Response to Age of Migration Chapter 10

Key Points:
1. Immigration policy does not necessarily affect whether or not immigrants settle in the receiving countries, but how the immigrants are accepted or marginalized in the countries’ societies.
2. Countries are still divided into ius sanguinis (by blood, only allowing children of citizens to become citizens) and ius soli (by soil, allowing children born in the country to be citizens). The former, in places such as Austria and Switzerland, makes it possible for people to grow up in a country but not be able to be a citizen.
3. There are three general classifications for countries’ immigration policies: the differential exclusionary model that leads to isolated ethnic minorities (Switzerland and Austria), the assimilationist model that incorporates migrants into society with the prerequisite of giving up their background to accept the majority culture (France), and the multicultural model that grants equal rights to all immigrants without a requirement to give up their cultural identities (either laisse-faire: USA, or with government action: Australia and Canada)
Discussion Questions:
What does the lasse-faire approach to multiculturalism in the U.S. say about our culture, compared to the government action of Australia and Canada?
Does the recent cap on immigrant numbers in the U.S. reflect change our role as a country of immigrants?
What instigated Germany’s move away from ius sanguinis in comparison to Austria and Switzerland?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Final Write-Up - Education and Community-Building: Kotti’s Impact on Kreuzberg

Gentrification vs. Colonialism's "development", and Discussion Questions 5/1