
Even
African American
migration into northeastern cities, which began prior to the First
World War and continued through the Second World War, and which radically altered
such cities, is often spoken of in terms of an “exodus” out of the segregated
South
to the
“promised land.” Such characterizations gained hold in spite of the fact that the later
years of this migration coincided with the
deindustrialization
of many cities and resulted
in economic plight for many of the migrants.
The dangers of assumptions about the “American dream” lie most clearly in the fact
that migrations (and perceptions about them) are often closely connected. The “success”
of one set of migrants or immigrants is seen in contrast to the experience of others, and is
often mobilized in political discourse through notions of “model minorities” or peoples
marked by a “tangle of pathology” As such, these assumptions fit neatly into or even
frame beliefs about
race
and
ethnicity
that become mobilized in public-
olicy debates.
This is especially clear in the case of the migration of whites out of cities to the
“crabgrass frontier” following the Second World War. Often labeled
white flight,
since
the migration occurred partly in response to this influx of African Americans, many white
city dwellers began to move to
suburbs
. Spurred on by the easy availability of mortgages
for GIs returning from service in the Second World War (which African Americans have
sometimes characterized as a “white ethnic handout,” since benefits were often withheld
from black
veterans)
and by the construction of networks of
highways
promoting
automobile
culture rather than public transportation, large numbers of the children o
immigrants moved away from urban
neighborhoods
to live in the newly developed
suburban tracts. While such whites reaped the perquisites of suburban lifestyle, the
marker of their success, most African Americans remained trapped in
ghettos
characterized by limited opportunities. What the
Kerner Commission
would see as the
emergence of “two societies” was a product of the emergence of a racial divide that was
not just spatial (suburban/ urban), but was also one framed by migration narratives (those
who assimilated/those who could not do so because of an assumed “culture of poverty”).
Other migrations of great significance to post-Second World War American society
occurred as a result of the rapid development of the western United States, spurred by
military expansion and the growth of the
oil
industry. In the aftermath of the restrictions
on immigration passed between the 1880s and 1920s, very few migrants entering states
like
California, Texas,
New Mexico and Arizona were first- and second-generation
immigrants from Europe and China, the origins of many earlier migrants. Instead, many
were of Mexican origin (exceptions to restrictions being made for immigrants coming
from within the Western Hemisphere) for whom the region had long been familiar and
marked by strong family and
community
ties crossing the boundaries of the nation state
(many such “migrants” even questioned the legitimacy of those boundaries). In addition,
migrants began leaving the “dust bowl” of Oklahoma to work as fruit pickers in
California’s
farming and wine industries (as in
The Grapes of Wrath,
1939), and these
were followed after the war by the kinds of migrants depicted in
The Lucy Show
(CBS,
1962–74), northeastern urbanites leaving their homes and making their way to the “land
of opportunity.” The movie industry too had established itself in
Hollywood
earlier in the
Entries A-Z 739