Trump to impose $100k fee for H-1B worker visas, White House says

In what way? The cited portion, which discusses theories in the field, says:

“The rainbow theorists argue that the machine was a functional body (Merton 1968) that pursued political incorporation of many ethnic groups in the political party. In return for loyalty to the political party, machines delivered a variety of social services to ethnic immigrants, in addition to jobs, friendship, and opportunities for social and economic advancement. The rainbow coalition of mostly white-ethnic groups was sustained through a virtually endless supply of ‘municipal gold’ (Erie 1988) that the machines controlled. This exchange system seemingly guaranteed ethnic loyalty to the machine.”

The remainder of the article shows how Irish domination left the Polish with the short end of the stick: “Through this study we try to show that Polish Americans in Chicago were on the short end of the exchange arrangements in the machine, receiving few rewards, especially as their independence from the Democratic party expanded during the Daley era.” The Poles were punished

This is basically Pakistan, except instead of clans it’s immigrant groups voting for their own co-ethnics and jockeying for advantage. It’s a far cry from the political debates of the founding era, which were based on principles and political theory, not ethnic tribalism.

So, what, are you advocating throwing everyone out of the US who isn't native American? Literally everyone else immigrated here.

It demonstrates that the Irish, for a time, had outsized political power, at the expense of the Poles, who outnumber them dramatically. In the time scale you're talking about, essentially everybody is an immigrant. Meanwhile: what's the immigrant ethnic bloc exercising outsized power in Chicago today?

The problem isn’t about which ethnic bloc has more power, it’s that people have such strong ethnic identities that they’re forming ethnic political blocs in the first place and doling out patronage on the basis of ethnic group. That’s a recipe for dysfunction and corruption, as we see in Chicago. People will forgive a lot of corruption and graft for their ethnic tribe. And the winners of those elections are robbing the treasury to pay for benefits targeted at their co-ethnics.

150 years after their inception, assimilation of ethnic whites has largely ended those political machines. But the effects are cumulative. Chicago still lives with the consequences of the machine politics of the Cermak to Daley era. And ethnic politics still plays a large role in Chicago between whites, hispanics, and black people: https://www.hispanicfederation.org/news/new-poll-shows-dead-... (“One interesting finding is that one-third of Latinos think Vallas may be Latino.”).

That’s not a helpful lens because it overlooks the patterns of settlement. Nearly all the founding fathers were British. During the 18th century, German and Scandinavian immigrants formed their own communities across the midwest. Ethnic politics had little opportunity to arise in these communities, which were individually mono cultural. That result of that is quite different from a mass influx of a foreign population with a distinct group identity into an existing city or town.

In terms of what we could do now, we should stop illegal immigration and asylum entirely. We should also end family reunification. And skilled immigration should be spread out around the country (there are top universities everywhere). All that would prevent the development of ethnic enclaves, and over time lead to the weakening of disparate ethnic identities. That’s what happened during the immigration restriction from 1924-1965, when the foreign born population share dropped by 2/3, and the salience of ethnic identity among European Americans was greatly reduced.

But that's exactly what your source doesn't show. There are more Polish people living in Chicago than in Krakow; it's the largest population of ethnic Poles in the world anywhere outside of the largest metros in Poland itself. And they don't effectively exert power as a bloc. Your source shows one bloc, of Irish; today, the most effective wielders of power in Chicago are Black. There's no coherent immigration story to tell here.

It comes off a little bit like it would if you claimed that immigration brings with it organized crime, because La Cosa Nostra was dominated by Italians. But LCN is not in fact the story of Italians in America, and wasn't replicated by other ethnic blocs.

People share affinities and affinities structure interactions, and naturally some of those structural affinities are going to be ethnic. But if they weren't ethnic, they'd be religious, or political, or economic, which is what US history actually demonstrates.

If you're going to make the case that any of this matters in Chicago politics, though: cite the immigrant bloc that controls and distorts Chicago politics. Which ones are the illegitimate aldermen? I don't like most Chicago alderpeople, so you're not going to hurt my feelings.

It's only "not helpful" because you don't have a good argument against it. :)

Also, the founders were not British. Most of them were second and third generation immigrants.

In addition, I don't think you realize how funny this statement is:

> Ethnic politics had little opportunity to arise in these communities, which were individually mono cultural

I wonder if you can spot the massive gaping hole in this logic. I doubt it.

Being born in a British colony in the early 1700s to British subject parents did in fact mean you were also a British subject. Several were also born in Great Britain proper. They were also nearly all ethnically English or Scottish.

Indeed, most of the founding fathers were British.