Migration, National Identity, and Citizenship in a ...

Migration, National Identity, and Citizenship in a Transnational World Leo R. Chavez University of California, Irvine

Key words: .

The movement of peoples across national borders challenges taken-forgranted assumptions about what we mean by “the nation,” “citizenship,” and “identity.”1 In many nations, these notions are undergoing radical transformation. Indeed, we might even say that in some cases these once fixed and secure ideas are now in crisis, as multiple meanings compete for primacy. It is now common to ask, “What is the nation?” “Who is part of the nation?” “What is a citizen?” and “Can I have multiple national identities?” What I would like to do here is examine these questions and the social tensions they generate as natives in immigrant-receiving nations grapple with the changes they perceive as overwhelming their lives. I would like to do this by examining some key factors that complicate an understanding of nation, citizenship, and identity today. First of all, why people migrate into industrialized nations is often not clearly understood. Often, immigrants themselves are viewed as the main benefactors of migration, in terms of income and social services. Less often understood is the relationship between the demand for labor and fertility rates in receiving countries, and the importance of historical, political, economic, and sociocultural connections between sending and receiving nations. I have become increasingly interested in the fertility and immigration relationship. I have become increasingly interested in the relationship between fertility and immigration. I think of it in terms of this image (Figure 1):

▲

In capitalist economic systems, such as that of the United States and most of the Jobs industrialized nations of Europe and also Japan, the basic premise is that economic growth is not only good but essential. Fertility There is tremendous pressure to maintain even a modicum of economic growth, Figure 1　Capitalism: which translates into creating more jobs today than yesterday. Creating more jobs avoids the social, political, and economic problems that come with economic recessions and depressions. For example, young people want jobs when they enter the labor market, and older people want their social entitlements, such as Social Security and medical care. Economic growth helps to accomplish these desires. However, as this simple chart suggests, cultural values, based on economic considerations, are such that declining fertility rates are the rule in the industrialized nations and in the world more generally. This gap between fertility and economic growth creates a demand for immigrant labor (Massey 1987; Massey et al. 1998; Piore 1979). This gap will become exacerbated as many industrialized nations become increasingly older. Why is this gap between fertility and economic growth so important? There are only two ways to get workers for a labor market. You can either birth them or import them. This is true locally, regionally, and globally. Local labor markets can draw workers from other regions of the country, but they also draw foreign workers if the demand for labor persists. Consider the fertility rates by country in Table 1.2 Now consider the percentages of the foreign-born in various countries in Table 2.3 What is clear is that countries with below replacement fertility rates (less than two children per woman) often experience pressure for immigration. Only the United States is listed as being at replacement level, but this rate is actually lower if only women under 45 years of age, the reproductive years, are considered (see below). For some nations, such as Spain and Italy, fertility decline, combined with economic growth, has resulted in a rather rapid shift from being an emigrant-sending nation to an immigrant-receiving nation. Although 4 to 5 % foreign-born in a population may not seem excessively high, the sudden visibility of immigrants can raise concerns. In Spain, for example, where the proportion of immigrants from ▲

IMMIGRATION AND SOCIAL CONTROL DURING THE GETÜLIO VARGAS DICTATORSHIP

Table 1: Fertiltiy Ratesin Selected Countries Source: Population Reference Bureau's 2006 Population Data Sheet

Figure 2: Stock of Foreign-born People As Percentage of Total Population, 2005 Source: EuroStat, 2006; UN Migration Database 2005; Muenz 2006; Kashiwazaki and Akaha 2006

northern Africa is relatively small, Spaniards view them as a threat to Spanish language, identity, and culture (Checa et al. 2003). Japan, a nation that guards its borders carefully, has what it considers an “immigration problem,” even though the foreign-born account for only 1.6 % of its population (Kashiwazaki and Akaha 2006). If a nation does not produce workers but has an investment in economic growth and job creation, then there is pressure to provide workers through immigration. The anti-immigration discourse blames immigrants for responding to this labor demand with little consideration to homegrown pressures for immigrant flows. However, values found in the receiving society influence the demand for immigrant labor significantly. Such values include having fewer children, the desire for more education, a meaningful job, and more time for personal goals, as well as a desire for services such as fast food, child care, lawn care, elder care, manicures, hair care, and on and on. Along with these desires are equally strong desires not to do certain jobs. I often ask students, “How many of you are going spend your summer helping farmers harvest their crops?” None raise their hands. This was once a common practice in the United States. Industrial societies generally do not educate youth to desire low-income, semiskilled jobs in agriculture and food production, construction, manufacturing, and services. These are the default jobs for those we fail to educate properly, but that is another topic. The bottom line is that fertility is related to immigration in a way that is often not discussed in the anti-immigrant discourse. Also, the direction of migration is seldom random. People move along paths created by historical political and economic connections between countries. For example, today’s transnational migrants often move between countries France and Algeria; England and India, the West Indies, Hong Kong, and Pakistan; Germany and Turkey; the United States of America and Korea, Mexico, Vietnam, Cuba, and Central America; and Japan and Brazil and Peru. All of these transnational flows of people occur between nations that have had long-term, often colonial or post-colonial, relationships. A second factor that complicates how we understand nation, citizenship and identity today is that in nations that have a history of immigration, past immigration flows are often seen through rose-colored glasses. Past immigrants, who are now integrated into the nation, are often seen as the “good” immigrants in contrast to today’s “problem” immigrants. Past immigrants are often characterized as hard working people who really


wanted to assimilate rapidly. Becoming part of the nation, therefore, was easy. This story is often told in contrast to the story told about contemporary immigrants, who are perceived as not wanting to assimilate into the nation and bringing a whole host of problems. The U.S. example is illustrative of this point. The following image (Figure 2) is of the neighborhood called Little Italy, in New York City, around the turn of the Figure 2 twentieth century. This image captures the sentimentality through which the past is represented. This photograph of Little Italy in New York City was taken in the early 1900s. The words “Who We Were, Who We Are” makes a direct link between today’s nation and these past immigrants. Past immigrants wanted to become Americans quickly, to assimilate quickly, and the door was open for them. “They” became American, the magazine cover seems to say. In contrast, today’s immigrants are often characterized as “multiculturalists” who are bent on retaining the cultures and languages of their homelands, and eschew the idea of becoming American (Chavez 2001; Huntington 2004; Schlesinger 1992). However, the representations of past and contemporary immigrants to the United States are both too simplistic. Past immigrants to the United States faced tremendous obstacles integrating into the nation. It was not so easy. They faced discrimination and attitudes that often associated them with crime, disease, and other social pathologies. Half the Italians in the first photograph went back home because it was so hard to become American. These images from the late 1800s and early 1900s, capture the perceptions and fears many in U.S. society held about the “new” immigrants at the time. Figure 3 Reality images (Figure 3):

Figure 4

Figure 5

In this image from the late 1800s, you have immigrants carrying signs that indicate the problems they bring with them: disease, plague, crime, poverty, filth, and labor unrest. This cartoon (Figure 4) depicts southern and eastern Europeans as vermin, as rats, coming to the United States, bringing with them crime, anarchy, and political unrest. Asian immigrants, though most are today very successfully integrated into U.S. society, were also seen in the past as bringing problems. Here, this “Stature of Liberty” (Figure 5) is Chinese, and is associated with filth,

disease, and immorality. The point is that while we may remember the past nostalgically, and characterize past immigrants as desiring to lose their language and cultural traditions rapidly as they assimilated into U.S. life, that story was not really reality. Past immigrants faced major problems and it took time to learn about U.S. society and culture, and to learn English. A third problem that complicates how we understand nation,


citizenship and identity today has to do with what I call media spectacles, through which many natives learn about the lives of immigrants. However, media spectacles are representations of immigrant lives, their virtual lives, which may not correspond to the immigrants’ actual lived lives. And, media representations may not correspond to how immigrants themselves view their lives. But for most natives, for whom contact with immigrants is rare or brief, these representations of immigrants, the virtual lives of immigrants that are created, are what they base their opinions on and on which public policies are based. Broadly speaking, events or public performances that receive an inordinate volume of media attention and public opinion become media spectacles.4 In much of the industrialized world, it is difficult to escape media coverage and the incessant “talk” about immigration5. When immigration-related events or issues receive extensive media focus and become media shows, there is more going on than merely relating the news. As Guy Debord observed, in modern technological societies, life has become “an immense accumulation of spectacles. All that once was directly lived has become mere representation” (Debord 1995 [1965]:14). The images we constantly consume not only inform us of life around us, they help construct our understanding of events, people, and places in our world6. Struggles over the meaning of citizenship pervade media-infused spectacles where immigration or immigrants are the topic. For example, in the Spring of 2005, there occurred a spectacle of surveillance along the U.S.-Mexico border carried out by the Minuteman Project (Chavez 2008). For about three weeks, volunteers monitored the U.S.-Mexico border in the state of Arizona. Such immigration-related spectacles push us to think about the meaning of spectacles in society and how they help construct subjective understandings of “citizens” and “non-citizens.” For example, the Minuteman Project’s activities in Arizona were about more than drawing attention to the perils of an uncontrolled border and unauthorized immigration (Figure 6, 7). The Minutemen were also decrying what they perceived as the dilution of the rights and privileges of U.S. citizenship because of massive immigration. The spectacle of surveillance they created was meant to draw attention on the contested terrain of citizenship in a world where national borders are increasingly permeable. In short, media spectacles are productive acts that construct knowledge about subjects in our world. This is particularly the case for how members

Figure 6. Minuteman Project’ spectacle on the Arizona-Mexico border, April 2005

Figure 7. Minuteman April 2005

of nations internalize who they perceive as part of their nation. Notions of belonging, national identity, and who we include in our imagined community of fellow citizens is a product of many things, not the least of which is what we glean from the media7. How newcomers imagine themselves and are imagined by the larger society in relation to the nation is mediated through the representations of immigrants’ lives in media coverage. Media spectacles transform immigrants’ lives into virtual lives, which are typically devoid of the nuances and subtleties of real lived lives8. The virtual lives of “immigrants” become abstractions and representations that stand in the place of real lives. Rather than actual lives, virtual lives are generalized, iconic, and typified and are


turned into statistical means. They are aggregate figures melded into costbenefit analyses. They are no longer flesh-and-blood people; they exist as images. Through its coverage of events, the media produce knowledge about, and help construct, those considered legitimate members of society as well as those viewed as less legitimate, marginalized, and stigmatized Others9. Thus media spectacles help define what it means to be a “citizen,” a task that can be undertaken only by also defining its contrasting concepts: “alien,” “illegal alien,” “foreigner,” and “immigrant.” The fourth factor that complicates how we understand nation, citizenship and identity today is that in nations that are only recently begun to experience immigration, the problem of “the nation,” conceived in “racial” terms comes into conflict with the problem of incorporating visibly different immigrants. Here, too, media spectacles play an important role. Take for example how Japanese-Brazilians in Japan come to be known to the Japanese public (Tsuda 2003a; Tsuda 2003b). The Japanese public learns about the Japanese Brazilians through media spectacles such as that focusing on the yearly samba parade in the Asakusa neighborhood of Tokyo. What the images reveal are cultural and racial differences of Japanese Brazilians to the Japanese (Figure 8, 9).

Figure 8. Asakusa Samba Carnival, 2007

Figure 9. Asakusa Samba Carnival, 2007

Figure 11. Paris, France

Figure 10. U.S. News and World Report, USA

Figure 12. Paris, France

Figure 13. Refugees in Ireland

Issues of authenticity, purity, and difference become displayed and reinforce existing preconceptions about Japanese society and its cultural and racial composition. The message is that Japanese Brazilians are not exactly like the prototypical Japanese. Despite their Japanese origins, they are the impure Other, bringing different cultural practices and, in some cases, racially-mixed bodies. In the United States and Europe, immigration and fertility pose threats to the demographic composition, viewed in both racial and cultural terms. In the United States, Mexican and other Latin American immigrant women are the focus of public discourse (Figure 10). In much of Europe it is Muslim women (Figure 11, 12). In Ireland it is African women refugees (Figure 13). What they have in common is that their reproduction, both biological and social, are represented as problems.

10


Latinas in the U.S. for example, are the object of a discourse that produces a limited range of meanings, often focusing on their supposed excessive reproduction, seemingly abundant or limitless fertility, and hypersexuality, all of which are seen as “out of control” in relation to the supposed social norm. The biological reproduction of Latinas combines with their social reproduction in the popular imagination to produce fears about Latino population growth as a threat to the nation—that is, “the American people,” as conceived in demographic and racial/ethnic terms. The cover of U.S.-News & World Report above is an example of this discourse on threat posed by Mexican immigrant women’s fertility (Figure 10). In this image, the magazine is telling us that an “invasion” is taking place. However, notice that there are no soldiers or other visible elements that would support the militaristic concept of an invasion. Rather, at the head of the invading force is a woman being carried across the U.S.-Mexico border. She symbolizes the fertility of Mexican women, who will have babies, then families, then communities, and then eventually this will lead to a potential take over of the Southwestern part of the United States. In addition, so the story goes, also comes an unwillingness by Mexican immigrants and their children to learn English or integrate into the larger society. This threat materializes not merely because of Latino population growth, but also because Latino babies transgress the border between immigrants and citizens10. These transgressions contribute to immigration as a hot political issue, especially when the mother is an undocumented immigrant11. Reproduction, in both the biological and social senses, has become a key site political contestation. Should the children of immigrants receive citizenship as a result of birth in a territory - jus soli? Or should citizenship be accorded through lineage or “blood” - jus sanguinis? In Ireland recently, there was a vote to take away birthright citizenship (Moran 2007; Smith 2008; Tormey 2007). Citizenship through blood, jus sanguinis, is a key way to conceive immigration along racial lines. Struggles over jus soli, birthright citizenship, is a struggle over inclusion of difference rather than exclusion based on heritage. The final factor that complicates how we understand nation, citizenship and identity today is that the notion of citizenship itself is in crisis. What is meant by citizenship is being pulled apart by both natives and immigrants. Citizens, especially nationalists, worry that the rights and privileges of citizenship are being diluted as immigrants become part of the nation. Their emphasis is on restoring citizenship’s value by focusing on 11

borders, both in the sense who is allowed to become citizens and the borders of the nation itself, that is, who is allowed to come into the nation. In addition, globalization has led to questions about the rights and privileges of citizenship and whether citizenship extends beyond the limits of the nation-state (Bosniak 2000; Gordon and Stack 2007; Hall and Held 1989). Indeed, the proliferation of types of citizenships now under consideration is an indication of the current crisis surrounding the meaning of citizenship. Some argue that there are “economic citizens,” who through their labor contribute to the well-being of society (Gordon 1991; Rocco 2004). Others argue for transnational citizenship, postnational citizenship, transmigrant citizenship, transborder citizenship, and flexible citizenship, each of which recognizes that migrants often maintain lives that extend across the borders of nation-states (Anderson 2002; Basch et al. 1994; Brettell 2000; Castaneda 2004; Fitzgerald 2000; Ong 1999). Then there are “denizens,” legal residents of a country who are not naturalized citizens but enjoy some economic and political rights (Hammer 1990; Varsanyi 2006). Victoria Bernal observes that an “emotional citizenship” emerges through the use of the Internet by the widely dispersed Eritrean refugees (Bernal 2006). Others point to social inequalities that create a segmented citizenship, as some members of society are more valued than others, who often become stigmatized12 . Some also argue that immigrants and minorities are engaged in a struggle for cultural citizenship, reflecting their claims for inclusion in society (Flores and Benmayor 1997; Ong 1996; Rosaldo 1997; Stephen 2003; Torres et al. 1999). What, then, do we mean by citizen and citizenship? This, of course, varies by national context. Even in one context, citizenship can, and does, have many meanings13. It can range from the notion of being a “good citizen,” implying responsible membership in a social group, to strict legal definitions of rights and privileges. Incorporating immigrants into society entails a transformation from “other” to “us.” However, becoming part of the “us,” or to be included as part of the “we,” as in “we the people,” is a contested process partly because it is not clear what this process entails (Aleinikoff 1997; Hollinger 1993). Meanings of such seemingly concrete and objective terms as “citizen” and “citizenship” fluctuate over time and place. And immigration always complicates the notion of citizenship (Aleinikoff and Klusmeyer 2002; Coutin 2007; Yuval-Davis 2006). Should immigrants and their children be included as citizens? Under what conditions should they be included in the national body? How we 12


answer these questions depends on the way we perceive immigrants, which in turn is often based on what we know of them through their “virtual” lives, which are constructed through media representations (Carrier and Miller 1998). The problem, as I have already noted, is that real lives of immigrants and their children may not correspond to their media-constructed virtual lives. Immigrants are attempting to expand the definition of citizen, and what it means to be a citizen, a member of the society. And this brings us back to media spectacles. In the Spring of 2006, immigrants, hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million or more immigrants marched throughout the United States (Figure 14-16). Immigrants and their supporters in the United States marched to protest proposed legislation (House of Representatives Bill 4437) that would have made illegal immigrants felons, the worst kind of criminals (Chavez 2008). This would have forestalled any hopes of becoming legal immigrants. Anyone who helped them would also have faced severe penalties, and this could have included teachers, doctors, and even priests. The immigrants also marched to express their desire to be part of the society and to demand respect for their economic contributions to society. They were, in essences, claiming the public square to assert their economic and cultural citizenship and feelings of belonging. It is important to emphasize that these marches were orderly and peaceful. The immigrants were signaling their understanding of what “good citizenship” means, that is, the order conduct of political expression. Through these lawful and peaceful marches, the immigrants and their supporters expressed their desire for belonging and their desire to protect their political interests. In other words, their political expressions reflected their hope and desire to be included under the rule of law. It is important that they viewed society as holding out this possibility for them to be included. They were not so alienated from society that they believed that they had not other recourse to express their sentiments than through social upheaval, as what occurred in England and France in 2005. I would call those riots spectacles of rage. In England, Indian and Pakistani immigrants and their children rioted because of their anger over what they perceived was their being shut out of English society and a lack of economic mobility. In Paris, immigrants and the children of immigrants raised in France live in segregated ghettos, where they too believe they face discrimination and few economic and social opportunities. In both France 13

Figure 14. Los Angeles May1, 2006

Figure 15. Columbia, South Carolina, April 10, 2006

Figure 16

14


and England, immigrants and their children rioted rather than marched, reflecting their view that society left them little other viable recourse to express their desire for full social membership and full citizenship. In conclusion, the obstacles to understanding nation, citizenship and identity in today’s world present tremendous challenges. Every immigrant receiving nation needs to re-think ideas about what it means to be X (“American,” “Irish,” “Japanese”) in ways that allow for the inclusion of immigrants and their children. Citizenship should not be viewed as a limited resource, but a resource that renews the spirit of society by allowing others to develop a sense of belonging to the nation. The failure to do so is a recipe for social discord and social disintegration.

Notes 1 This paper was originally prepared for the conference: Migration and Identity: Conflicts and New Horizons, Osaka University, August 25, 26, 2008, organized by Osaka University and the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. I would like to thank my friend Junji Koizumi-san, Osaka University, and the University of São Paulo for inviting me to conference. In preparing this paper, I drew heavily on my recent book, The Latino Threat: Constructing Immigrants, Citizens, and the Nation (Stanford University Press, 2008). 2 The Population Reference Bureau defines total fertility rate as the average number of children a woman would have, assuming that current age-specific birthrates remain constant throughout her childbearing years (usually considered to be ages 15 to 49). 3 For more on foreign-born in these countries, see Kashiwazaki and Akaha, “ Japanese Immigration Policy”; Muenz,“ Europe.” 4 Kellner, Media Spectacles. 5 On the media and immigration, see Bailey,“ Mexico in the U.S. Media”; Coutin and Chock, “
‘Your Friend, the Illegal’
”; Fernandez and Pedroza,“ Border Patrol”; Keogan,“ Sense of Place”; Santa Ana, Brown Tide Rising; Santa Ana, “
‘Like an Animal’
”; Santa Ana, Moran and Sanchez, “Awash Under a Brown Tide”; Simon and Alexander, Ambivalent Welcome; White and White, Immigrants and the Media. 6 For examples of the way media frames events see: Benford and Snow, "Framing Processes and Social Movements."; Ensink and Sauer, "Social-Functional and Cognitive Approaches to Discourse Interpretation"; German, "The Role of the Media in Political Socialization and Attitude Formation toward Racial/Ethnic Minorities in the US;" and Coutin and Chock, "’Your Friend, the Illegal.’”

15

7 As Ella Shohat has observed,“ In a transnational world typified by the global circulation of images and sounds, goods and peoples, media spectatorship impacts complexly on national identity, communal belonging, and political affiliations.” Shohat,“ Post-Third-World Culture.” 8 For a discussion of the theory of virtualism see Carrier and Miller, Virtualism. 9 Media spectacles become a technique of governmentality by contributing to the development of systems of knowledge to control the conduct of populations. 10 For an analysis of metaphors of women and nation, see Probyn,“ Bloody Metaphors.” 11 For a discussion of immigrants as threats and the construction of citizens in relation to sexual politics, see Alexander, Pedagogies of Crossing. 12 Ong, Buddha Is Hiding. 13 Ortner,“ On Key Symbols.”

References Aleinikoff, T. Alexander 1997 The Tightening Circle of Membership. In J. F. Parea (ed.) Immigrants Out! The New Nativism and the Anti-Immigrant Impulse in the Untied States. pp.324-332. New York: New York University Press. Aleinikoff, T. Alexander, and Douglas Klusmeyer 2002 Citizenship Policies for an Age of Migration. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institute for International Peace. Anderson, James 2002 Transnational Democracy: Political Spaces and Border Crossings. London and New York: Routledge. Basch, Linda, Nina Glick Schiller, and Cristina Szanton Blanc 1994 Nations Unbound: Transnational Projects, Postcolonial Predicaments, and Deterritorialized Nation-States. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach. Bernal, Victoria 2006 Diaspora, Cyberspace and Political Imagination: The Eritrean Diaspora Online. Global Networks 6(2): 161-179. Bosniak, Linda S. 2000 Universal Citizenship and the Problem of Alienage. Northwestern University Law Review 94(3): 963-984. Brettell, Caroline B. 2000 Theorizing Migration in Anthropology. In Migration Theory. New York: Routledge. Carrier, James G., and Daniel Miller 16


1998 Virtualism: A New Political Economy. Oxford: Berg. Castaneda, Alejandra 2004 Roads to Citizenship: Mexican Migrants in the United States. Latino Studies 2(1): 70-89. Chavez, Leo R. 2001 Covering Immigration: Popular Images and the Politics of the Nation. Berkeley: University of California Press. 2008 The Latino Threat: Constructing Immigrants, Citizens and the Nation. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Checa, Francisco, Ángeles Arjona, and Juan Carlos Checa 2003 La Integración Social de los Inmigrados: Modelos y Experiencias. Barcelona, Spain: Icaria Editorial, s.a. Coutin, Susan Bibler 2007 Nations of Emigrants: Shifting Boundaries of Citizenship in El Salvador and the United States. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. Debord, Guy 1995 [1965] The Society of the Spectacle. New York: Zone Books. Fitzgerald, David 2000 Negotiating Extra-Territorial Citizenship: Mexican Migration and the Transnational Politics of Community. La Jolla, CA: Center for Comparative Immigration Studies, University of California, San Diego. Flores, William V., and Rina Benmayor 1997 Latino Cultural Citizenship: Claiming Identity, Space, and Rights. Boston: Beacon Press. Gordon, Andrew, and Trevor Stack 2007 Citizenship beyond the State: Thinking with Early Modern Citizenship in the Contemporary World. Citizenship Studies 11(2): 117-133. Gordon, Colin 1991 Governmental Rationality: An Introduction. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller (eds.) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Hall, Stuart, and David Held 1989 Citizens and Citizenship." In S. Hall and M. Jacque (eds.) New Times: The Changing Face of Politics in the 1990s. pp.172-188. New York: Verso. Hammer, Tomas 1990 Democracy and the Nation State: Aliens, Denizens, and Citizens in a World of International Migration. Aldershot: Avebury. Hollinger, David 1993 How Wide the Circle of "We"? American Intellectuals and the Problem of Ethnos since World War II. American Historical Review 98(2): 317-337. Huntington, Samuel P. 17

2004 Who We Are: The Challenges to America's National Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster. Kashiwazaki, Chikako, and Tsuneo Akaha 2006 Japanese Immigration Policy: Responding to Conflicting Pressures. November. Migration Information Source, Migration Policy Institute. (http://www. migrationinformation.org/Profiles/display.cfm?ID=487) [Accessed September 9, 2007] Massey, Douglas S. 1987 Return to Aztlan: The Social Process of International Migration from Western Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press. Massey, Douglas S., Joaquin Arango, Graeme Hugo, Ali Kouaouci, Adela Pellegrino, and J. Edward Taylor 1998 Worlds in Motion: Understanding International Migration at the End of the Millennium. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Moran, Erin 2007 Immigrant Appearances and the Emergence of "Active Citizenship" in Ireland. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Anthropological Association, Washington, D.C., November 30, 2007. Ong, Aihwa 1996 Cultural Citizenship as Subject-Making: Immigrants Negotiate Racial and Cultural Boundaries in the United States. Current Anthropology 37(5): 737-762. 1999 Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logics of Transnationality. Durham: Duke University Press. Piore, Michael J. 1979 Birds of Passage: Migrant Labor Industrial Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rocco, Raymond 2004 Transforming Citizenship: Membership, Strategies of Containment, and the Public Sphere in Latino Communities. Latino Studies 2(1): 4-25. Rosaldo, Renato 1997 Cultural Citizenship, Inequality, and Multiculturalism. In W. V. Flores and R. Benmayor (eds.) Latino Cultural Citizenship. pp.27-38. Boston: Beacon Press. Schlesinger, Arthur M. Jr. 1992 The Disuniting of America. New York: W.W. Norton. Smith, Angèle 2008 The Irish Citizenship Referendum (2004): Motherhood and Belonging in Ireland. In D. R.-D. a. C. B. Brettell (ed.) Citizenship, Political Engagement, and Belonging: Immigrants in Europe and the United States. pp.60-77. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 18


Stephen, Lynn 2003 Cultural Citizenship and Labor Rights for Oregon Farmworkers: The Case of Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Nordoeste (PCUN). Human Organization 62(1): 27-38. Tormey, Anwen 2007 "Everyone with Eyes Can See the Problem": Moral Citizens and the Space of Irish Nationhood. International Migration 45(3): 69-100. Torres, Rodolfo D., Louis F. Mirón, and Jonathan Xavier Inda 1999 Introduction. In R. D. Torres, L. F. Mirón, and J. X. Inda (eds.) Race, Identity, and Citizenship. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Tsuda, Takeyuki 2003a Domesticating the Other: Japanese Media Images of Nikkejin Return Migration. Ethnology: An International Journal of Cultural and Social Anthropology 42(4): 289-305. 2003b Strangers in the Ethnic Homeland: Japanese Brazilian Return Migration in Transnational Perspective. New York: Columbia University Press. Varsanyi, Monica W. 2006 Interrogating "Urban Citizenship" vis-à-vis Undocumented Migration. Citizenship Studies 10(2): 229-245. Yuval-Davis, Nira 2006 Belonging and the politics of belonging. Patterns of Prejudice 40(3): 197214.

Author’s Biography Leo R. Chavez is Professor of Department of Anthropology, University of California, Irvine (California). His major fields of study are transnational migration, including immigrant families and households, labor market participation, motivations for migration, the use of medical services, and media constructions of “immigrant” and “nation.” His Publications include Shadowed Lives: Undocumented Immigrants in American Society (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 1992, 1997 2nd edition); Covering Immigration: Popular Images and the Politics of the Nation (University of California Press 2001); The Latino Threat: Constructing Immigrants, Citizens, and the Nation (Stanford University Press, 2008).

19

20