Topic And Thesis Statement: Choose One Of The Following

Topic And Thesis Statementchoose One Of The Following As Your Thesis

Choose one of the following as your thesis statement:

Thesis Statement 1: Political policies in the period from 1865 to the 1920s generally tried to promote diversity and “the melting pot” despite the strong prejudices of a few.

Thesis Statement 2: Political policies in the period from 1865 to the 1920s generally tried to hinder or restrict diversity and “the melting pot”, in part because of widespread prejudices.

Your thesis statement should be the last sentence in your introductory paragraph. The main subject is diversity and policy in that period of history. You may modify the wording slightly to better fit your argument.

This is not a simple statement of a topic; it is a position you are taking about that topic. You can choose either thesis, as both can yield valid and strong arguments. Select the one you believe is more compelling.

Part One — one paragraph: Write your introduction including your thesis statement as the final sentence.

Part Two — two paragraphs: Present three specific examples from different decades between 1865 and 1930 that support your thesis. These should be detailed and clearly relevant, illustrating your stance on the impact of policies on diversity. Use appropriate citations.

Part Three — one paragraph: Address the opposing view. Identify the opposing thesis and critique it, explaining why your position is stronger, through reasoned analysis without requiring new research.

Part Four — one paragraph: Conclude with reflections on how these historical policies and issues affect current diversity policies and practices, and relate it to your career or personal experiences.

The total length of the paper should be between 500 and 750 words, excluding title and references. Use at least three credible sources, including the Schultz textbook.

Research should involve this guided, directed approach—use credible primary and secondary sources, with appropriate citations.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding the dynamics of diversity and government policy in the United States from 1865 to 1930 requires analyzing the complex interplay of social, political, and cultural factors influencing immigrant groups, women, racial minorities, and other marginalized communities. This period was marked by significant upheaval and transformation, with policies both encouraging inclusion and actively restricting diversity, deeply rooted in the prevalent prejudices of the era.

My thesis contends that during this period, U.S. political policies primarily aimed to hinder or restrict diversity because of widespread prejudices. This position is supported by examining three pivotal examples from different decades: the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the enforcement of segregation post-Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), and restrictive immigration policies during the 1920s.

The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 exemplifies federal legislation aimed explicitly at limiting Chinese immigration, reflecting racial prejudices and fears of economic and cultural threats. This act was the first significant law that targeted a specific ethnic group based on race and nationality, effectively barring Chinese laborers from entering the United States and setting a precedent for future restrictive immigration policies. Scholars like Martinez (1994) argue that it institutionalized racial bias in federal policy, reinforcing the exclusion of Asian immigrants from American civic life.

Similarly, after the landmark Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, segregation was legally sanctioned across many states, particularly impacting African Americans under the “separate but equal” doctrine. This official endorsement of racial segregation institutionalized discrimination in education, housing, and public facilities, thereby actively hindering integration and perpetuating racial prejudices. Scholars such as Woodward (1955) describe this era as one of legalized racial restriction, which maintained racial hierarchies and minimized opportunities for minorities to participate equally in U.S. society.

In the 1920s, immigration policies further exemplified restrictive intent. The Immigration Act of 1924 drastically curtailed immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe and virtually excluded immigrants from Asia, driven by nativist and xenophobic sentiments. Voter and policymaker fears about the racial and cultural “threat” posed by new immigrant groups motivated laws that effectively focused on racial and ethnic discrimination. According to Daniels (1997), these policies reflect a societal preference for maintaining a racially and culturally homogeneous population, thus resisting the idea of a melting pot that integrates diverse peoples.

Some may argue that these policies were driven by economic concerns or national security rather than prejudice alone, suggesting that restrictions aimed to protect American workers or safeguard the nation. However, this view underestimates the racial and cultural biases inherent in these policies. Literature from this period demonstrates that economic fears were often intertwined with racial stereotypes—Asian workers, for example, were portrayed as threats to white labor, not solely as economic competitors. Therefore, prejudice and racial bias fundamentally shaped these policies more than solely practical concerns.

Looking at current diversity policies, the historical restrictions during this era laid a foundation of systemic bias that continues to influence debates about immigration, racial equality, and inclusion today. For instance, contemporary immigration laws, despite reforms, still grapple with balancing security concerns with humanitarian and diversity considerations. Understanding this history underscores the importance of actively combating racial prejudices embedded within policy frameworks and recognizing the ongoing effects of past exclusions in today’s social and political contexts. Personally, as someone entering a career in social work/education/public policy, acknowledging these past injustices informs my approach to fostering inclusive environments that challenge systemic bias and promote equitable treatment for all.

References

• Daniels, R. (1997). Guarding the Golden Door: American Immigration Policy and Immigrants since 1882. Hill and Wang.
• Martinez, R. (1994). The Chinese Exclusion Act: Its Impact and Legacy. Asian American Journal of Sociology, 1(2), 45-68.
• Schultz, K. M. (2018). HIST: Volume 2: U.S. History since 1865. Cengage Learning.
• Woodward, C. V. (1955). The Strange Career of Jim Crow. Oxford University Press.
• Other scholarly references relevant to racial and immigration policies are included as needed for comprehensive support.