Article Preview
TopSpatial Assimilation Vs. Resurgent Ethnicity
The racial and ethnic diversity brought on by immigration, coupled with increasing rates of suburbanization among Whites, has led several studies, both empirical and theoretical, to address the broad question of whether or not there are any differences between the residential patterns of early immigrants (European immigrants, Black) and the more recent non-European immigrants. Some studies stress fluency of the host language, familiarity with the host culture, and increasing socio-economic status as having an impact on immigrants’ assimilation into the main stream society, while others recognize structural factors like fiscal and social problems of inner cities or discriminatory practices such as blockbusting and red lining as driving, or sometimes constraining, population movement. In this section we look briefly at two theoretical frameworks—spatial assimilation and resurgent ethnicity—to provide explanations for residential patterns of immigrants.
Spatial assimilation theories broadly argue that residential segregation is a spatial outcome of disparities in socio-economic status and the level of acculturation among different racial/ethnic immigrant groups (Massey, 1985). Gordon (1964) distinguished between ‘structural assimilation’ which hinged on one’s socio-economic status including educational attainment and income, and ‘cultural assimilation’ which is signaled by fluency in the host language and culture as evidence of the same. Segregation is seen as a failure to either assimilate structurally, or culturally, or both. For them, socio-economically impoverished inner city ethnic enclaves are nothing more than a temporary shelter for new immigrants with low assimilation, and hypothesize that a minority racial/ethnic immigrant group will eventually move out of inner city ethnic enclaves, seeking more integration with the dominant host group as they advance economically and integrate culturally (Massey & Denton, 1985).