What Hispanic challenge?

In a controversial FP March/April 2004 cover story (we’re all for debate over here at FP), Sam Huntington argued that the U.S. faces a “Hispanic challenge”, and that if immigration from Latin America continues unabated, America will be split into “two peoples, two cultures, two languages”. This culturalist argument has since been echoed by anti-immigration ...

In a controversial FP March/April 2004 cover story (we're all for debate over here at FP), Sam Huntington argued that the U.S. faces a "Hispanic challenge", and that if immigration from Latin America continues unabated, America will be split into "two peoples, two cultures, two languages". This culturalist argument has since been echoed by anti-immigration lobbyists and politicans across the country, with particular emphasis on the question of English vs. Spanish as a national language:

[I]f Mexican immigration abruptly stopped...[t]he inflow of immigrants would again become highly diverse, creating increased incentives for all immigrants to learn English and absorb U.S. culture. And most important of all, the possibility of a de facto split between a predominantly Spanish-speaking United States and an English-speaking United States would disappear, and with it, a major potential threat to the country's cultural and political integrity.

As a first generation (non-Hispanic) immigrant, I've always found it hard to believe that anyone could get by for long in the U.S. without learning English. And a groundbreaking study by leading sociologists at Princeton and UC Irvine soundly debunks this pillar of the anti-immigration argument:

In a controversial FP March/April 2004 cover story (we’re all for debate over here at FP), Sam Huntington argued that the U.S. faces a “Hispanic challenge”, and that if immigration from Latin America continues unabated, America will be split into “two peoples, two cultures, two languages”. This culturalist argument has since been echoed by anti-immigration lobbyists and politicans across the country, with particular emphasis on the question of English vs. Spanish as a national language:

[I]f Mexican immigration abruptly stopped…[t]he inflow of immigrants would again become highly diverse, creating increased incentives for all immigrants to learn English and absorb U.S. culture. And most important of all, the possibility of a de facto split between a predominantly Spanish-speaking United States and an English-speaking United States would disappear, and with it, a major potential threat to the country’s cultural and political integrity.

As a first generation (non-Hispanic) immigrant, I’ve always found it hard to believe that anyone could get by for long in the U.S. without learning English. And a groundbreaking study by leading sociologists at Princeton and UC Irvine soundly debunks this pillar of the anti-immigration argument:

Although the generational life expectancy of Spanish is greater among Mexicans in Southern California than other groups, its demise is all but assured by the third generation.

The research finds that Spanish is all but “lingustically dead” among third generation Latinos and Hispanics. This throws a serious wrench into the intellectual machinery behind so many anti-Latin immigration movements. How was Huntington so wrong? He only looked at the second generation, and was just guessing about the third:

If the second generation does not reject Spanish outright, the third generation is also likely to be bilingual, and fluency in both languages is likely to become institutionalized in the Mexican-American community.

Though the study doesn’t disprove some of Huntington’s other reasonable points, it just goes to show how important facts are in the Hispanic immigration debate, and just how misleading guesswork and intuition can be. 

More from Foreign Policy

Bill Clinton and Joe Biden  at a meeting of the U.S. Congressional delegation to the NATO summit in Spain on July 7, 1998.

Liberal Illusions Caused the Ukraine Crisis

The greatest tragedy about Russia’s potential invasion is how easily it could have been avoided.

A report card is superimposed over U.S. President Joe Biden.

Is Biden’s Foreign Policy Grade A Material?

More than 30 experts grade the U.S. president’s first year of foreign policy.

White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan gives a press briefing.

Defining the Biden Doctrine

U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan sat down with FP to talk about Russia, China, relations with Europe, and year one of the Biden presidency.

Ukrainian servicemen taking part in the armed conflict with Russia-backed separatists in Donetsk region of the country attend the handover ceremony of military heavy weapons and equipment in Kiev on November 15, 2018.

The West’s Weapons Won’t Make Any Difference to Ukraine

U.S. military equipment wouldn’t realistically help Ukrainians—or intimidate Putin.