Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:59:07.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Andalucia-Hawaii-Calitornia Migration: A Study in Macrostructure and Microhistory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

Beverly Lozano
Beverly Lozano
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The development of world-systems theory enables us to explain human migration without resorting to the theoretically barren lists of “push-pull” factors and personal motivations that characterize previous studies. Although individuals still make private decisions to move, the patterned movement of groups is better understood as an essential component in a global economic order with shifting demands for labor. National migration policies can also be interpreted within this global context. Since migration plays a central role in moving workers to regions where their labor is needed, governmental legislation regulating these movements has reflected capitalists' needs for a free labor force. It is with this in mind that Aristide Zolberg summarizes the behavior of one nation-state in the world-system as “an element in the interest-calculus of others.”

Type
Migration
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , April 1984 , pp. 305 - 324
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I am deeply grateful to Gary Hamilton for his generous comments on an earlier version of this paper. My thanks also go to John Walton, who provided several critical insights.

1 Burawoy, Michael, “The Functions and Reproduction of Migrant Labor: Comparative Material from South Africa and the United States,” American Journal of Sociology, 81:5 (1976), 1050–88.Google Scholar

2 Zolberg, Aristide, “Migration Policies in a World System,” in Human Migration: Patterns and Policies, McNeill, William H. and Adams, Ruth S., eds. (Bloomington, Indiana, 1978), 241–86.Google Scholar

3 See Moore, Barrington Jr. , Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston, 1966), 485, for a discussion of this issue.Google Scholar

4 Zolberg, , “Migration Policies,” 280.Google Scholar

5 Johannessen, Edward, The Hawaiian Labor Movement (Boston, 1956), 27.Google Scholar

6 U. S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Immigration, Hearings on Immigration into Hawaii before Committee on Immigration, 67th Cong., 1st sess. (Washington, D. C., 1921), 6.Google Scholar

7 Ibid., 5.

8 Ibid., 36.

9 Ibid., 34.

10 As Alejandro Portes and Walton, John point out, “for immigrants to be useful to an expanding capitalist economy, the situation had to be arranged so that the means they initially received would not be sufficient for their survival” (Labor, Class and the International System (New York, 1981), 52).Google Scholar

11 U. S. Congress, Hearings, 4.Google Scholar

12 See Giddens, Anthony, Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis (Berkeley, 1979), 203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Malefakis, Edward, Agrarian Reform and Peasant Revolution in Spain (New Haven, 1970), 96.Google Scholar

14 Spanish Institute for Agrarian Reform, Agrarian Reform in Spain (London, 1937), 38–40.Google Scholar

15 Malefakis, , Agrarian Reform, 22.Google Scholar

16 For example, see Carrion, Pascual, Los Latifundios en Espana: Su importancia, origen, consequencias y solución (Barcelona, 1932)Google Scholar; Malefakis, , Agrarian Reform; Juan Martinez-Alier, Labourers and Landowners in Southern Spain (London, 1971)Google Scholar; and Vives, Jaime Vicens, An Economic History of Spain (Princeton, 1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Artola, Miguel, La Burguesia Revolutionaria (1808–1874) (Madrid, 1974), 149.Google Scholar

18 Spanish Institute for Agrarian Reform, Agrarian Reform, 17.Google Scholar

19 Vives, Jaime Vicens, Economic History, 613.Google Scholar

20 Oddone, J.A., La Emigración Europea al Rio de la Plata (Montevideo, 1966), 39.Google Scholar

21 Artola, , La Burguesía Revolutionaria, 165.Google Scholar

22 Vicens, Vives, Economic History, 637.Google Scholar

23 Carrion, , Los Latifundios en Espana, 16.Google Scholar

24 Moral, Juan Diaz del, Historia de las Agitaciones Campesinas Andaluzas (Madrid, 1969).Google Scholar

25 In a comparative study suggesting how one should go about investigating agrarian class societies, Juan Martinez-Alier cautions that “a proper theory of the [various] social formations will include an industrial sociology or a sociology of work in the different rural settings” (“Peasants and Labourers: Spain, Cuba and Highland Peru,” Journal of Peasant Studies, 1:2 (1974), 154)Google Scholar. In other words, theory about rural class relations must be grounded not on typologies based on feudal-capitalistic or traditional-modern dichotomies, but on a firm understanding of peasant or laborer attitudes toward work and systems of remuneration and on accurate investigations of the specific social milieux in which these operate. See also Stinchcombe, A., “Agricultural Enterprise and Rural Class Relations,” The American Journal of Sociology, 67:2 (1961), 165–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26 Malefakis, , Agrarian Reform, ch. 5.Google Scholar

27 Carrion, , Los Latifundios en Espana, 343.Google Scholar

28 Malefakis, , Agrarian Reform, 91.Google Scholar

29 Ibid., 98.

30 Ibid., 100.

31 Pitt-Rivers, J.A., Introduction, Mediterranean Countrymen (Paris, 1963), 21.Google Scholar

32 Kenny, Michael, “Patterns of Patronage in Spain,” in Friends, Followers and Factions, Schmidt, Steffen W., Scott, James C., Lande, Carl, and Guasti, Laura, eds. (Berkeley, 1960), 356.Google Scholar

33 Gilmore, David, “Patronage and Class Conflict in Southern Spain,” Man, 12:3/4 (1977), 446–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34 Moral, Diaz del, Historia, 217.Google Scholar

35 Legislative Reference Bureau, Public Land Policy in Hawaii; An Historical Analysis, Report no. 5 (Honolulu, 1959), 4Google Scholar. Under such a system of long-term leasing in which agriculturists didn't actually have to purchase the land they farmed, capital obtained through the use of the same leases as collateral could be employed for other purposes such as plantation development and improvement.

36 Kuykendall, Ralph S., The Hawaiian Kingdom 1854–;1874: Twenty Critical Years (Honolulu, 1953), 143.Google Scholar

37 Reineke, John, Feigned Necessity: Hawaii's Attempt to Obtain Chinese Contract Labor, 1921–23 (San Francisco, 1979), 20.Google Scholar

38 “Japanese Immigrants,” The Planters Monthly, 8:4 (1889), 149.Google Scholar

39 “Report of Committee on Labor to the President and Members of the Hawaii Sugar Planters Association,” The Planters Monthly, 19:11 (1900), 515.Google Scholar

40 Kuykendall, , Hawaiian Kingdom, 181.Google Scholar

41 Congress, U.S., Hearings, 17.Google Scholar

42 “State of Labor on the Hawaiian Islands,” The Planters Monthly, 18:12 (1899), 562.Google Scholar

43 “President's Address,“ Hawaiian Planters Record, 2:1 (1910), 4.Google Scholar

44 “State of Labor,” 562.Google Scholar

45 U. S. Congress, Hearings, 43.Google Scholar

46 Ibid.

47 “Emigració con pasaje gratuito al estado de Hawai,” reproduced in Winters Express [Winters, California], Centennial Edition (1975), 76.Google Scholar

48 Schnack, George, “Subjective Factors in the Migration of Spanish from Hawaii to California” (M. A. thesis, Stanford University, 1940)Google Scholar. One cannot help but note the small size of this migration, given the fact that other regions of Spain had emigration rates as high as 20.6 per thousand, mostly bound for Latin America. The highest rate from the latifundio region was found in Granada, and only amounted to 8.0 per thousand. Malefakis suggests that this may result from the southern farm laborer's preference to “combat the injustice of his situation rather than flee from it.” Malefakis, , Agrarian Reform, 105Google Scholar. See also MacDonald, J.S., “Agricultural Organization, Migration and Militancy in Rural Italy,” The Economic History Review, 16:1 (08 1963), 61–75, on this point.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

49 Moral, Diaz del, Historia, 145.Google Scholar

50 It has been reported that the Andalucia-Hawaii-California migration was a clandestine migration, since apparently it is not recorded anywhere in the Spanish records. See Gomez, Rosendo A., “Spanish Immigration to the United States,” Americas, 19:1 (1962), 59–78. A numberCrossRefGoogle Scholar of people I interviewed confirmed that, indeed, they came without knowledge of the authorities, but it is doubtful that this was the case for all of them.

51 Schnack, , “Subjective Factors,” 35.Google Scholar

52 In 1910, there were 1,990 Andalucians in Hawaii, of whom 515 worked on plantations. Even allowing for a number of women and children who might not be employed, this still suggests that a considerable number of workers from the 1907 passage had already made their way off the plantations and into other occupations. Schnack, , “Subjective Factors,” 52.Google Scholar

53 Limbaugh, Ronald and Payne, Walter, Vacaville: The Heritage of a California Community(Vacaville, 1978).Google Scholar

54 Ibid., 127.

55 See Alejandro Portes for his discussion of what he terms the “microstructures of migration.” “Migration and Underdevelopment,” in Latin American Immigration Project: Occasional Papers (Durham, North Carolina, 1978), 53.Google Scholar

56 Portes, and Walton, , Labor, Class, 64.Google Scholar