“对我们来说,再也没有后门了”

IF 0.1 4区 历史学 Q3 HISTORY
Eladio Bobadilla
{"title":"“对我们来说,再也没有后门了”","authors":"Eladio Bobadilla","doi":"10.1525/ch.2023.100.3.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that the nativist-led referendum known as Proposition 187, which in 1994 sought to deny undocumented immigrants and their families access to many of the state’s social services, represents a set of paradoxes about Latino immigration to California and the United States whose roots, consequences, and implications are not yet fully understood. First, Prop 187 revealed the enduring place of undocumented people as “essential but unwanted.” Second, it represented both a victory and a defeat for the immigrants’ rights struggle. And finally, it represented both an end and a beginning in U.S. immigration history. By interpreting Prop 187 in this way, historians and other scholars should see the moment in more complex and elucidating ways than we have so far, not merely as a “turn” against undocumented immigrants characterized by a new form of nativism fueled by fears about demographic and cultural change, not merely as a moment that spurred action and a search for power among both undocumented immigrants and Latino U.S. citizens, and not merely as something that “foreshadowed” attempts to bring immigration policy under local control. Instead, a more holistic look, and one that takes a longer view of this story, stretching both farther back in time and closer to the present, reveals that Prop 187 was never an issue of importance only to California, and that while there was much that was “new” about this form of nativism, there was also much more that simply made Prop 187 the logical conclusion. Neither did California merely foreshadow other states’ attempts to take immigration into their own hands. Rather, California’s Prop 187 was a direct cause of their doing so.","PeriodicalId":43253,"journal":{"name":"CALIFORNIA HISTORY","volume":"164 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“For Us, There Are No More Back Doors”\",\"authors\":\"Eladio Bobadilla\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/ch.2023.100.3.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that the nativist-led referendum known as Proposition 187, which in 1994 sought to deny undocumented immigrants and their families access to many of the state’s social services, represents a set of paradoxes about Latino immigration to California and the United States whose roots, consequences, and implications are not yet fully understood. First, Prop 187 revealed the enduring place of undocumented people as “essential but unwanted.” Second, it represented both a victory and a defeat for the immigrants’ rights struggle. And finally, it represented both an end and a beginning in U.S. immigration history. By interpreting Prop 187 in this way, historians and other scholars should see the moment in more complex and elucidating ways than we have so far, not merely as a “turn” against undocumented immigrants characterized by a new form of nativism fueled by fears about demographic and cultural change, not merely as a moment that spurred action and a search for power among both undocumented immigrants and Latino U.S. citizens, and not merely as something that “foreshadowed” attempts to bring immigration policy under local control. Instead, a more holistic look, and one that takes a longer view of this story, stretching both farther back in time and closer to the present, reveals that Prop 187 was never an issue of importance only to California, and that while there was much that was “new” about this form of nativism, there was also much more that simply made Prop 187 the logical conclusion. Neither did California merely foreshadow other states’ attempts to take immigration into their own hands. Rather, California’s Prop 187 was a direct cause of their doing so.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43253,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CALIFORNIA HISTORY\",\"volume\":\"164 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CALIFORNIA HISTORY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/ch.2023.100.3.2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CALIFORNIA HISTORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/ch.2023.100.3.2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,1994年由本土主义者主导的187号提案(Proposition 187)旨在拒绝无证移民及其家人获得加州的许多社会服务,这代表了一组关于拉丁裔移民到加州和美国的悖论,其根源、后果和影响尚未得到充分理解。首先,第187号提案揭示了非法移民“必不可少但不受欢迎”的持久地位。其次,它代表了移民权利斗争的胜利和失败。最后,它代表了美国移民史的结束和开始。通过以这种方式解读187号提案,历史学家和其他学者应该以比我们迄今为止更复杂和更清晰的方式看待这一时刻,而不仅仅是将其视为反对无证移民的“转折”,其特征是对人口和文化变化的恐惧引发了一种新形式的本土主义,而不仅仅是将其视为激发无证移民和拉丁裔美国公民采取行动和寻求权力的时刻,而不仅仅是将移民政策置于地方控制之下的“预兆”。相反,从更全面的角度来看,从更长远的角度来看这个故事,从更久远的时间和更接近现在的角度来看,187号提案从来不是一个只对加州重要的问题,虽然这种形式的本土主义有很多“新”之处,但也有更多的东西使187号提案成为合乎逻辑的结论。加州也不仅仅预示着其他州试图将移民问题掌握在自己手中。相反,加州的187号提案是他们这样做的直接原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“For Us, There Are No More Back Doors”
This article argues that the nativist-led referendum known as Proposition 187, which in 1994 sought to deny undocumented immigrants and their families access to many of the state’s social services, represents a set of paradoxes about Latino immigration to California and the United States whose roots, consequences, and implications are not yet fully understood. First, Prop 187 revealed the enduring place of undocumented people as “essential but unwanted.” Second, it represented both a victory and a defeat for the immigrants’ rights struggle. And finally, it represented both an end and a beginning in U.S. immigration history. By interpreting Prop 187 in this way, historians and other scholars should see the moment in more complex and elucidating ways than we have so far, not merely as a “turn” against undocumented immigrants characterized by a new form of nativism fueled by fears about demographic and cultural change, not merely as a moment that spurred action and a search for power among both undocumented immigrants and Latino U.S. citizens, and not merely as something that “foreshadowed” attempts to bring immigration policy under local control. Instead, a more holistic look, and one that takes a longer view of this story, stretching both farther back in time and closer to the present, reveals that Prop 187 was never an issue of importance only to California, and that while there was much that was “new” about this form of nativism, there was also much more that simply made Prop 187 the logical conclusion. Neither did California merely foreshadow other states’ attempts to take immigration into their own hands. Rather, California’s Prop 187 was a direct cause of their doing so.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信