Economic development is associated with modernization urbanization internal rural-urban migration and international migration. Emigration is positively associated with development and aid to developing countries will increase emigration from those countries until the developing country reaches a standard of living equal to that of the developed country. Studies of European emigration to America have shown that emigration is correlated with the onset of industrialization and that emigration was highest when the home country was experiencing a depression and the US economy was in a period of upswing. The basis of society in an underdeveloped country is labor-intensive subsistence farming which provides work and sustenance to a household or community. As soon as capital is applied to agriculture the small peasant holdings are replaced by large private holdings efficiently farmed by machinery and producing surpluses that find their way to markets that is to urban areas which represent concentrations of wealth. The fabric of agricultural society is destabilized as the peasant owner becomes a hired laborer who migrates to the urban area when farms need fewer and factories more laborers. The 1st phase of migration is thus rural to urban. But development is discontinuous both in time and in space and when the displaced worker cannot find employment in the cities of his own country he emigrates to another. Transportation and communication facilities developed to facilitate industrial and commercial exchange also serve as carriers of international migration usually to the same country with which close economic links have already been established. International migration feeds on itself because earlier immigrants provide a network that makes resettlement easier cheaper and less risky for the next wave of migrants. Moreover the emigrants send money back to the home country which helps to speed up the development process in the home country until modernization and urbanization reach the point where there are no more displaced peasants to export. The experience of the United States and Mexico illustrates most phases of the emigration cycle. The 1st wave of Mexican emigration to the US lasted from 1900 to 1929 when the US economy was growing and the Mexican Revolution (1910-1919) devastated the Mexican economy. In the 1930s Mexico experienced a period of rapid growth. The 2nd wave of emigration 1942-1964 stemmed from the coincidence of drought in Mexico and wartime labor shortage in the US which was remedied by the bracero program which granted temporary visas to Mexican agricultural workers. The 3rd and current wave of emigration began in the mid-1960s. It was fueled by the Mexican governments ambitious economic reform program which was to be paid for out of oil revenues. When oil prices fell the Mexican economy suffered a crisis of inflation and debt. However the development process in Mexico is reaching the stage where there are no longer large numbers of surplus agricultural workers and Mexican emigration should diminish over the next 2 decades.

Economic Development and International Migration in Comparative Perspective

Mexican migration to the US is distinguished by a seeming paradox that is seldom examined: while no other country has supplied nearly as many migrants to the US as Mexico has since 1965, virtually all major changes in US immigration law during this period have created ever more severe restrictions on the conditions of “legal” migration from Mexico. Indeed, this seeming paradox presents itself in a double sense: on the one hand, apparently liberalizing immigration laws have in fact concealed their significantly restrictive features, especially for Mexicans; on the other hand, ostensibly restrictive immigration laws intended to deter migration have nonetheless been instrumental in sustaining Mexican migration, but only by significantly restructuring migrants’ legal status as “undocumented.” Beginning in the 1960s— precisely when Mexican migration escalated dramatically—and ever since, persistent revisions in the law have made it virtually impossible for the great majority who would migrate from Mexico to do so in accord with the law and have thus played an instrumental role in the production of a legally vulnerable, undocumented workforce of “illegal aliens.”

The Legal Production of Mexican/Migrant “Illegality”

The contemporary framing in American public discourse on immigrants is examined through a data-driven metaphor analysis. The print media texts of the 1994 political debate and campaign in California over an anti-immigrant referendum, Proposition 187, is analyzed. An ongoing cataloguing of metaphors from hundreds of Los Angeles Times articles displays the discourse that reflects and informs California public opinion. The metaphors discerned include `IMMIGRANTS ARE ANIMALS'. In so far as prose metaphors in the print media reflect public discourse, this study captures a public perception that dehumanizes immigrant workers. Additionally, alternative analyses of the framing of the discourse of Proposition 187 are compared to the present analysis.

`Like an Animal I was Treated': Anti-Immigrant Metaphor in US Public Discourse

The article assesses the prospects for the assimilation of new immigrant groups and judges their likely effects on the society culture and language of the United States. It places the new immigration in historical perspective and indicates the distinctive features that set it apart from earlier influxes. It appraises the structural context for the incorporation of todays immigrants and argues that because of fundamental differences their assimilation will not be as rapid or complete as that achieved by European immigrants in the past. The article concludes by suggesting how the nature of ethnicity will change as a result of a new immigration that is linguistically concentrated geographically clustered and temporally continuous into an American society that is increasingly stratified and unequal. (SUMMARY IN FRE AND SPA) (EXCERPT)

The new immigration and ethnicity in the United States.

This article reviews how US deportations ballooned between 1997 and 2012, and underscores how these deportations disproportionately targeted Latino working class men. Building on Mae Ngai's (2004) concept of racial removal, we describe this recent mass deportation as a gendered racial removal program. Drawing from secondary sources, surveys conducted in Mexico, the U.S. Department of Home- land Security published statistics, and interviews with deportees conducted by the first author in Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, Brazil and Jamaica, we argue that: (1) deportations have taken on a new course in the aftermath of 9/11 and in the wake of the global economic crisis - involving a shift towards interior enforcement; (2) deportation has become a gendered and racial removal project of the state; and (3) deportations will have lasting consequences with gendered and raced effects here in the United States. We begin by examining the mechanisms of the new deportation regime, showing how it functions, and then examine the legislation and administrative decisions that make it possible. Next, we show the concentration of deportations by nation and gender. Finally, we discuss the causes of this gendered racial removal program, which include the male joblessness crisis since the Great Recession, the War on Terror, and the con- tinued criminalization of Black and Latino men by police authorities. Latino Studies (2013) 11, 271-292. doi:10.1057/lst.2013.14

/pdf/latino-immigrant-men-and-the-deportation-crisis-a-gendered-4oquqflf52.pdf

Latino immigrant men and the deportation crisis: A gendered racial removal program

During the Great Depression, nearly half a million Mexican Americans were repatriated to Mexico, either voluntarily or by coercion. Historian Abraham Hoffman provides a dramatic case study of the movement in Los Angeles and a survey of the repatriation process throughout the United States.

Unwanted Mexican Americans in the Great Depression: Repatriation Pressures, 1929 1939

Western Times and Water Wars: State, Culture, and Rebellion in California John Walton

"back to their homeland." Although the departure of Mexican immigrants has been mentioned by a few writers, most notably Carey McWilliams, the movement has never been treated in detail.' Inquiry into the repatriation movement reveals that the peak period during which destitute Mexican aliens returned to Mexico was preceded by a federal deportation drive centered on the Los Angeles area. In order to understand the context in which this drive took

Stimulus to Repatriation: The 1931 Federal Deportation Drive and the Los Angeles Mexican Community

D uring the years of the Great Depression, an unprecedented number of Mexican immigrants, for a variety of reasons, returned or were returned to Mexico from the United States. This movement, an acceleration of repatriation that dated back to the 1920s, was also spurred by a federal deportation campaign against aliens who had illegally entered the United States. Mexican aliens were especially vulnerable to this campaign because many had entered informally before laws were passed, and they had not regularized their entry.l For many years repatriation, as well as other episodes in Mexican American history, was completely ignored. Not until recently have serious studies begun to come from disciplines other than sociology, anthropology, or education. Because of the dearth of material on Mexican Americans, scholars have been compelled to rely on a select group of published writings for much of the background knowledge and many of the assumptions made about the experiences of Mexicans in the United States. For the phenomenon of repatriation, one of the most quoted sources has been Carey McWilliams, for the past twenty years editor of the Nation and a widely respected journalist. McWilliams, a prolific writer, discussed Mexican repatriation in several of his books dealing with minorities in America. His first observations on the return of Mexicans to Mexico were recorded in an article

Mexican Repatriation Statistics: Some Suggested Alternatives to Carey McWilliams

DURING THE FIRST three decades of the twentieth century hundreds of thousands of Mexicans left the political upheavals and economic uncertainty of Mexico for the opportunities, real or imagined, that they believed awaited them north of the border. By the 1920s this wave of immigration had come to the attention of a spectrum of Americans that included nativists, social scientists, small-scale farmers, agribusinessmen, and politicians. The arguments of these people over the question of whether to restrict immigration from Mexico generated more heat than light. Although dozens of articles were published in popular magazines, debates conducted, and congressional hearings held, virtually all of the verbiage reflected preconceived positions of self-interest. Agribusiness claimed it could not survive without Mexican labor, while nativists argued that the white race could not survive the unrestricted immigration of an "inferior" people.By 1926 Congressman

Abraham Hoffman

Papers

Unwanted Mexican Americans in the Great Depression: Repatriation Pressures, 1929 1939

Western Times and Water Wars: State, Culture, and Rebellion in California John Walton

Stimulus to Repatriation: The 1931 Federal Deportation Drive and the Los Angeles Mexican Community

Mexican Repatriation Statistics: Some Suggested Alternatives to Carey McWilliams

An Unusual Monument: Paul S. Taylor's Mexican Labor in the United States Monograph Series