Migration and Diaspora

How the World Came to the City

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER
600x350px

Search: "Ellis Island immigrants arriving 1900"
"Mulberry Street New York City 1900 immigrants"

Sources: Library of Congress, NYPL Digital Collections

HIST 101 • Chapter 20: Urbanization

The World in Motion

🌍 Core Claim

Urbanization is not just Americans moving into cities. It is the world in motion—driven by industrial capitalism, imperial disruption, political violence, and transportation revolutions.

Late-19th-century American cities were nodes in global systems of labor, capital, and migration.

Constrained Choices

🔑 Key Insight for This Lecture

Urban growth reflects constrained choices made under pressure—not free individual preference.

Migrants were not simply seeking "opportunity." They were often fleeing violence, poverty, or persecution—and choosing among limited options.

Part I

The Lure of the City

Why cities exploded after 1870

Industrial Capitalism Reorganized Space

🏭 Factories Required

Concentrated wage labor—thousands of workers in one place

🚂 Transportation Revolution

Railroads, steamships, and telegraph compressed time and distance

Cities became engines of opportunity and risk.

The Numbers Tell the Story

By 1900 ~40% of Americans lived in cities
By 1920 A majority lived in urban areas for the first time
By 1900 6 cities exceeded 500,000 people

New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Boston, Baltimore

A Cultural Reversal

Antebellum View

Cities were seen as:

  • Corrupt and dangerous
  • Threats to republican virtue
  • Places of moral decay

"Those who labor in the earth are the chosen people of God." — Jefferson

Post-1870 View

Cities were celebrated as:

  • Modern and dynamic
  • Centers of progress
  • Inevitable and exciting

The city as the symbol of American power

Not "Natural Growth"

⚠️ Important Clarification

Urbanization is not "natural growth"—it is a structural outcome of industrial systems.

Industrial capitalism CREATED the conditions that drew people to cities. Without factories, railroads, and global trade networks, this migration would not have happened.

Part II

"New Immigrants"

The scale and sources of migration after 1880

A Shift in Sources

"Old" Immigration

Before 1880

  • Northern & Western Europe
  • Britain, Ireland, Germany
  • Scandinavia

Often Protestant (except Irish)

"New" Immigration

After 1880

  • Southern & Eastern Europe
  • Italy, Poland, Russia
  • Austria-Hungary, Greece

Often Catholic, Jewish, or Orthodox

The Scale of Change

By 1890 15% of U.S. population was foreign-born
By 1900 Most urban residents were immigrants or their children

Migration often occurred as families, not lone adventurers.

Higher birth rates among immigrants accelerated urban growth.

Correcting the Ellis Island Myth

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER
500x350px

Search: "Ellis Island medical inspection"
"steerage passengers immigrants ship"

Sources: Ellis Island Foundation, Library of Congress

The popular image: hopeful immigrants seeing the Statue of Liberty, starting fresh in America.

The reality:

  • Debt — many borrowed heavily to pay for passage
  • Danger — steerage conditions were harsh; disease was common
  • Permanent rupture — most never saw their homelands again

Part III

Conceptual Toolkit

Diaspora, not assimilation

Understanding Diaspora

📌 Definition

Diaspora: The dispersal of people from a homeland, with ongoing cultural, emotional, and institutional ties to that homeland.

Key elements:

  • Dispersal — leaving, often under pressure
  • Memory — longing for the homeland
  • Identity — maintaining distinct cultural practices
  • Networks — connections across borders

Contrasting Models

❌ "Uprooted"

Immigrants as traumatized, losing their culture, struggling to adapt

Oscar Handlin, 1951

✓ "Transplanted"

Immigrants as active agents who adapt culture while maintaining continuity

John Bodnar, 1985

✓ Diaspora

Ongoing connections, hybrid identities, networks across borders

Current framework

Push and Pull Factors

⬅️ Push Factors

What drove people out:

  • Violence and persecution
  • Land loss and enclosure
  • Economic collapse
  • Political instability
  • Religious oppression

➡️ Pull Factors

What drew people in:

  • Wages and jobs
  • Safety from persecution
  • Existing networks (family, village)
  • Perception of opportunity
  • Recruiters and advertisements

Chain Migration

🔗 Definition

Chain migration: Movement that follows kinship and community ties—where you go depends on who you already know there.

Core insight: Cities grow through networks, not randomness.

The same Italian village might send ALL its emigrants to one specific neighborhood in Chicago. Polish families from one region might all settle in the same blocks of Pittsburgh.

Homeland vs. Host Tension

The central dilemma of diaspora life:

Belonging without full acceptance

  • Emotional ties to the "old country"
  • Economic life in the new country
  • Children caught between two worlds
  • Never fully "at home" in either place

📝 Pause & Process

Quick Check

Which analytical framework best captures the idea that immigrants maintained ongoing connections to their homelands while building new lives in America?

  1. "Uprooted" — emphasizing trauma and cultural loss
  2. "Melting Pot" — emphasizing assimilation into American culture
  3. "Diaspora" — emphasizing dispersal with continuing homeland ties
  4. "Nativism" — emphasizing opposition to immigration

Part IV

Building Ethnic Worlds

How immigrants created communities inside American cities

Why Immigrants Clustered

Immigrants deliberately clustered to reduce risk and preserve autonomy.

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER
550x380px

Search: "Little Italy New York 1900"
"Hester Street Lower East Side 1900"

Sources: Museum of the City of New York, NYPL

Living near people who spoke your language and shared your culture meant:

  • Finding jobs through personal networks
  • Accessing familiar food, religion, customs
  • Getting help in emergencies
  • Raising children with cultural continuity

Key Ethnic Institutions

⛪ Religious Institutions
Churches, synagogues, temples — spiritual and social centers
📰 Ethnic Newspapers
News from home, community announcements, political mobilization
🤝 Mutual-Aid Societies
Insurance, burial funds, emergency loans
🎭 Fraternal Organizations
Social clubs, cultural preservation, community identity

What Ethnic Institutions Did

💰 Economic Survival

Job networks, credit, emergency funds, business connections

🎭 Cultural Continuity

Language, music, food, holidays, traditions passed to children

👶 Childcare & Education

Day care, religious education, language schools

🗳️ Political Organization

Voting blocs, advocacy, connections to city machines

Critical Reframing

🔑 Key Insight

Ethnic enclaves are adaptive strategies, not failures to assimilate.

When nativists complained that immigrants "refused to become American," they misunderstood what was happening.

Ethnic communities were survival mechanisms in a hostile environment—and they eventually became pathways into American society.

Part V

Nativism

The anxiety of belonging

Understanding Nativism

📌 Definition

Nativism: Preference for native-born Americans over immigrants, often expressed through hostility, discrimination, and restrictive policies.

Nativism isn't just prejudice—it's organized political opposition to immigration.

Nativism Through Time

1840s-50s Irish Catholics targeted by Know-Nothing movement
1870s-80s Chinese targeted → Chinese Exclusion Act (1882)
1880s-1920s Southern/Eastern Europeans, Catholics, Jews targeted
1920s National Origins Quota system restricts "undesirable" groups

New "Scientific" Justifications

After 1880, nativists developed new arguments:

🧬 Social Darwinism

"Survival of the fittest" applied to races and nations

📊 Racial Hierarchies

Pseudo-scientific rankings of "superior" and "inferior" races

🧪 Eugenics

Claims about heredity, "fitness," and "breeding"

These ideas gave old prejudices a veneer of scientific legitimacy.

The Central Contradiction

Economic Reality

Industrial capitalism required immigrant labor.

  • Factories needed workers
  • Railroads needed builders
  • Mines needed laborers

Cultural Politics

Native-born Americans resisted immigrant presence.

  • Competition for jobs
  • Fear of cultural change
  • Racial anxieties

Capitalism wanted their labor. Culture rejected their presence.

Part VI

The City as Contested Space

Pluralism through tension

Not a Melting Pot

🔑 Key Reframing

Cities are not melting pots—they are contested spaces.

The "melting pot" metaphor suggests smooth blending. Reality was messier:

  • Immigrants reshaped food, religion, music, labor, and politics
  • Conflict was normal, not pathological
  • Urban life produced pluralism through tension, not harmony

Looking Ahead

Today we've seen how migration networks created diverse urban worlds.

But there were limits to this pluralism.

📍 Next Lecture

We'll examine where pluralism ended—race, law, and exclusion, especially for Asian migrants. The Chinese Exclusion Act (1882) created a model for racial restriction that shaped American immigration law for generations.

Key Takeaway

Urbanization reflects global movement under pressure.

Cities became laboratories for modern identity, conflict, and belonging.

IMAGE PLACEHOLDER
700x300px panoramic

Search: "New York City skyline 1900"
"Chicago World's Fair 1893 panorama"

Sources: Library of Congress, Chicago History Museum

📝 Check Your Understanding

Synthesis Question

How does the concept of "diaspora" help explain why immigrants clustered in ethnic neighborhoods rather than dispersing throughout American cities?

Consider: homeland ties, chain migration, ethnic institutions, and the functions these communities served.

📚 Want to Learn More?

Instructor's recommended readings:

  • John Bodnar, The Transplanted — foundational diaspora framework
  • John Higham, Strangers in the Land — definitive study of nativism
  • Jonathan Zimmerman, Whose America? — cultural conflict over national identity
  • Jacob Riis, How the Other Half Lives — primary source (read critically!)

Note: Riis is valuable as a cultural artifact showing how native-born Americans viewed immigrants—not as objective description.