Immigrants from the past

[LONDONER]

The following link contains photos of immigrants from the past dressed in their national dress. Interesting and colourful:

http://mashable.com/2016/10/01/ellis-isl...OMfeDZROqE

[Insertnamehere]

Liking the details on the Ruthenian outfit.

Hmmmm...I see some French sympathies on that Danish uniform :confused:

[Emiliano]

Photographs like those never get old for me. It's just really interesting to think about this country's relationship with immigration over the past two centuries, from Castle Garden to Trump's wall. The immigrant experience really fascinates me in general - what compels people to leave their home country, what kind of life and living conditions the have once they arrive in the us. What the process of assimilation was like, and what aspects of their culture they kept, what things were lost. How the native born society views immigrants, and how the different ethnic groups find ways to establish themselves here. How the expectation and the reality of living in America compared...

I always liked this quote too: "I came to New York because I heard the streets were paved with gold. When I got here, I learned three things: The streets are not paved with gold. They are not paved at all. I am expected to pave them.”

Turn of the century NYC is my favorite time period to learn about, but it was a really rough, dangerous, filthy, crowded place. It's interesting to juxtapose the images of the new arrivals in their traditional dress with photos like the ones taken by Jacob Riis of the tenements on the Lower East Side too.

[Insertnamehere]

^ That is usually a story filled with interstring mixed results, some good, some bad, some downright shameful in most places where it happens.

Of course, I can only talk locally, since I've only have mild knowledge about inmigration to NY and US in general.

In this bit of land, it was a very different story depending where you came from and that laregely determined whether you'd get in easily or harder.

It was not the same being Italian/Spaniard than British/French/German. If you were Spaniard, it was not the same being Galician/Andalusian than Castilian or Basque. And locally, coming from Perú or Bolivia was and still sort of is, from some kind of people, looked down upon (there are local historical issues at play there).

Palestinian and Arabs had the hardest time adapting here, for rather obvious reasons, even when most Palestinians that landed here were Christian. Nowadays some of them are part of very wealthy families. As of now, last names notwithstanding, they are fully integrated.

Germans that colonized the near south in the mid 1850s did so brilliantly...maybe too brilliantly considering some issues after 1945. They were mostly southern Germans of pre-unified Germany (Bavarians, Austrians, etc.) and therefore Catholic, which made it all the easier to not adapt but to actually deliver their cultural elements onto the rural south. Same can be said about Croatians in the far south.

British were mostly bussinessmen and their role into turning this city of mine into a trading hub and making the city grow, flourish and thrive into the golden age it had util 1914 was one of the most important developments I can think of that immigration brought. British investement payed for railroads, it made the mining industries in the north more efficient, etc (yes, that came with strings attached, but they were largely worth it).

Furthermore, Germans and British coming to this port were mostly Protestant, which was a major fact in helping to end the monopoly of the Catholic Church, the cease of the benefits they enjoyed and the transfer of their control over education and civilian registration to the hands of the State. In a side note, they also left behind architecture of their own that mixed with the local one, which is was makes this port city of mine appealing to tourists.

All of these communities, at first separated, got integrated and are now not likely different than the rest of us. If there are differences, you can dump them mostly on social status rather than origins.

When it comes to other Latin American communities the thing gets trickier. The history with our bordering neighbours is an uneasy one. As such, immigrants coming from those places would probably face some problems, but for the most part, while not integrated, they live in peace.

The most recent surge in immigration, starting around 2010, comes from Colombia. This brings about quite the culture shock, as I myself have experienced, but once you get pass those differences, all is good.

The main source of friction would come from social status. The ones that are uneducated consequentially work in cheap labor stuff and since this country LOVES to segregate people according to wealth, these peeps end up in not so nice places, and therefore engaging in the same problems that locals face when not packing enough money to live comfortably.

There are several others, though, that come with degrees, experience, postgraduate studies, etc. They have a much easier time finding good jobs and having a better life.

You wouldn't think at first that we'd have less problems taking in our own kind than peeps from Europe or the Middle East, but as it turnes out, it is quite the opposite. Nationality around these parts seems to be far more important than the overall shared culture Latin America is supposed to have. It is a strange process of "othering" but one that started even when we were still colonies.

But, as integration, at least of the late XIX-early XX century communities, is a completed process, it's only a matter of time before it happens with the most recent ones. I'd like to think that Latin America's foundations as a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society can trump the pettiness of other issues like nationalities, historical grudges bewteen neighbors, etc.

[Emiliano]

^ That is usually a story filled with interstring mixed results, some good, some bad, some downright shameful in most places where it happens.

Of course, I can only talk locally, since I've only have mild knowledge about inmigration to NY and US in general.

In this bit of land, it was a very different story depending where you came from and that laregely determined whether you'd get in easily or harder.

It was not the same being Italian/Spaniard than British/French/German. If you were Spaniard, it was not the same being Galician/Andalusian than Castilian or Basque. And locally, coming from Perú or Bolivia was and still sort of is, from some kind of people, looked down upon (there are local historical issues at play there).

Palestinian and Arabs had the hardest time adapting here, for rather obvious reasons, even when most Palestinians that landed here were Christian. Nowadays some of them are part of very wealthy families. As of now, last names notwithstanding, they are fully integrated.

Germans that colonized the near south in the mid 1850s did so brilliantly...maybe too brilliantly considering some issues after 1945. They were mostly southern Germans of pre-unified Germany (Bavarians, Austrians, etc.) and therefore Catholic, which made it all the easier to not adapt but to actually deliver their cultural elements onto the rural south. Same can be said about Croatians in the far south.

British were mostly bussinessmen and their role into turning this city of mine into a trading hub and making the city grow, flourish and thrive into the golden age it had util 1914 was one of the most important developments I can think of that immigration brought. British investement payed for railroads, it made the mining industries in the north more efficient, etc (yes, that came with strings attached, but they were largely worth it).

Furthermore, Germans and British coming to this port were mostly Protestant, which was a major fact in helping to end the monopoly of the Catholic Church, the cease of the benefits they enjoyed and the transfer of their control over education and civilian registration to the hands of the State. In a side note, they also left behind architecture of their own that mixed with the local one, which is was makes this port city of mine appealing to tourists.

All of these communities, at first separated, got integrated and are now not likely different than the rest of us. If there are differences, you can dump them mostly on social status rather than origins.

When it comes to other Latin American communities the thing gets trickier. The history with our bordering neighbours is an uneasy one. As such, immigrants coming from those places would probably face some problems, but for the most part, while not integrated, they live in peace.

The most recent surge in immigration, starting around 2010, comes from Colombia. This brings about quite the culture shock, as I myself have experienced, but once you get pass those differences, all is good.

The main source of friction would come from social status. The ones that are uneducated consequentially work in cheap labor stuff and since this country LOVES to segregate people according to wealth, these peeps end up in not so nice places, and therefore engaging in the same problems that locals face when not packing enough money to live comfortably.

There are several others, though, that come with degrees, experience, postgraduate studies, etc. They have a much easier time finding good jobs and having a better life.

You wouldn't think at first that we'd have less problems taking in our own kind than peeps from Europe or the Middle East, but as it turnes out, it is quite the opposite. Nationality around these parts seems to be far more important than the overall shared culture Latin America is supposed to have. It is a strange process of "othering" but one that started even when we were still colonies.

But, as integration, at least of the late XIX-early XX century communities, is a completed process, it's only a matter of time before it happens with the most recent ones. I'd like to think that Latin America's foundations as a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society can trump the pettiness of other issues like nationalities, historical grudges bewteen neighbors, etc.

That interesting, thanks for sharing that info. I wouldnt have assumed that about immigrants coming from other Latin American countries. It does make sense though thinking about it in terms of the historical relationships.

Is there a lot of immigration between countries the area in general, or is there something specific about Argentina that draws people there? Like different economic situations/opportunities?

And what were the strings attached to the British influence that you mentioned?

[Insertnamehere]

That interesting, thanks for sharing that info. I wouldnt have assumed that about immigrants coming from other Latin American countries. It does make sense though thinking about it in terms of the historical relationships.

Is there a lot of immigration between countries the area in general, or is there something specific about Argentina that draws people there? Like different economic situations/opportunities?

And what were the strings attached to the British influence that you mentioned?

Pfft, Latino coutries have spent more time bickering at each other than shaking hands. Integration is a thing now, though

You would have to ask an Argentine citizen about further detail, but, if I know our neighbours well enough: when it comes to Europeans back then, it was all about seeking easier moneymaking. Buenos Aires has a strategic gateway location, connecting and controling the passage from the Atlantic to the Paraguay-Paraná-Uruguay river system via the River Plate delta, meaning it connected Paraguay, Eastern Bolivia and inner Brazil (along with its own territories) with European markets. Bussiness making from some industrious peeps must have been quite easy when you came from a wealthy country.

Something similar was valid here, back then my city was one of the most important ports in the South Pacific, serving ships rounding Cape Horn (before the Panama canal was opened) so, trade, trade, trade. It was all about bussinesses.

The Argentine pampas are also a major agricultural zone providing meat, dairy and grain for many markets, so no matter what you chose to do, Argentina was a good place to immigrate to if you were European.

Overall, newly independent countries that were avid of knowledge and technology for development willingly invited them. They came rushing because upon ending Spanish rule, also ended its mercantilistic policies and monopolies. A whole new market was now open to the world. Again: trade, trade, trade.

I reckon the liked the Southern Cone better than they did other places due to the temperate climate too.


As for Latino-to-Latino immigration it's really a thing of the past 20 years. There was always some small scale immigration between neighbouring countries, but only now it is picking up. That is purely an economic thing. Southern Cone countries have done better economically, overall, than the rest of South America in the past 20-30 years, so consequentially, there is more immigration towards these countries.

I would say that the Southern Cone is less afflicted by internal conflicts that have the reach of the FARC in Colombia for example.

It is also easier now because of what I said: integration efforts.

In the 90s MERCOSUR was created to provide for a common market, visa liberalization, mutual investement, increase trade etc. Core and member countries in this common market provide a more mobile work force, as a consequence. Even merely "associated" countries like mine share some benefits (like yours truly being able to hop around most of South America without a visa or passport).