To what extent does a fear of Communism explain the changes in American policy towards immigration in the 1920s?

Authors Avatar

Stacey Mitchell 6L3

To what extent does a fear of Communism explain the changes in American policy towards immigration in the 1920s?

  In the 1920s, the changes in American policy towards immigration were partly due to a fear of Communism within the country however, other factors were significant. In the 1920s it was largely felt throughout America that some immigrants, mainly from Eastern Europe were trying to provoke a Communist revolution in the country. As a result of this, hostility towards immigrants grew and thus American policy changed. Due to World War I, policy towards immigration changed further due to the growth of nativism in America. This increased xenophobia within the country, particularly towards the Germans, and resulted in Americans wanting less immigration. The social problems in America such as crime and poor housing were largely blamed on immigrants, increasing hostility, and along with the fear for American society and beliefs, policy towards immigration changed further. Economic fears were also a significant factor in this changing policy due to the loss of American jobs. This was the result of many immigrants willing to work for less pay and in poorer conditions than Americans, thus increasing hostility towards them. Also, due to the different religious backgrounds of the immigrants, religious fears were evidently a factor in this changing policy. These different religions made Americans fear for their largely Protestant society. Overall, these factors contributed greatly to the changing American policy on immigration and resulted in the desire of ‘America for Americans’.

  Due to a fear of Communism in America in the 1920s, American policy on immigration grew increasingly more hostile. After the Russian Revolution in 1917, in which the first Communist state was established, many Americans believed that ‘new’ immigrants, mainly from Eastern Europe, were trying to provoke a similar revolution in America. This fear increased the hostility towards immigrants as Communism was seen as a great threat to the politics of America. An example of this hostility is Mitchell Palmer, America’s anti-Communist/-Anarchist Attorney General. After the bombing of his house in 1919, he set the blame on ‘foreign radicals’, who he believed would be found in immigrant communities, and pledged to purge it. His General Intelligence Division was set up to spy on these immigrants. This generated support from the American citizens, revealing the increased hostility towards immigrants and the evident fear of Communism. Immigrants were raided in 33 cities, 6000 foreign ‘radicals’ were arrested and held in terrible conditions and 600 people were departed. This showed the lengths people would go to in order to rid America of Communism. However, faith in Palmer was lost due to his warning of a May Day demonstration not being carried out. It was evident that the Bolshevik threat had been exaggerated, therefore suggesting a further change in American policy. John Kerr argues that a fear of Communism was a greatly significant factor in the changing policy towards immigration; “Many Americans feared that Communism might spread”, however Tindall and Shi would argue that the War was a more significant factor; “surging post-war nativism generated new efforts to restrict immigration”.

Join now!

  It is evident that the First World War was an important factor in the changing policy towards immigration in America in the 1920s. During World War I, efforts were made by many businessmen across America to try and ‘sell’ the war to Americans and generate German hatred within the country. Due to this, xenophobia increased within the country during the war and as a result, Americans grew more hostile towards immigrants. Many changes were made to American policy which reflected this change as many German immigrants were discriminated against. For example, the German language was no longer taught in ...

This is a preview of the whole essay