Pre-1900 America relied on voluntary assimilation, not forced homogeneity

Evidence

Until the twentieth century, native Americans had not supposed that national homogeneity depended, necessarily or desirably, on special pressures to assimilate the immigrants. Surely assimilation would follow readily enough from the general institutions and atmosphere of American society, unless of course an especially vicious immigration appeared on the scene; and in that case America could restrict its entry or its influence. Thus. virtually the whole American response to foreign minorities was contained in two general attitudes: on the one hand, rejection and withdrawal; on the other, a confident faith in the natural, easy melting of many peoples into one. When fearful of disruptive influences, the Americans sought to brake the incoming current or to inhibit its political power; otherwise they trusted in the ordinary processes of a free society. — John Higham, Strangers in the Land, 1402

Categorization

• XREF: Contrasts the American ‘natural melting’ confidence with the deliberate assimilationist drives of Russia and Hungary that Higham describes in the next passages—both endpoints bracket the later turn to coercive Americanization. — connects to: Pre-twentieth-century American ethnic policy ran on either assimilationist faith or exclusion, never forced integration; Colonial liberal assimilation differed fundamentally from later racialized exclusion — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on…, 63

Broader Connections

• Pre-twentieth-century American ethnic policy ran on either assimilationist faith or exclusion, never forced integration #corroborates (0.90)
• Colonial liberal assimilation differed fundamentally from later racialized exclusion #qualifies (0.80) — Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities, 63