Social Agency and White Supremacy in Immigration Studies

Abstract

Assimilation scholarship is rooted in the race relations framework that has been critiqued for providing legitimacy to the prevailing racial order, not least because it credits ethno-racial group agency as the mechanism that causes inequities among groups’ socioeconomic outcomes and the degrees to which they are socially accepted. To explain socioeconomic inequities, alternative frames centering on racialization and structural racism look to white supremacy and the unequal ends it engenders, but the sociological theory developed in these alternatives is largely tangential to assimilation theory. That the assimilationist model still dominates leaves a key part of the discipline vulnerable to supporting white supremacist ideologies about societies falsely believed to be colorblindly meritocratic. For this reason I call upon sociologists to work together to dethrone assimilationism from its exalted status in the sociology of immigration and scholars of race knowledgeable in these alternative approaches to actively reenter the arena of immigration studies and take the ground that has been ceded to the assimilationist frame. I suggest these as next steps in a campaign to overturn the dominance of the race relations model in sociology as a whole.

Asian-Americans Solidarity through We Bare Bears Series Case Study: Money Man Episode

“…Dr Bean's choice to make Jock as a winner might be caused by three possibilities: whether because Jock was a male, he was a white, or both (a white male). Since White people dominating United States, so White people have more privilege and White Supremacy ideology was formed [13] [14] [15] .…”

Racialized im/migration and autonomy of migration perspectives: New directions and opportunities

“…Most recently, drawing from bell hooks (2000), Golash Boza, Duenas, and Xiong () have called on migration scholars to examine how “white supremacist capitalist patriarchy” oppressions shape the trajectory and space of action for migrants, in particular working‐class women migrants of color. Such openings reveal opportunities for scholars to overcome the paradigmatic impasses in sociology between ethnicity frameworks that emphasize agency and inclusion and racism frameworks that focuses on oppression and exclusion while centering the struggle of migrants (Valdez & Golash‐Boza, ; Treitler, ). Indeed, the urgency of these issues following the white supremacist‐fueled and nativist‐driven presidential victory of Donald Trump in 2016 requires scholar‐activists to cognitively map both standard and unorthodox approaches in order to best position their research projects alongside the brutal realities of racialized im/migrants in a moment of danger.…”

Review of Race Scholarship and the War on Terror

“…Racialization provides an alternative perspective to that of immigration scholars. Treitler (2015) argued that an assimilationist approach to immigration systematically ignores the racialized structural barriers that prevent some immigrants from faring well in the United States. Treitler convincingly argued that reliance on integration as a determination of success upholds the existing racial order because it ignores the racialized social structures that prevent any form of assimilation.…”