Suchergebnisse

More than any other Factor, The Iranian Revolution of 1978–79 and its aftermath have contributed to the growth of the Iranian diaspora population worldwide. The revolution precipitated the exodus of Iranian exiles or political refugees, and the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran further discouraged the return of many Iranians already abroad. As a result, by about 1990, 637,500 Iranians were enumerated in official national censuses of the following ten countries on four continents: U.S., Canada, West Germany, Sweden, Great Britain, France, Norway, Australia, Israel, and Japan.With an Iranian population—defined as persons either born in Iran or of Iranian ancestry—of 285,000 in 1990, the U.S. contained nearly half (45%) of the Iranians living in the above-mentioned Western and Asian countries. This overwhelming concentration, an availability of good data on immigrants (including Iranians), and a number of Iranian students who have become social scientists in the U.S., have encouraged research on this group.

Case studies of immigrant groups have contributed significantly to theoretical developments in the fields of immigration and ethnic studies. The focus on the immigrant group as a whole has resulted in ignoring immigrant subgroups, reducing ethnicity to national-origin. Ethnically diverse immigrant groups contain more than one type of ethnicity. Internal ethnicity refers to the presence of ethnic groups within an immigrant group. It is argued that, in the destination country, the immigrant subgroups who were already minorities in the country of origin are less assimilated than the immigrant subgroup which was part of the majority population. Survey data collected in a probability sample of Iranians in Los Angeles allow us to address this issue. Ethnicity of the Muslim majority in the United States is compared with that of Armenian, Bahai, and Jewish ethno-religious minorities from Iran. The data analysis supports the argument, and further shows that pre-migration ethnicity is an important and neglected aspect of post-migration ethnicity.

More than a generation has passed since the substantial immigration of Iranians to the United States in the late 1970s, resulting in a sizable second-generation population (defined by convention as persons born in the United States and those who immigrated under the age of thirteen). This article presents a first look at the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the second generation at the national level, and compares them with those of the first generation (Iran- or foreign-born population). It uses the 2005–07 merged data set compiled by the United States Census in the American Community Survey (ACS). The results indicate a preliminary continuation of economic and educational success from the first- to the second-generation Iranians. Moreover, this achievement has become more balanced across gender lines in the second generation. Specifically, in terms of educational attainment and labor force participation, females have quickly closed the gap with their male counterparts. Because the second generation is still young, it is premature to assess the extent of intergenerational mobility among Iranians. But given this generation's initial achievements, one can only expect an upward trajectory.

During times of war or political crisis such as the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 in the United States, minorities that share the same ethnic or religious background as the "enemy" of the state are subject to backlash. This backlash takes several forms. First, members of the majority population may engage in scapegoating of the targeted population (i.e., acts of intimidation, harassment, verbal abuse, and physical violence against persons and/or property). Extreme forms of such behavior (e.g., murder, arson) are categorized by law as "hate crimes." Second, pre-existing, or newly created, negative stereotypes of the targeted group(s), propagated in the media, often fuel the actions of the hatemongers. Third, the state responds to perceived threats to the nation's security and sovereignty by targeting members of the ethnic/religious group(s) for scrutiny and repression, allegedly because they constitute a fifth column, or have the potential to become a fifth column, within its borders. Government reprisals in American history have included internment, detention, deportation, mandatory identification cards, surveillance, and prosecution (Bozorgmehr and Bakalian, "Post-9/11"). While the state may not condone citizens' vigilante actions, its own policies are likely to send a different message.

Immigration research poses special problems, but survey researchers studying immigrant groups rarely write about the problems they encounter in the design and conduct of their surveys (Hurh and Kim 1984). Three areas of particular importance are: (1) securing the approval of community leaders or persons of influence; (2) identifying adequate frames for relatively small immigrant populations, from which random samples can be selected; and (3) conducting the fieldwork, including recruiting and training interviewers fluent in immigrant languages.The main objective of this paper is to describe various stages of our recently completed survey of Iranians in Los Angeles (see Figure 1). We pay particular attention to the problems we have faced in carrying out this study, and how resolving some of them reshaped our original research design.

Iranians constitute one of the most numerous new immigrant groups from the Middle East, and one of the highest status foreign-born groups in the United States. Yet there are few published studies documenting their immigration to the United States, and their characteristics. An understanding of different aspects of Iranian adaptation to the United States requires a basic knowledge of their immigration history, and demographic, social and economic characteristics.This paper presents the first systematic and comprehensive profile of Iranians in the U.S. based on the most recent available statistical data. The sources for this analysis are: (1) all available published reports from the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and from the 1980 U.S. Census; (2) INS data tapes on Iranian immigrants admitted to the U.S.from 1972 to 1986; and (3) the 5 percent sample tape from the 1980 U.S. Census of population.

The main objective of this paper is to use the Iranian case to test three hypotheses about the demographic, religious, and socioeconomic differences between immigrants and political refugees or exiles, which are commonly found in the literature. These hypotheses are tested by using data from the 1980 U.S. Census Public Use Microdata Sample for the 1975-80 and the pre-1975 Iranian immigrant cohorts. Our first hypothesis is that the 1975-80 immigrants include a higher proportion of religious minorities than the pre-1975 immigrants. Our second hypothesis is that the 1975-1980 cohort, composed of a large number of refugees, is much more balanced with respect to age and sex distribution than the pre-1975 cohort. The third hypothesis is that Iranians who arrived in 1975-80 had a higher socioeconomic achievement than those who came before that date. The analysis of data from the 1980 U.S. Census on immigration cohorts is preceded by a brief review of trends and types of Iranian immigration to the United States as documented by tabulations from the INS. While these tabulations pertain only to the United States, they also reflect immigration trends to Los Angeles, since this metropolitan area is the favored destination of Iranian immigrants to the United States.

Ethnic Los Angeles presents a multi-investigator study of Los Angeles's immigrant population. Using U.S. census data for the past three decades, essays on each of L.A.'s major ethnic groups tell us where these new Americans live and work, why they came to Los Angeles, and the nature of their families and social networks. The contributors also give a history of immigration policy and discuss the economic forces that have made the city a magnet for immigrants

AbstractAs a relatively new, highly educated, professional and entrepreneurial immigrant group, Iranian Americans display complex linguistic patterns. In this article, we analyze data from the American Community Survey (ACS) on English language proficiency and languages spoken at home for the first- and second-generation Iranian Americans. These quantitative data are supplemented by in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of Iranian American families in the northeastern United States on their behavior and attitudes toward learning and preserving their native language (Persian). Although ACS data show high English language proficiency among first-generation Iranian immigrants, they also show a relatively high usage of Persian language among this ethnic group. Findings show that parents and children had positive behavior and attitudes toward the preservation of Persian. As transnational families, parents have created a "tool kit" to ensure that Persian will persist at least through the second generation. Maintaining transnational ties, attending weekly cultural and religious events, providing Persian instruction, and controlling children's language use at home were among the most important mechanisms of ethnic language maintenance.