Chat with us, powered by LiveChat HIST1302 Brookhaven College Identity of Hyphenated Americans Assignment | Abc Paper

1) Why do the authors of Document 1 and Document 2 believe it is necessary to strictly define
Americans, and promote efforts to assimilate, or “Americanize,” immigrants in the United
States? How do President Theodore Roosevelt and Senator Smith’s arguments differ? Do you
find their arguments persuasive? Why or why not? Based upon Document 3, how might Woody
Guthrie respond to each of those proposals? 2) In examining Document 4 and Document 6, how did the onset of the Cold War redefine
what it meant to be an American? What role do these documents suggest loyal citizens play in
waging war against Communism? In examining the political cartoon (Document 5), how does
the artist critique the “anti-subversive” efforts that took place during the Second Red Scare? In
what ways does the McCarthy era continue to influence American society? 3) The turbulent 1960s saw numerous attempts to identify the root problems within American
society and the role of citizens in resolving them. In examining Document 7, Document 8, and
Document 9, what common problems are identified within American society? What are some of
the differences? What role did each of these documents suggest Americans should play in
achieving social justice? Are their arguments persuasive? Why or why not? 4) The last several decades of the Twentieth Century saw the emergence of new groups of
Americans claiming rights as citizens. To what extent does the failure of the Equal Rights
Amendment (Document 10) to be ratified, but the signing of Title IX (Document 11) into law,
signal about the changing role and rights of women in modern America? After reading President
George H.W. Bush’s remarks (Document 12), why do you believe it took so long for the country
to acknowledge and protect the rights of the disabled? 5) How does Maya Angelou’s inauguration poem (Document 13) reflect upon the identity of
“hyphenated Americans” by the early 1990s? In reading Document 14, how does PresidentElect Barack Obama define Americanism? Looking back over documents 1-13, did his election,
as the first person of color to become President of the United States, resolve the questions and
crises surrounding the definition of an American citizen? In a post-9/11 world, has America
progressed in its inclusiveness? Why or why not?

Unformatted Attachment Preview

HIST 1302
This assignment has several documents for you to read and view in order to answer the five
required questions. Please follow any formatting guidelines and minimum length requirements as
set by your professor. Please take your time to analyze these documents and submit thoughtful
arguments supported by the evidence these documents provide.
1. Excerpt of Theodore Roosevelt’s “Hyphenated Americans” Speech (October 12, 1915)
2. Excerpt of “Shut the Door” Speech (April 9, 1924)
3. Woody Guthrie’s “This Land is Your Land” (February 1940)
4. LOOK Magazine’s “How to Spot a Communist” (March 1947)
5. Political Cartoon “You read books, eh?” (April 24, 1949)
6. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy’s “Enemies from Within” Speech (February 9, 1950)
7. Excerpt of Port Huron Statement (June 15, 1962)
8. Black Panther Ten-Point Program (October 1966)
9. Caesar Chavez “Letter from Delano” (April 4, 1969)
10. Equal Rights Amendment (1972)
11. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (June 23, 1972)
12. George H.W. Bush on the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act (July 26, 1990)
13. Maya Angelou “On the Pulse of the Morning” (January 20, 1993)
14. President-Elect Barack Obama’s Victory Speech (November 4, 2008)
Document 1: [excerpt] “Hyphenated Americans” Speech (1915)
Former President Theodore Roosevelt delivered the following speech to a meeting of the
Knights of Columbus in Carnegie Hall, New York City on October 12, 1915. With World
War I raging in Europe and across the globe, Roosevelt warned of the need for
preparedness amongst American citizens. Excerpts from this speech focus upon how
Roosevelt defined “Hyphenated Americans” and the importance of their
“Americanization” for the country’s strength and success in future conflicts.
FOUR centuries and a quarter have gone by since Columbus by discovering America opened the greatest era in
world history. Four centuries have passed since the Spaniards began that colonization on the main land which has
resulted in the growth of the nations of Latin-America. Three centuries have passed since, with the settlements on
the coasts of Virginia and Massachusetts, the real history of what is now the United States began. All this we
ultimately owe to the action of an Italian seaman in the service of a Spanish King and a Spanish Queen. It is
eminently fitting that one of the largest and most influential social organizations of this great Republic, a Republic in
which the tongue is English, and the blood derived from many sources, should, in its name, commemorate the great
Italian. It is eminently fitting to make an address on Americanism before this society.
We of the United States need above all things to remember that, while we are by blood and culture kin to each of the
nations of Europe, we are also separate from each of them. We are a new and -distinct nationality. We are
developing our own distinctive culture and civilization, and the worth of this civilization will largely depend upon
our determination to keep it distinctively our own. Our sons and daughters should be educated here and not abroad.
We should freely take from every other nation whatever we can make of use, but we should adopt and develop to
our own peculiar needs what we thus take, and never be content merely to copy.
Our nation was founded to perpetuate democratic principles. These principles are that each man is to be treated on
his worth as a man without regard to the land from which his forefathers came and without regard to the creed which
he professes. If the United States proves false to these principles of civil and religious liberty, it will have inflicted
the greatest blow on the system of free popular government that has ever been inflicted. Here we have had a virgin
continent on which to try the experiment of making out of divers race stocks a new nation and of treating all the
citizens of that nation in such a fashion as to preserve them equality of opportunity in industrial, civil, and/ political
life. Our duty is to secure each man against any injustice by his fellows….
What is true of creed is no less true of nationality. There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.
When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I
have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an
American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts “native” before the hyphen as of the man who puts German
or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance
must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if
he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as
any one else.
The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a
nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of GermanAmericans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or ItalianAmericans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that
nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic. The men who do not become Americans and
nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls
himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays
a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the
land to which he feels his real heart-allegiance, the better it will be for every good American. There is no such thing
as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an
American and nothing else….
For an American citizen to vote as a German-American, an Irish- American, or an English-American, is to be a
traitor to American institutions; and those hyphenated Americans who terrorize American politicians by threats of
the foreign vote are engaged in treason to the American Republic.
Now this is a declaration of principles. How are we in practical fashion to secure the making of these principles part
of the very fiber of our national life? First and foremost let us all resolve that in this country hereafter we shall place
far less emphasis upon the question of right and much greater emphasis upon the matter of duty. A republic can`t
succeed and won`t succeed in the tremendous international stress of the modern world unless its citizens possess that
form of high-minded patriotism which consists in putting devotion to duty before the question of individual rights.
This must be done in our family relations or the family will go to pieces….
What is true of the family, the foundation stone of our national life, is not less true of the entire superstructure. I am,
as you know, a most ardent believer in national preparedness against war as a means of securing that honorable and
self-respecting peace which is the only peace desired by all high-spirited people. But it is an absolute impossibility
to secure such preparedness in full and proper form if it is an isolated feature of our policy… But it is equally true
that there cannot be this preparation in advance for military strength unless there is a social basis of civil and social
life behind it. There must be social, economic, and military preparedness all alike, all harmoniously developed; and
above all there must be spiritual and mental preparedness….
We should meet this situation by on the one hand seeing that these immigrants get all their rights as American
citizens, and on the other hand insisting that they live up to their duties as American citizens. Any discrimination
against aliens is a wrong, for it tends to put the immigrant at a disadvantage and to cause him to feel bitterness and
resentment during the very years when he should be preparing himself for American citizenship. If an immigrant is
not fit to become a citizen, he should not be allowed to come here. If he is fit, he should be given all the rights to
earn his own livelihood, and to better himself, that any man can have. Take such a matter as the illiteracy test; I
entirely agree with those who feel that many very excellent possible citizens would be barred improperly by an
illiteracy test. But why do you not admit aliens under a bond to learn to read and write within a certain time? It
would then be a duty to see that they were given ample opportunity to learn to read and write and that they were
deported if they failed to take advantage of the opportunity.
No man can be a good citizen if he is not at least in process of learning to speak the language of his fellow-citizens.
And an alien who remains here without learning to speak English for more than a certain number of years should at
the end of that time be treated as having refused to take the preliminary steps necessary to complete Americanization
and should be deported. But there should be no denial or limitation of the alien`s opportunity to work, to own
property, and to take advantage of civic opportunities. Special legislation should deal with the aliens who do not
come here to be made citizens. But the alien who comes here intending to become a citizen should be helped in
every way to advance himself, should be removed from every possible disadvantage, and in return should be
required under penalty of being sent back to the country from which he came, to prove that he is in good faith fitting
himself to be an American citizen.
Therefore, we should devote ourselves as a preparative to preparedness, alike in peace and war, to secure the three
elemental things: one, a common language, the English language; two, the increase in our social loyalty citizenship
absolutely undivided, a citizenship which acknowledges no flag except the flag of the United States and which
emphatically repudiates all duality of intention or national loyalty; and third, an intelligent and resolute effort for the
removal of industrial and social unrest, an effort which shall aim equally at securing every man his rights and to
make every man understand that unless he in good faith performs his duties he is not entitled to any rights at all.
The American people should itself do these things for the immigrants. If we leave the immigrant to be helped by
representatives of foreign governments, by foreign societies, by a press and institutions conducted in a foreign
language and in the interest of foreign governments, and if we permit the immigrants to exist as alien groups, each
group sundered from the rest of the citizens of the country, we shall store up for ourselves bitter trouble in the
The foreign-born population of this country must be an Americanized population no other kind can fight the battles
of America either in war or peace. It must talk the language of its native-born fellow-citizens, it must possess
American citizenship and American ideals. It must stand firm by its oath of allegiance in word and deed and must
show that in very fact it has renounced allegiance to every prince, potentate, or foreign government. It must be
maintained on an American standard of living so as to prevent labor disturbances in important plants and at critical
times. None of these objects can be secured as long as we have immigrant colonies, ghettos, and immigrant sections,
and above all they cannot be assured so long as we consider the immigrant only as an industrial asset. The
immigrant must not be allowed to drift or to be put at the mercy of the exploiter. Our object is not to imitate one of
the older racial types, but to maintain a new American type and then to secure loyalty to this type. We cannot secure
such loyalty unless we make this a country where men shall feel that they have justice and also where they shall feel
that they are required to perform the duties imposed upon them. The policy of “Let alone” which we have hitherto
pursued is thoroughly vicious from two standpoints. By this policy we have permitted the immigrants, and too often
the native-born laborers as well, to suffer injustice. Moreover, by this policy we have failed to impress upon the
immigrant and upon the native-born as well that they are expected to do justice as well as to receive justice, that they
are expected to be heartily and actively and single-mindedly loyal to the flag no less than to benefit by living under
We cannot afford to continue to use hundreds of thousands of immigrants merely as industrial assets while they
remain social outcasts and menaces any more than fifty years ago we could afford to keep the black man merely as
an industrial asset and not as a human being. We cannot afford to build a big industrial plant and herd men and
women about it without care for their welfare. We cannot afford to permit squalid overcrowding or the kind of living
system which makes impossible the decencies and necessities of life. We cannot afford the low wage rates and the
merely seasonal industries which mean the sacrifice of both individual and family life and morals to the industrial
machinery. We cannot afford to leave American mines, munitions plants, and general resources in the hands of alien
workmen, alien to America and even likely to be made hostile to America by machinations such as have recently
been provided in the case of the two foreign embassies in Washington. We cannot afford to run the risk of having in
time of war men working on our railways or working in our munition plants who would in the name of duty to their
own foreign countries bring destruction to us… What would be done to us in the name of war if these things are done
to us in the name of neutrality?
… I ask you to make a special effort to deal with Americanization, the fusing into one nation, a nation necessarily
different from all other nations, of all who come to our shores. Pay heed to the three principal essentials: (i) the need
of a common language, with a minimum amount of illiteracy; (2) the need of a common civil standard, similar
ideals, beliefs, and customs symbolized by the oath of allegiance to America; and (3) the need of a high standard of
living, of reasonable equality of opportunity and of social and industrial justice. In every great crisis in our history,
in the Revolution and in the Civil War, and in the lesser crises, like the Spanish war, all factions and races have been
forgotten in the common spirit of Americanism. Protestant and Catholic, men of English or of French, of Irish or of
German, descent have joined with a single-minded purpose to secure for the country what only can be achieved by
the resultant union of all patriotic citizens….
Even in the matter of national defense there is such a labyrinth of committees and counsels and advisors that there is
a tendency on the part of the average citizen to become confused and do nothing. I ask you to help strike the note
that shall unite our people. As a people we must be united. If we are not united we shall slip into the gulf of
measureless disaster. We must be strong in purpose for our own defense and bent on securing justice within our
borders. If as a nation we are split into warring camps, if we teach our citizens not to look upon one another as
brothers but as enemies divided by the hatred of creed for creed or of those of one race against those of another race,
surely we shall fail and our great democratic experiment on this continent will go down in crushing overthrow. I ask
you here to-night and those like you to take a foremost part in the movement a young men`s movement for a greater
and better America in the future.
All of us, no matter from what land our parents came, no matter in what way we may severally worship our Creator,
must stand shoulder to shoulder in a united America for the elimination of race and religious prejudice. We must
stand for a reign of equal justice to both big and small. We must insist on the maintenance of the American standard
of living. We must stand for an adequate national control which shall secure a better training of our young men in
time of peace, both for the work of peace and for the work of war. We must direct every national resource, material
and spiritual, to the task not of shirking difficulties, but of training our people to overcome difficulties. Our aim
must be, not to make life easy and soft, not to soften soul and body, but to fit us in virile fashion to do a great work
for all mankind. This great work can only be done by a mighty democracy, with these qualities of soul, guided by
those qualities of mind, which will both make it refuse to do injustice to any other nation, and also enable it to hold
its own against aggression by any other nation. In our relations with the outside world, we must abhor wrongdoing,
and disdain to commit it, and we must no less disdain the baseness of spirit which lamely submits to wrongdoing.
Finally and most important of all, we must strive for the establishment within our own borders of that stern and lofty
standard of personal and public neutrality which shall guarantee to each man his rights, and which shall insist in
return upon the full performance by each man of his duties both to his neighbor and to the great nation whose flag
must symbolize in the future as it has symbolized in the past the highest hopes of all mankind.
Document 2: [excerpt] “Shut the Door” Speech (1924)
As part of the debate over the Immigration Act of 1924 (also known as the National Origins
Act), Senator Ellison DuRant Smith of South Carolina gave voice to many who supported
immigration restrictions as a means of preserving existing American resources.
It seems to me the point as to this measure—and I have been so impressed for several years—is that the time has
arrived when we should shut the door. We have been called the melting pot of the world. We had an experience just
a few years ago, during the great World War, when it looked as though we had allowed influences to enter our
borders that were about to melt the pot in place of us being the melting pot.
I think that we have sufficient stock in America now for us to shut the door, Americanize what we have, and save
the resources of America for the natural increase of our population. We all know that one of the most prolific causes
of war is the desire for increased land ownership for the overflow of a congested population. We are increasing at
such a rate that in the natural course of things in a comparatively few years the landed resources, the natural
resources of the country, shall be taken up by the natural increase of our population. It seems to me the part of
wisdom now that we have throughout the length and breadth of continental America a population which is beginning
to encroach upon the reserve and virgin resources of the country to keep it in trust for the multiplying population of
the country.
I do not believe that political reasons should enter into the discussion of this very vital question. It is of greater
concern to us to maintain the institutions of America, to maintain the principles upon which this Government is
founded, than to develop and exploit the underdeveloped resources of the country. There are some things that are
dearer to us, fraught with more benefit to us, than the immediate development of the undeveloped resources of the
country. I believe that our particular ideas, social, moral, religious, and political, have …
Purchase answer to see full

error: Content is protected !!