Los otros: Raza, normas y corrupción en la gestión de la extranjería en México, 1900–1950

Abstract

Pablo Yankelevich's recent book Los otros: Raza, normas y corrupción en la gestión de la extranjería en México, 1900–1950 scrutinizes Mexico's relationship with foreigners in the national territory from the end of the Porfiriato to the postwar period. The study will appeal first and foremost to historians, but it will also be of use to scholars of migration both to and from Mexico, the national tourism industry, and race and ethnicity in early to mid-twentieth-century Mexico. Rather than organize his study chronologically, Yankelevich uses each chapter to trace specific topics from the Porfiriato to the 1950s.Chapter 1, “Ante el yunque de la patria,” builds a conceptual framework that grounds early twentieth-century immigration policy within the context of postrevolutionary mestizophilia. Building on the work of Manuel Gamio, Yankelevich notes that immigration posed certain problems to the Indigenous/European binary. The state identified “races”—particularly Chinese, Black, Jewish, and eastern European—that, it believed, would not successfully contribute to a mestizo order. While the state created strict guidelines to keep such people out of the national territory, financial interests often led to revision of these policies. For example, the United States objected to attempts to keep Blacks out of Mexico because this made it difficult for US firms—particularly railroad companies—to operate there. That said, state officials continued to favor immigration policies that would whiten the nation and bring a desirable mestizaje.Chapter 2, “El servicio migratorio: Andamiaje normativo e infortunio institucional,” discusses the state's attempts to attract so-called desirable migrants, a term with both economic and eugenic overtones. Of chief importance was the enunciation of a legal distinction between tourists and immigrants, though there was later a need for an interim status for people, like students, who would stay in the country for an extended period of time before leaving. While policymakers ultimately aimed to use immigration as a tool for promoting mestizaje, they also aimed to ensure resources for Mexican citizens before supporting foreigners. Mexico thus tended to be reactive in its immigration policies. For instance, on several occasions the United States carried out deportation initiatives and sent large numbers of Mexicans home. The Mexican government responded by cracking down on immigration within its own borders. This was, of course, because thousands of Mexicans had suddenly arrived home in need of work.Chapter 3, “Negocios de la migración,” discusses corrupt public officials who failed to enforce the laws that they had been charged to uphold. Legislation was ineffective because public servants were not committed to upholding established laws, whether it was Porfirian executives paying off customs officials to let sickly immigrants enter the country without a medical exam or crooked coyotes and customs agents during the postrevolutionary period. During the 1920s, border cities attracted Prohibition-era US citizens in search of bars and brothels—often financed by US citizens—that were ripe for corruption. The chapter also discusses how the Mexican state frequently collaborated with the United States to expel migrants—many of whom traveled through Mexico on their journey northward—that both countries viewed as undesirable. The most dramatic case of this was the expulsion of Asian migrants from the northern states of Mexico in 1932. During World War II, Mexico monitored nationals from fascist countries like Spain, Italy, Germany, and Japan. That said, Mexico also made it nearly impossible for European Jews to flee to the country on the eve of the Holocaust—even if they had family in Mexico.Chapter 4, “Naturalización de extranjeros y ciudadanía restringida,” examines philosophies surrounding citizenship. Debates revolved around notions of jus soli (birthright citizenship), jus sanguinis (citizenship through family), and naturalization. During the Porfiriato the country passed the Ley Vallarta, which recognized only jus sanguinis, though it provided a pathway to naturalization for foreigners and their children who had been born in the country. The law remained in effect after the ratification of the Constitution of 1917. Mexico finally adopted jus soli alongside jus sanguinis in 1930, a move that situated the country alongside peer nations in the Americas (pp. 250–51). The final chapter expounds on the discussions raised in chapter 4 by tracking immigration rates from different countries and regions to Mexico across time.As I read Los otros, I couldn't help but think about current migration flows through Mexico to the United States and the accompanying anti–Central American sentiments that have gripped the nation. Yankelevich's rigorous study clearly reverberates with contemporary events as it interrogates how notions of nationalism, race, and ethnicity contribute to national debates on immigration. Ultimately, Los otros will be required reading for students and scholars of Mexican studies across multiple disciplines; Yankelevich's excellent study has had a powerful impact on the field.