Nationalist Rationales, Racial Boundaries: A Case Study of Restrictionist Mexican Americans

• In Event: 242 - Section on International Migration Roundtable Session (one-hour).
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 05. Immigration and Discrimination

Abstract

The 2006 immigration marches have become emblematic of Latinos’ united position on immigration. However, solidarity and collective action is only one group formation outcome of sociopolitical exclusion. By ignoring those Latinos who disrupt the tenet of ethnic solidarity against immigration restriction, research has failed to specify the mechanisms that lead some Latinos to depart from their own on a highly bifurcated debate. Drawing on interview, I document the boundary making strategies that Mexican-origin Latinos who are “anti-illegal immigration” deploy to formulate us and them groupings vis-à-vis immigrants. I show that respondents are politically conservative, highly nationalistic, and the express a sense of nostalgia for “the past” in broad terms. They differentiate “us” from “them” in terms of national membership, distinguishing those who are deserving of the material and symbolic resources of the nation-state from those who are outsiders. Since they share racial/ethnic markers with foreigners, they engage in boundary making strategies to position themselves as legitimate/deserving members of the American nation. They distance themselves from immigrants by splitting the “Latino/Hispanic” pan-ethnic category from the “Mexican” national-origin category to differentiate us (Americans) from them (immigrants). They deploy multicultural discourse that establishes the compatibility of national loyalties and ethnic affinities to reconcile their immigrant background with their political position. Findings suggest an analytical refinement to the work on ethnic solidarity, revealing how political indicators and temporal effects intersect with ethnicity to produce distinct group formation outcomes.

Author

• Irene I. Vega, University of California-Los Angeles