“The reality is often quite different, a great national striving consisting frequently of failure.” - Anna Quindlen. Judging from this sentence from the text, A Quilt of a Country, you can already tell what the tone and diction is. The tone and diction for , A Quilt for a Country, is poetic and can connect to the readers. The tone and diction for, The Immigrant Contribution, is informational and logical. Both stories elaborate on the reason why immigrants migrated to the United States, and how they contribute to American history. The diction and tone emulates the author’s purpose, audience, and message. Kennedy’s tone is very logical because he describes the motive for immigrants to migrate to the United States. On paragraph two he explains
In paragraph two he states ”when we are confronted with grave crisis in Berlin and Southeast Asia, when we are devoting our energies to economic recovery and stability, when we are asking reservists to leave their homes and families for months on end…” President Kennedy starts each of his statements with “when we are” to address the sacrifices the people are making while the steel companies prioritizes in this dark hour, which shows they don’t care about their nation. He then shows us how this would be worsened even further if the steel companies maintained the high prices. Kennedy also states “It would make it more difficult for American goods to compete in foreign markets, more difficult to withstand competition from foreign imports, and thus more difficult to improve our balance of payments position…” He then repeatedly starts off with the phrase “more difficult.” This repetition, incorporated with facts, proves his point that the steel companies were unpatriotic and greedy because he shows how much trouble and difficulty the rise in steel companies would cause. Besides using the strategy of repeating words and phrases, Kennedy also uses statistics to achieve his argument.
they have "no sympathy"(125) for the immigrants. After this he tells how the politicians jumped
In 1924 immigration was reduced further to 160,000 a year, and in 1929, immigration was cut to 157,000 and quotas were again reset based on national origins in the 1920 U.S. Census. The rationale was that these laws would ensure the existing ethnic composition of the country and help assimilate the 15 million southern and eastern Europeans who had entered the previous forty years (endillegalimmigration).” Clearly then, Hardin’s alleged concern on the quantity of immigrants entering the United States doesn’t compute with the current regulations imposed already on how many immigrants are allowed to come legally yearly anyway! However, “the door was left open for Mexicans (who even then were desired by employers for their cheap labor) and northern Europeans. As history would show, this legal immigration led to illegal immigration and foreshadowed today’s debate on these topics (endillegalimmigration).” So, America left the door open for illegal immigration per their discretion to capitalize on cheap labor, not as a concern for the “lifeboat” but Hardin’s essay fails to address this important fact as do
In 1924 immigration was reduced further to 160,000 a year, and in 1929, immigration was cut to 157,000 and quotas were again reset based on national origins in the 1920 U.S. Census. The rationale was that these laws would ensure the existing ethnic composition of the country and help assimilate the 15 million southern and eastern Europeans who had entered the previous forty years (endillegalimmigration).” Clearly then, Hardin’s alleged concern on the quantity of immigrants entering the United States doesn’t compute with the current regulations imposed already on how many immigrants are allowed to come legally yearly anyway! However, “the door was left open for Mexicans (who even then were desired by employers for their cheap labor) and northern Europeans. As history would show, this legal immigration led to illegal immigration and foreshadowed today’s debate on these topics (endillegalimmigration).” So, America left the door open for illegal immigration per their discretion to capitalize on cheap labor, not as a concern for the “lifeboat” but Hardin’s essay fails to address this important fact as do
When you look at the books closely together, you can see how alike they are. Both authors use many analogies to get their points across. For example Eboo used the Martin Luther King Jr. and George Washington analogy. King knew Washington was a slaveholder, and a symbol of democracy, and it “Neither paralyzed him nor made him cynical.” Both the essays also use repetition with words and phrases such as, “What is the point?” in Quilt of a Country or the use of, “you” in Making the Future Better Together. The biggest and most astounding part of both pieces is that they talk about change. Eboo Patel tells you to be the change and Anna Quindlen writes about how the United States is change. These pieces go hand in hand with each other because change is the point they both try to put across. Diversity is also in both pieces. Quilt of a Country talks about how the United States is full of diversity and Making the Future Better Together talks about uniting by being diverse.
In the 1860’s, when the book begins, America is taking in a great deal of immigrants. America did not realize at this time that it was a natural and necessary course that the country was having to go through. The dominant group did not understand why this was having to happen in America because they thought that immigrant would cause a problem in the country. During the 1870’s and 1880’s, there was no feeling of threat posed by the immigrants on Americans that would make them feel like there was going to be a problem in the nation at all. The labor unions had originally allowed only the immigration of contract laborers, but by 1896 the American Federation of Labor had followed Gompers in his aggression to immigration, and American workers continued to stand against free immigration until the restriction movement finally succeeded. Even though Progressives and Socialists had a strong democratic placement, they changed their minds and began to support immigration because they did not want their jobs or lives to be interrupted by excessive immigration. In the early 1900’s, the South and the West favored free immigration because they were curious to increase their population. The South and the West voted against the literacy test whose purpose
It has been observed that, from history American has served as a destination for most immigrants in the world the world (Williams 16).
Some would say, quotes John F. Kennedy, “Everywhere immigrants have enriched and strengthened the fabric of American life.” Thus, in today’s society, we can say that immigrants are what made America possible—economically and socially. We are in a melting pot era where the impossible was made possible. From the time John F. Kennedy was elected in 1960, making a promise to change the national origins system to unite the nations of all countries equally. Hence, in 1965, under Lyndon Johnson’s administration, Kennedy’s promise came into light, amending the INS—favoring unification of families, not national origins. Although, the unification was made possible, the peacefulness never lasted.
Robert H. Clancy in his speech, “An “Un-American Bill”: A Congressman Denounces Immigration Quotas” effectively describes how the Johnson Reed Act affected immigration. Clancy’s purpose is to inform people in the racial discrimination of the immigration act in 1924. He adopts a serious tone and strong feeling in order to provide proof to the intended audience. Robert H. Clancy uses sufficient pathos with many examples throughout the text, many logos were used clearly and ethos was provided effectively.
This ties into another one of his statements in that immigration takes much of its importance from its relation to the economic development of the United States (Carpenter 296). Because he explores the fact that immigration is a result of the economic well being of the United States, he introduces the concept that there will obviously be social conflict between the immigrants.
The country was in the depths of the Cold War during his time in office and he identified this as an opportunity to use immigration policy as a “psychological tool” against communism. Kennedy aimed to expose to the world that American principles of freedom, democracy, and capitalism were dominant to those offered by communist states. He concluded that if the United States opened its borders to endow immigration, people would “vote with their feet” and abundantly choose to make the US their home. However, Kennedy was not in office long enough to carry out this policy after being assassinated, so his successor, Lyndon B. Johnson carried the momentum. With Johnson’s time in office came the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act.
Although today’s America in many ways has changed into a new society. Immigrants desire to move to America because they have freedom of religion, a chance to rise from poverty, and a new beginning. According to Michel-Guillaume Jean de Crevecoeur in from Letters from an American Farmer, ‘’ A country that had no bread for him, whose fields produced him no harvest, who met with nothing but the frowns of the rich, the severity of the laws, with jails and punishments; who owned not a single foot of the extensive surface of this planet? No! Urged by a variety of motives, here they came (148). Immigrants have a need to move to America to have a better future. As immigrants look on America they see that it’s a way out of getting a new life.
One of such reasons would be for religious freedom. People can also move to other countries in search for opportunities. In particularly, in the United States, there are many employment opportunities, which people can find and work. Many people from other nations strongly believe that migrating to America will offer them employment opportunities. Next in the list of reasons, includes survival reasons. Whereas some argue that immigration is not good and has the potential of harming the United States, others people believe that immigration is good and has to be encouraged. Whereas Jacoby answers “yes” to the question of “Does Immigration Increase the Virtues of Hard Work and Fortitude in the United States,” Krikorian objects Jacoby’s idea and instead, argues that immigration is depletes the resources of a country. In the article “Five Myths about Immigration,” Cole argues that the United States has received and benefited from many immigrants since 1800s. In Booth’s article entitled, “Immigration Threatens America’s Unity,” he says that before the late 1900s the greatest immigration wave contributed to a bitter backlash (epitomized by the return of Ku Klux Klan and Chinese exclusion, which targeted blacks, Catholics, immigrants, as well as
“We are nation of immigrants. Some came here willingly, some unwillingly. Nonetheless, we are immigrants, or the descendants of immigrants, one, and all. Even the natives came from somewhere else, originally. All of the people who come to this country come for freedom, or for some product of that extraordinary, illusory condition. That is what we offer here—freedom and opportunity in a land of relative plenty.” (Middletown Journal 2005)
However, in the end both Kennedy and Quindlen both try to show Americans how important immigration is to the United States. Diversity is what built