During the 1870s to 1930, anxieties about the racial and national identity of Argentina was demonstrated in its racist immigration policies. Despite Argentina’s generally open borders, its immigration policies were deeply concerned with the global phenomenon of eugenics, of “race improvement.” Argentina supported European immigration and the nation’s elites used discourse that supported this “whitening” of the Argentine racial identity to “absorb” the lower races.
Yet, economic theories and histories of immigration in Argentina completely lack discussion of the racist discourse that characterized immigration. Instead, the three books characterize European immigration in Argentina as beneficial for the Argentine economy. While the books take into consideration negative externalities behind immigration in general, these arguments pertain mostly to economic factors. Are the economic arguments turning a blind eye to the racism inherent in the immigration policy or do they simply not see it as relevant?
Development cycles, political regimes and international migration: Argentina in the twentieth century by Andrés Solimano gives a brief history of Argentine immigration in the context of Argentina’s role in the world economy during the twentieth century. The book characterizes European immigration though economics: “International migration is like a barometer of economic conditions in home countries with respect to the rest of the world” (DC 7). Solimano argues that European immigration occurred at a widespread rate because of the the good economic conditions and the perception of opportunities of the resource-rich, labor-scarce country (DC 17). In a self-sustaining cycle, the massive immigration created further economic prosperity and expanding opportunities (DC 17). Solimano considers purely economic factors without consideration of social and racial dynamics when discussing immigration causes and effects, though racial identities were and continue to be economic identities.
Bodvarsson and Van den Berg, authors of The Economics of Immigration, also look at positive economic effects of immigration, arguing that immigrants increase the demand and supply curves of labor, as they are both consumers and workers (EI 419). Therefore, the authors argue that immigrants increase the size of the economy, “stimulating more specialization and exchange, economies of scale, and profit from innovation” (EI 252). While negative externalities of immigrants include their “demand of a share of ‘the commons’ in destination countries,” the book concludes that immigrants generally do not consume as many public services as natives (EI 419). Bodvarsson and Van den Berg state that a holistic approach towards immigration is crucial, and they consider economic and sociological theories (EI 422). Though the authors consider political or religious conditions as influencing immigration policy, they stop short of racial policies.
The third book, Immigration Worldwide by Segal, Elliott, and Mayadas highlights certain patterns when it comes to the history of migration in the world. First, the book explores causes or incentives of migration including the push from countries of origin and pulls from destination countries: “The ‘push’ out of the country often emerges from its internal conditions and intensifies with the personal circumstances of individuals. The ‘pull’ to another country or region works in tandem with the ‘push’ from the home country. In the absence of all dissatisfaction in the country of origin, the likelihood that individuals will move is practically nonexistent” (IW 7). The authors explore negative factors in countries of origin and positive ones in destination countries that go beyond purely economic factors. Yet, they do not explore the racial pulls from Argentina supporting European immigration.
All three books explore the idea that immigrants are self-selected and therefore more likely to be risk-taking, entrepreneurial, innovative and of higher socioeconomic backgrounds than average members of their countries of origin. Segal, Elliott, and Mayadas argue that this is the case because “immigrants must have the resources” and certain skills, whether they be emotional or economic, to make the journey and adapt (IW 7). The books argue that this self-selection of immigrants contributed to the economic growth of Argentina during the period of mass migration from Europe. However, Argentine elites saw immigrants specifically from Europe as beneficial to the economy because they were white and because this racial identity was also an economic one associated with productivity and with being ahead in the world economy.
Therefore, the fact that all three books which consider immigration in the economic trajectories do not even allude to the racial motivations and tensions behind Argentine immigration policy is problematic. Yes, European immigration helped the Argentine economy grow at the same time it was racist. Perhaps the economic books ignore race because their analyses would reinforce the racist economic categories of the time. However, without discussion of the racial discourse surrounding the economic policy of immigration, the books leave the relationship up to the readership’s imagination and confusion. The scholarship on immigration seems so fragmented, and therefore economic historians have deemed race as not relevant in the economic effects of immigration. Likewise, few historians on racial policy deem economics as relevant. This cleavage between these academic sectors needs to be sewn together.
Bibliography
Bodvarsson, Örn B. and Van den Berg, Hendrik. The Economics of Immigration: Theory and Policy. New York and London: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2009. PDF e-book.
Immigration Worldwide: Policies, Practices, and Trends. Edited by Uma A. Segal, Doreen Elliott, and Nazneen S. Mayadas. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Solimano, Andrés. Development cycles, political regimes and international migration:Argentina in the twentieth century. Translated by CEPAL. Santiago: United Nations, 2003. PDF
