create difficulties and often separate generations in the immigrating family. Anzia Yezierska creates an immigration story based on a Jewish family that is less than ideal. Yezierska’s text is a

In Immigration: What Is to Be Done? By David Cole, David advocates the misleading anti-sentiment of immigrants today, such as immigrants taking jobs from U.S citizens, immigrants refusing to assimilate, Immigrants using and taking society’s resources, and the belief that Noncitizens are not entitled to constitutional rights. David contends these beliefs suggesting that the claims are biassed and flat out wrong, in addition he shows admiration for immigrants.

Both Quindlen and Kennedy believed that immigration joins the country together. Although having the same belief, they also had different concepts when it came to the issue. However they also shared some similarities in their vision. Quindlen and Kennedy often shared the same idea but they had different opinions on ways to cope with the issues that are around us. These differences include, the purpose of immigration, if it’s helping and if it will be good in the long run. Each author however, has a different approach to this issue. Nevertheless, both Quindlen and Kennedy had well thought views about immigration and both of their stories were very intelligent and informal.

Kaus argument starts with his assertion that media triggered pathos is clouding reality and reasoning. He points out the ‘poster child’ view of dreamers as “college-bound high school grads or military personnel”, “valedictorians” and “first responders.” This is the ideal image of an “American”, showing that dreamers are fulfilling the dream of coming to America to make a life of success. Kaus thus shows how this is a cloud of judgment by stating “the pursuit of pure compassion comes with harmful side effects.” This pathos evokes the feeling of fear and anger in his audience. He acknowledges that the country is trying to help immigrants but by doing this is will cause harm to the nation. He alludes ways this program will do this is by giving

Finally Iceland introduces the segmented assimilation theory which focuses on divergent patterns of incorporation among contemporary immigrants. Iceland then moves to comment on how U.S. immigration policy has influenced

From the graphs in part 2 of the story, the attitudes of immigrants has changed drastically. From the 3 questions asked in the surveys of 2002 and 2009 all votes have increased by 25% or more. The number of immigrants who spent most of their time with other natives was 25%. The number of immigrants who talk to their natives on the phone was a total of 28%. Lastly, the number of immigrants who speak their native language at home was 32%. Therefore the attitudes of recent immigrants definitely differ from those of the older

Caldwell argues that “Western Europe became a multi-ethnic society in a fit of absence of mind.” European policymakers imported people from Africa and the middle east to fill short term labor shortages in post-war Europe, Germany especially. For the first time in modern history, immigrants have a substantial presence in Europe. Islam is the continent’s second largest religion. These immigrants continued to multiply even as the jobs disappeared: the number of foreign residents in Germany increased from 3m in 1971 to 7.5m in 2000 And by 2050, the foreign-origin populations in most European countries will be between 20 and 32%. even though the number of foreigners in the workforce did not budge. Today immigrants account for about 10% of the population of most west European countries, and up to 30% in some of Europe 's great cities. These same policymakers made the assumption that immigrants would quickly adopt the moral and cultural norms of their host societies. The heavy industries

Khan used an example of colonizing ship to describe her conversation in the article by showing a direct line. Furthermore, she linked the direct line with an example of branches that grew from one another. (Khan) Khan showed a logical appeal through her facts about the racial practices in Dutch during the mid-70s when the Dutch economy brought Turkish and Moroccan immigrant workers and their families to Netherland to overcome the labour crisis. “The Turkish and Moroccan families who stayed in the Netherlands continued to be treated as a threat by many Dutch residents.” (Khan) Consequently, the facts by the author about the immigrant communities made her argument persuasive. Her argument was convincing to believe that the treatment people like her were getting on the basis of nationality, race and white privilege was not fair.

The question of identity is always a difficult one for those living in a culture or group, yet belonging to another. This difficulty frequently remains in the mind of most immigrants, especially the second generations who were born in a country other than their parents. Younger generations feel as if they are forced to change to fit the social standards despite previous culture or group. Furthermore those who wish to adopt a new identity of a group or culture haven't yet been fully accepted by original members due to their former identity.

To measure societal acceptance towards immigrants, attitudinal data can be utilized to better understand the effects of immigration on both societies. One way to measure the general political reaction of each country towards the influx of immigrants. Though such data is constrained by temporal boundaries, a blanket understanding can be gleamed from surveys taken in nations during different periods. Further, in both countries, support for the importance of mainstream right-wing strategies has exacerbated the politicization of the immigrant issue. A survey asking identical questions in the two countries was conducted by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in 2000. The Swedes tend to be more positive than the Danes, but the differences are not dramatic. However, similarly to Denmark, societal attention to the issue increased in the 1980s, not least due to a considerable growth in the number of refugees from the Middle East. In both nations, there are clear trends that reveal a significant rise in negative attitudes towards immigrants; but, the levels of said societal and political attention towards immigrants and the policies enacted which affect immigrants differ greatly in Sweden and Denmark.

Citizenship confers on an individual an ability to participate in democracy such as decision-making and inclusion in policy making processes, (Michels, 2011). Citizenship gives one participatory power; in the decision making process of their country of origin, in the same way citizenship can be a form of capital to an individual. ‘Citizenship constitutes a strategically constructed form of capital which manifests in formal (legal and institutional) and informal (practiced and cultural) forms’’ (Bauder H., 2008:315).’’People who possess a certain form of capital are able to distinguish themselves from others who lack that form of capital’’ (Bauder, 2008:318). Such distinctions can increase gaps in social class orders and increase feelings of relative deprivation between migrant families and non-migrant families (de Haas, 2010).Capital forms the foundation of social life and dictates one’s position within the social

Migrants are defined as all those who were born outside the UK and were known as ‘aliens’ or ‘foreigners’. Kostakopoulou calls this assumption into question, arguing that ‘aliens’ are by definition outside the bounds of the community by virtue of a circular reasoning which takes for granted the existence of bounded national communities, and that this which takes for granted the existence of bounded national communities, and that this process of collective self-definition is deeply political and historically dated. The composition of the current UK migrant population has of course been conditioned by immigration policy over the past 50 years. Immigration has become a major debate across the UK, with many different reasons given for and