‘The Hispanic Challenge’ about Immigration Free Essay Example

The article of Samuel Huntington entitled “The Hispanic Challenge” is argumentative report which tackles the heated issue concerning immigration and the influx and growing dominance of the Hispanics in the United States in particular. As with any argumentative piece, this article has drawn many criticisms, foremost among these is the reaction of Ricardo Hausmann who in essence argues that the views of Huntington are myopic. This short discourse will try to elaborate on the key point of contention of these two articles and analyze the strength and weaknesses of their respective positions.

The first issue that the Hausmann tackles with regard to the article of Huntington is that the view of Huntington “follows in a long tradition of those who would cast doubt on the patriotism of non-Anglo-Protestant ethnic groups (Hausmann 1)”. The question that must be asked regarding this issue therefore is whether or not the increase in Hispanic immigrants threatens the core of anglo-protestant culture. Hausmann argues that the view that Huntington presents with respect to the patriotism of the Hispanics is an overused argument that has already been widely discredited.

Huntington on the other hand attempts to present a correlation between the number of foreign immigrants and the number of debates and controversies that shake the core of anglo-protestant culture (Huntington 32). The argument of Hausmann presents a more valid understanding of the issue at hand in this case. While Huntington attempts to make his point by presenting data and statistics regarding the number of immigrants from Mexico and the debates and controversies that it has spawned, he fails to prove that there is indeed a strong correlation here.

The Philippines and Cuba are also a predominantly catholic nations but Huntington does not show that these countries may have also had an effect on the debates concerning the state language. While it certainly makes a good discussion, the argument of Huntington on this matter simply does not persuade. There is no need to analyze the arguments of Hausmann on this point because what he merely suggests is that Huntington properly examines the method by which he attempts to prove his point but does not argue against its possible validity. The next topic concerns the concern of Huntington with regard to the English as the nation’s language.

The thesis that Huntington presents is that the rising trend with the growing Hispanic population is further encouraged by offering higher compensation to those who can speak Spanish as well as English (Huntington 38). Hausmann argues that Huntington maintains a myopic view of the issue when he argues that because of the growing number of Hispanics in the United States the primacy of English as the main language is threatened. According to Hausmann, “Does Huntington think social policies should be designed to make sure that American monolinguists never face any disadvantage because of their lack of communication skills? Hausmann 1)” Huntington on the other hand argues his point by presenting data that conclusively shows that the growing trend is to reward individuals who speak English and Spanish, “In Miami, one study found, families that spoke only Spanish had average incomes of $18,000; English-only families had average incomes of $32,000; and bilingual families averaged more than $50,000. (Huntington 39)” Again Huntington tries to prove his point by presenting data showing that there is indeed a growing trend that rewards individuals who can speak Spanish as well as English.

It is clear at this point that Huntington has already made a hasty conclusion regarding this issue. Huntington fails to consider that America is not only populated by the Hispanics but many other races and cultures as well. In the early 1980s, individuals that could speak English as well as Japanese were highly compensated because of the amount of trade between America and Japan. Currently, the new trend is not in learning Spanish but in Chinese as China is the largest growing economy in the world. Hausmann makes the same mistake that Huntington makes here because he fails to consider the bigger picture.

In this age where globalization and international trade is the trend, the rewards for any individual who is capable of conversing fluently in two languages is greater than one who is nonlinguistic. The final bone of contention between these parties is with regard to the issue of the high rate of poverty among the Hispanics which as Huntington claims is the main problem with the Hispanics; Hispanic communities, with their high poverty rate, cause the deterioration of the other communities surrounding them (Huntington 41).

Hausmann is quick to point out that if the argument of Huntington were sustained then the states of Mississippi, Alabama and West Virginia would suffer as well because of the dominance of the African Americans in those states. Huasmann indirectly argues that Huntington is gravely mistaken in creating an assumption that any other race aside from the Americans is destined for poverty. Huntington digs his own grave when he presents this argument and attempts to support it by claiming that, “A key part of this development was the expansion of Miami’s economic ties with Latin America.

Brazilians, Argentines, Chileans, Colombians, and Venezuelans flooded into Miami, bringing their money with them. By 1993, some $25. 6 billion in international trade, mostly involving Latin America, moved through the city (42). ” While this may seem like a strong argument to some people, it is clear that the logic is flawed. Any fledgling economist can point out that the reason is not because of the Hispanic ties but because of the proximity of the state to the South American countries.

The ports in those States receive one of the heaviest traffics because shipping allows for lower expenses because of the volume carried as opposed to land transportation. Huasmann merely criticizes the logic of Huntington in this point. In the end, it is clear that the arguments of Hausmann, while failing to show any real evidence to contradict the statements of Huntington, makes more sense. The position that Hausmann took in his article was more in the nature of a rebuttal argument. Huntington on the other hand, while attempting to hide his biases by presenting “solid” evidence, was clearly unable to properly substantiate any of his claims.

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers.

Get your custom essay

Helping students since 2015