2nd Year Reflection #2

This past Friday morning on September 27th, I spent an hour and a half, from 9:00-10:30am, on the 11th floor of Thompson Library attending a non-IA event at the COMPAS Conference titled “Who is an American?” At this event, I was educated on a variety of topics regarding what people think it means and what it actually means to be “an American.” I thoroughly enjoyed this event not only for its content but also for it open forum, free-spoken structure where the panelists fielded audience questions and made a very intellectual, academic event feel much more conversational. 

While this event does not directly relate to any other topics I have learned about in other coursework, this event specifically relates to the topic of International Affairs in its relation to the vast spectrum that is the American population and the influence of this population on political, economic, and legal facets of the United States. For the half of the conference that I was able to attend, the two panelists that spoke on these matters were Deborah Schildkraut, a political science professor from Tufts University, and Elizabeth Cohen, a professor at Syracuse University whose focus lies in citizenship and related fields.

I gained a lot personally from the conference in knowledge and conversational fire-power that allowed me to be better informed and to better contribute towards discussions relating to the idea of what it means to be American. In the same way, I gained a lot academically in being challenged by these notions of what it means to be American and learning from the conversation surrounding this topic that blossomed from the panelists’ presentations.

Professor Schildkraut spoke mostly on the statistics behind U.S. citizen sentiments towards the idea of what it means to be an American, and the numbers were quite interesting. According to a couple of studies, having American ancestry and being born in the U.S. were deemed least important by the survey participants, of the questions asked, in regards to what it means to be an American. Conversely, following American customs and speaking English were deemed to be the two most important facets of being an American. Very interestingly, as well, under 25% of the participants thought that it was important to be of European heritage or descent while over 50% decided that being Christian was important to be considered an American. 

Professor Cohen spoke a lot on citizenship and cited some facts regarding our current administration and public attitudes about immigration and immigration policy. She talked on the Trump administration and how Trump has decided to create a mass deportation machine because “we” have decided that these people cannot be here. She told us that the budget for ICE is ten times larger than the budget for INS was in 1993, and also how customs and border protection is now larger than all other law agencies. After sharing these statistics, she wanted to emphasize that we should recognize that before we try to push those out who are wanting to attain citizenship, they are American, too.

Cohen said that, from her research and experience, public opinion generally supports the idea of immigrations and immigrants, and if we derived our legislation from public opinion the circumstances of placement might be made better. Around these circumstances, I thought Professor Schildkraut made a great point in that there is a constant nostalgia for the good old days when people actively pursued the American dream, citizenship, and learning English… but that still exists today and in such great capacity. Professor Cohen agreed in her belief, a very commonly shared one, that we are a nation of immigrants, but today’s immigrants, whenever today is, are always compared to these mythical immigrants of earlier times that were, for whatever reason (and very falsely claimed), easier to take.

With the discussion-based vibe of the conference, it was brought up by an audience member that it is incorrect and exclusive to say that we are a nation of immigrants when many generations’ ancestors were brought to the U.S. involuntarily and against their will. I found this to be a great point and definitely something to keep in mind the more I speak and reflect on this topic. In the same way, it was noted by Professor Cohen that she tries as hard as she can to avoid speaking and writing using the word “American” because it refers not only to the United States but the continental Americas. 

This was a pet peeve of mine when I was abroad this past summer, and, when asked where we were from, my friend would respond, “… from America,” instead of correctly explaining that we were from the United States. The last point that Professor Schildkraut made that I found to be quite interesting and unfortunate at the same time was that, while the results of the surveys were interesting, it is important to note that just because the participants showed strong feelings and support for immigration, the data reveals no evidence of action. 

I found the conference to be extremely interesting, though-provoking, and informative. I very much enjoyed learning from the panelists and hearing from the number of unique perspectives provided by audience, as well. I am very glad that I decided to attend this conference as I was enlightened by the issues surrounding Americanism, and my own perspective and approach to such topics and related issues were enhanced, as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *