answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

1. The following quotes were made by two Congressmen during the debate over Immigration quotas in

December, 1920 (Congressional Record, 1921).

Congressman James McClintic, Democrat Oklahoma: "I say the class of immigrants coming to the shores

of the United States at this time are not the kind of people we want as citizens in this country."

Congressman Lucian Parrish, Democrat Texas: "We should stop immigration entirely until such a time as

we can amend our immigration laws and so write them that hereafter no one shall be admitted except he

be in full sympathy with our constitution and laws."

2. Nicolas Vanzetti was tried in Massachusetts twice, first for bank robbery and then for murder. In the

first trial, Webster Thayer, who was the judge in both cases, told the jury: "This man, although he may

not have actually committed the crime . . ., is nevertheless morally culpable, because he is the enemy of

our existing institutions."

3. Statement by Bartolomeo Vanzetti, April 10, 1927: "Sacco too is a worker from his boyhood, a skilled

worker, lover of work, with a good job and pay, a bank account, a good and lovely wife, two beautiful

children and a neat little home at the verge of a wood, near a brook. Sacco is a heart, a faith, a character, a

man; a man, lover of nature and of mankind. A man who gave all, who sacrifice all to the cause of

Liberty, and to his love for mankind; money, rest, mundane ambitions, his wife, his children, himself and

his own life. Sacco has never dreamt to steal, never to assasinate. He and I have never brought a morsel of

bread to our mouths, from our childhood to today, which has not been gained by the sweat of our brows.

Never.... Oh yes, I may be more witful as some have put it. I am a better babbler than he is, but many,

many times in hearing his heartful voice ringing a faithful sublime, in considering his supreme sacrifice,

remembering his heroism I felt small, small at the presence of his greatness and found myself compelled

to fight back from my eyes the tears, and quanch my heart trobling to my throat not to weep before him:

this man called thief and assasin and doomed. But Sacco's name will live in the hearts of people and in

their gratitude, when... your laws, institutions, and your false gods are but a dim remembering of a cursed

past in which man was wolf to the man. If it had not been for these things I might have lived out my life

talking at street corners to scorning men. I might have died, unmarked, unknown, a failure. Now we are

not a failure. This is our career and our triumph. Never in our full life could we hope to do such work for

tolerance, for justice, for man's understaning of man, as now we do by accident. Our words, our lives, our

pains -- nothing! The taking of our lives -- lives of a good shoemaker and a poor fishpeddler-- all! That

last moment belongs to us -- that agony is our triumph."

4. "Chicago Girl Urges General Protest Strike" was published in the Johnstown, Pa. Tribune, on August

10, 1927. It is about a female teenage Italian immigrant who led a political protest in Chicago against the

threatened execution of Sacco and Vanzetti.

"A bright-eyed 18-year-old high school girl paced her cell at police headquarters today shouting she was an

anarchist after having been arrested while leading thousands of shouting Sacco-Vanzetti sympathizers through the

streets last night. It was the girl who brought chaos to an orderly Sacco-Vanzetti protest meeting. As the meeting

ended she dashed to the street, shouting: "General strike! general strike!" This added a splash of color to the

otherwise drab proceedings of the meeting and inflamed the gathering.

With the girl, Aurora D'Angela, at the lead, the crowd surged into the street and marched along shouting the

"Third Internationale" and appealing for a general strike. For a few blocks the protest parade was orderly. Then a

motor car was ripped and torn by the crowd. A street car was boarded and the girl slapped the motorman. One

small police motor car attempted to stop the parade, but its passage was blocked. Additional police motor cars

swept into the tide of shouting enthusiasts and tear gas bombs were unloosed into the crowd. The tear gas bombs

caused the crowd to disperse and 15 of the leaders--including the 18-year-old girl--were arrested.

She maintained she had long attended Liberal meetings in Chicago and said: "I am an anarchist. My father

was an anarchist." Throughout the entire din there was a cry that Sacco and Vanzetti were being persecuted by

capitalism. No signs were in evidence and the only means of identifying the crowd was in the constant shouting.

Join the Multicultural Debate

Consider the issues raised in this chapter and read the following statements by different authors who

discuss multicultural social studies:

James A. Banks (1993): "One misconception about multicultural education is that it is an entitlement

program and curriculum movement for African Americans, Hispanics, the poor, women and other

victimized groups. . . . Multicultural education . . . is not an ethnic- or gender-specific movement. It

is a movement designed to empower all students to become knowledgeable, caring, and active

citizens in a deeply troubled and ethnically polarized nation and world."

Maxine Greene (1993: 17): "Learning to look through multiple perspectives, young people may be

helped to build bridges among themselves; attending to a range of human stories, they may be

provoked to heal and to transform. Of course there will be difficulties in affirming plurality and

difference and, at once, working to create community. Since the days of De Tocqueville, Americans

have wondered how to deal with the conflicts between individualism and the drive to conform."

Octavio Paz (1993: 57-58): "You are already a hybrid culture, which to me is a positive thing. I believe

all cultures are richer when they assimilate others, and change. I don't believe in a pure culture. Here

we are sitting and talking in New York, a city populated by the minorities that are the world's

majority. It is marvelous, no?"

Diane Ravitch (1990c: 3): "Almost any idea, carried to its extreme, can be made pernicious, and this is

what is happening now to multiculturalism. . . . Advocates of particularism propose an ethnocentric

curriculum to raise the self-esteem and academic achievement of children from racial and ethnic

minority backgrounds. Without any evidence, they claim that children from minority backgrounds

will do well in school only if they are immersed in a positive, prideful version of their ancestral

culture."

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (1992: 29): "The use of history as therapy means the corruption of history as

history. . . . Let us by all means teach black history, African history, women's history, Hispanic

history, Asian history. But let us teach them as history, not as filiopietistic commemoration."

Albert Shanker (1995): "As practiced by some, 'multiculturalism' takes the shape of something

approximating a new ideology of separatism. It challenges the idea of a common identity and rejects

the possibility of a common set of values. . . . Often, the claims of multiculturalists and other

separatists reflects the attitude that no one group may make a judgment on any other, since all

'depends on your point of view'. This extremely relativistic viewpoint conflicts with the need that all

societies have of establishing some basic values, guidelines and beliefs."

Christine Sleeter (1991:12): "Education that is multicultural and social reconstructionist forges a

coalition among various oppressed groups as well as members of dominant groups, teaching directly

about political and economic oppression and discrimination, and preparing young people directly in

social action skills."

Add your voice to the discussion:

1. Which statement(s) come(s) closest to your understanding of multiculturalism? Why?

2. Which statements do you disagree with? Why?

3. What are the implications of this chapter and the quotations for planning social studies curricula?

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: 'Why did American attitudes towards new immigrants change during the 1920's?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about U.S. History

Why was political change for women difficult before 1920?

Social attitudes about women made change difficult.


What are some of the causes of nativism?

Causes of the Nativism1. Cultural/Racial - Fear and Anxiety about differences: racial, cultural, religious and linguistic differences. Nativists view immigrants as fundamentally different and dangerous to American norm, believe immigrants can cause fragmentation in the society and fear of non-white majority.2. Economic - Economic Change: Immigrants are the reason for the loss of status or security of American workers, usually due to some large structural change in the economy. Immigrants offer cheaper labor with more working hours and no benefits.3. Political/Ideological - Xenophobia (fear of foreigner) or scapegoating of immigrants as a reaction against US global involvements or domestic civil unrest. Fears that foreigners will undermine American Democracy (papism, monarchism, fundamentalism) or fear of violence (terrorism, activism).


What were the British colonial policies toward the Native Americans?

Some British policies made for the colonies were the stamp act, the sugar act, and quartering act. The colonies protested against the alleged illegal taxation which started the rebellion named the American revolution.


How did U.S. policy towards the plain Indians change in the late 1850s?

They went from making a deal to forcing them off the land.


How did british policy towards slavery change?

The British officially ended slavery in 1833 when the Slavery Abolition Act took effect.

Related questions

How did American Indians' attitudes about land change after the European's arrived?

how did american indians attitudes about land use change after the europens arrived


Did American attitudes about African American civil rights really change by 1870?

no


How did immigrants change American society?

boooty


Changing attitude toward prohibition?

Attitudes towards Prohibition did change at the start of the period of Prohibition many people were positive towards the idea of Prohibition with them believing that it would lead to a "Purer" American society however by the end of the Prohibition era most people wanted the law to be abolished with most believing that it had been a failure which had encouraged ordinary American citizens to become criminals So overall attitudes towards the idea of probhition did change from the period of 1915-33


How did Thomas Paine change people's attitudes towards government?

nbdhbfhbgzbgfgh bhfgbhfgb hfbgdfgn


Do the boys want to be rescued in the lord of the flies?

in the beggining, yes. towards the end, their attitudes change


What accounted for the change in American attitude during the 1970?

what accounted for the changes in American attitudes are in the 1970


How did the war change attitudes towards international issues?

Most Americans supported America's new global leadership role


What has the author Tom McEwan written?

Tom McEwan has written: 'Managing values and beliefs in organisations' -- subject(s): Business ethics 'A report on organisational involvement and attitudes towards quality and change carried out at Slough/Windsor Holiday Inn' 'A general report on organisational involvement and attitudes towards quality and change carried out at Head Office and eleven Holiday Inns' -- subject(s): Holiday Inns (UK) Limited 'A report on organisational involvement and attitudes towards quality and change carried out at Holiday Inn head office'


How did American Indians attitudes about land use change after the europeans arrived?

They already had rivalries over land and resources


How did Japanese attitudes toward foreigner change in the 1600s and why?

Cause they want to change there attitudes


How did American Indians attitudes about land use change after Europeans arrived?

They already had rivalries over land and resources