Immigrant Assimilation: Culture, Identity, and Integration

Introduction to Assimilation

Assimilation refers to the social, political, and cultural integration of a minority group into a substantial, dominant society and culture. The term is most commonly used to describe the experience of ethnic groups and immigrants who settle in new territories. These immigrants often acquire new attitudes and traditions through communication and contact with their host society, while also introducing some of their own cultural practices in return (Penninx, 2005). The process of assimilation involves a step-by-step change across varying stages. When new members of a community become utterly indistinguishable from the native population, complete assimilation has occurred (Spielberger, 2004). Over time, the new community casts off the culture of their original homeland — including values, rituals, religion, language, and laws — until there is no distinguishable cultural disparity between them and the members of the native society that hosts them. This idea stands in sharp contrast to the perception of multiculturalism, whereby religious and ethnic groups maintain strong connections to their values and cultural heritage. There is a widely held understanding that these differences, if embraced, contribute to the rich cultural diversity that ensures a society's success.

Even though assimilation of minority cultural groups into dominant ones has been highly influential in most societies over long historical periods, much of the current literature has focused on the relationship between U.S. culture and race. This focus has been shaped by the detailed history of immigration in the United States. Cultural absorption became prevalent in the U.S. during the first part of the 20th century, when new immigrants were encouraged to blend into American culture to achieve economic success, minimize perceived self-segregation between communities, and achieve social stability. There was also a belief that the cultural homogeneity achieved through assimilation could improve social relations. This unity would lessen conflicts between different cultural groups, as they could come together under one belief and social system. Economically, assimilation was believed to help more diverse groups engage in dominant production and consumption models, creating multiple opportunities for a stabilized economy. Assimilation was therefore not seen as yielding negative results; it was viewed as enhancing new immigrants' economic opportunities, social mobility, and as positively contributing to the economic and social stability of the host nation.

Most U.S. immigrants tended to settle in traditional gateway states such as Texas, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Florida, and California. In these states, immigrants encountered many other foreigners who had already moved to the United States. These traditional gateways had long-established hierarchical, class, ethnic, and racial affiliations. However, there is no comparable history of immigration in newer settlement gateways, and so the racial, class, and ethnic hierarchies of immigrants are less clearly defined. This indefinite positioning grants immigrants more power to define their scope and influence their establishment (Waters & Jiménez, 2005).

Furthermore, the geographical size of these new settlement gateways may significantly influence the assimilation of immigrants. Cohabiting in smaller gateways may affect the degree of racial disparity between natives and immigrants. A third factor is the difference in institutional arrangements, which can also strongly influence immigrants' assimilation. Traditional gateways may be more welcoming because they often have foundational institutions to help immigrants access social services, such as bureaus, social organizations, and legal aid. Finally, Waters and Jiménez (2005) speculate that these perceived differences may influence both the concept of immigrant assimilation and researchers' assessments of that assimilation.

How Assimilation Differs for Immigrant and Indigenous Ethnic Groups

The idea of immigrant assimilation initially gained political prominence in the United Kingdom and the United States between the 1950s and 1960s, when postwar immigration into both countries increased substantially. In the United Kingdom, the debate around assimilation and integration intensified shortly after World War II. Britain reconsidered expanding its working population for economic prosperity and encouraged migration from formerly colonized countries. Politicians supported the immigration process, reasoning that these foreign communities would simply fit into the predefined sociocultural norms of the United Kingdom without significant friction. The political class assumed that assimilating new groups into the overriding culture would curb conflicts arising from intergroup rivalry over jobs, opportunities, and other resources.

Contrary to these expectations, the concept of assimilation became contentious for contemporary scholars, who argue that it creates a citizenship hierarchy. This hierarchy is segregative: those who successfully integrated into the contemporary culture were rewarded with higher social status and privileges. These scholars argued that the ability of a group of foreigners to absorb into a dominant culture determined their success in the assimilation process and brought with it greater social benefits (Holohan & Holohan, 2012). This was detrimental to cultural groups whose ethnicity did not readily allow them to assimilate. For instance, studies suggest that immigrant communities in the United States and the United Kingdom have a greater likelihood of integrating with ease if they come from White European nations rather than Indo-Chinese or Afro-Caribbean countries.

Across various disciplines, many writers have disputed the accuracy and extent to which migrant communities have fully assimilated into new host cultures. From the 1960s onward, scholars in postcolonial theory, race and ethnicity studies, and sociology have raised concerns about the idealized nature of assimilation as a concept. Many researchers and thinkers maintain that immigrant communities preserve their values and cultural heritage to some degree. This is demonstrated by the first generation of immigrants, who often reject their host cultures and hold on to their previous values and ways of life within their own migrant communities. This tension has motivated governments to develop new policies aimed at integrating and assimilating foreign immigrants — for instance, the Community Cohesion body in the United Kingdom. These policies were further strengthened following the attacks in Washington, D.C., and New York, and the attack on the London transport system in 2005. These events led to the formulation of new policies limiting certain groups' cultural freedoms, particularly those of Muslim communities (Holohan & Holohan, 2012). The prevalence of terrorism widened the scope of the citizenship debate across many Western countries, prompting legislation requiring verified citizenship backgrounds from incoming immigrants. Recent literature suggests that new policies supporting assimilation as part of an international agenda may emerge, driven by the global rise of fundamentalism and nationalism in both Islamic states and Western countries.

It is not guaranteed that social similarity is produced through cultural assimilation. Culturally diverse geographical and social barriers may persist even when a predominant culture exerts strong influence. The process of cultural assimilation can occur either spontaneously or through force. Forced assimilation occurs when more dominant cultures apply various mechanisms to realize it (Carter, 2005). Different types of assimilation — including forced cultural integration — have particular relevance to indigenous groups that experienced colonialism between the 18th and 20th centuries. This form of assimilation involved the elimination of local economies, the division of native properties among foreign powers, dwindling food supply and sustainability, separation of families, and forced religious conversion. Forced assimilation was rarely sustainable, whether through colonialism or within a single country. It frequently led to revolts and the collapse of cultural control. Those who were forcefully assimilated would often revert to their original cultures and religions once the pressure of dominant powers diminished.

Conclusion: Hispanic and Latin American Cultural Persistence

The United States takes pride in hosting many immigrants, as it has a historical background of successfully absorbing people from across the world. Economic dynamism is attributed to immigrants and their families' integration, which happened amidst a vibrant and lively culture. Latin and Hispanic Americans originate from different geographical, economic, and social backgrounds, reflecting the diversity of their national origins and family heritage. However, cultural similarities tend to bring these backgrounds together. For instance, the Spanish language is a common cultural distinction among Hispanic Americans. Latin and Hispanic American cuisines are celebrated across the U.S. and have exerted a strong influence on American culinary culture more broadly. Most notably, Mexican food — Tex-Mex in particular — has been Americanized into a culinary staple.

Typical Mexican cuisine includes dishes based on corn, such as tacos, tamales, and tortillas, along with flavors and seasonings like pico de gallo, mole, and guacamole. Salsas and tortilla chips are now among the best-selling snacks in the U.S. following their rise in popularity. More recently, other Latin American dishes have gained relevance in the U.S. as well. The all-you-can-eat rodizio service offered at Brazilian steakhouses known as churrascarias has gained popularity in U.S. urban areas. At street fairs, Colombian arepas are now commonly found. Many Americans consider ceviche, which originated in Peru, a great delicacy. The variety and availability of these foods reflect the distribution of Latin American populations across the country.

Younger generations may be far removed from the culture of original Mexican American immigrants, yet many still embrace core elements of Mexican culture — valuing family, the Spanish language, and traditional cuisine. Hispanic and Latin Americans place great value on family. Historically, these groups maintained large, close-knit families, and it was common for multiple generations to live in the same neighborhood or even the same household, with grandparents playing a central role in raising children. Even as these living arrangements evolve, families' well-being remains a central concern for family-oriented Latin Americans. Family gatherings are commonplace and held in high esteem, often including communal meals on weekends. People learn the values, expectations, and norms of their society through socialization. Symbols help people deliberate on their shared understanding of cultures, and this process breeds further socialization. Symbols are significant in helping people derive meaning from their cultural interactions with one another.

References

Allen, J. S. (2012). The omnivorous mind: Our evolving relationship with food. Harvard University Press.

Avila-Saavedra, G. (2011). Ethnic otherness versus cultural assimilation: US Latino comedians and the politics of identity. Mass Communication and Society, 14(3), 271–291.

Carter, P. L. (2005). Keepin' it real: School success beyond Black and White. Oxford University Press.

Choi, D. D., Poertner, M., & Sambanis, N. (2020). Linguistic assimilation does not reduce discrimination against immigrants: Evidence from Germany. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 1, 12.

Holohan, S., & Holohan, S. (2012). Assimilation. In H. K. Anheier & M. Juergensmeyer (Eds.), Encyclopedia of global studies. Sage Publications.

Montanari, M. (2006). Food is culture. Columbia University Press.

Pauls, E. P. (2019, August 21). Assimilation. Encyclopedia Britannica.

Penninx, R. (2005). Integration of migrants: Economic, social, cultural and political dimensions. The new demographic regime: Population challenges and policy responses, 5(2005), 137–152.

Spielberger, C. (2004). Encyclopedia of applied psychology. Academic Press.

Waters, M. C., & Jiménez, T. R. (2005). Assessing immigrant assimilation: New empirical and theoretical challenges. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 105–125.