Eve Machtakova Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White (Routledge 1995, reprinted 2009).

Topic: How the Irish Became White, a monograph by Noel Ignatiev discusses the transition of the Irish from an oppressed society, to poverty in the United States (mostly in Philadelphia), and ultimately to their transformation as white and productive members of the American social structure. The treatment of the eighteenth century Irish displayed a classic case of racial oppression.1 Years of oppression in Ireland left the mass Irish population of immigrants struggling in poverty once they settled in the urban areas of the United States. At the same time, while struggling to rise up from the lower economic class, the Irish fought to prove their whiteness to their new country. Regardless of long anti-slavery history in Ireland, the immigrants seeking privileges did not side with abolitionist principles. Thesis: After suffering in Ireland, the immigrants no longer accepted discrimination and moved away from addressing slavery as an evil institution. Many of the Irish strongly supported the Democrats and became involved in anti-abolitionist movements. How the Irish Became White illuminates the whys and the hows the Irish chose to abandon their history of anti-slavery notions. While liberators and abolition supporters back in Ireland, like Daniel OConnell, urged Irish immigrants to continue the legacy of anti-slavery, competition with blacks for jobs and slowly gaining higher credibility and social status let the Irish forget years of oppression and allowed them to emerge as oppressors themselves. Implications: The initial wave of Irish immigrants settled in lower class regions and often intermixed with African Americans in Philadelphia. Regardless of their white skin, the Irish did receive a warm welcome in America due to differences in language, socioeconomic status, and religion. Empathy toward African Americans who suffered in the same poor working and living
1

42

conditions, led many Irish to sympathise with Republicans and abolitionists. William Lloyd Garrison and his journal the Liberator urged Irish immigrants to continue to fight oppression in the form of abolition. A large number of Irish invested themselves in abolitionist ideas, attended meetings, and supported Republican figures. Irish close proximity to African Americans and support of Republicans, left most Americans to consider the Irish just as black. Soon, however, the Irish created a distance between them and African Americans. The monograph makes it seem like the Irish completely disregarded events in the South and saw the blacks in the North as competition for labor and benefits. ...in order for them (Irish) to avoid the taint of blackness it was necessary that no Negro be allowed to work in occupations where Irish were to be found.2 More and more Irish moved their allegiance to the Democratic party and participated in conferences and even riots against African Americans. The immigrants took as many low paying jobs from blacks as possible, and maintained them with the overwhelming numbers of Irish needing to work. The Irish political shift to the Democratic party and their heated competition for labor, evolved the immigrants into a strong opposition of abolition and turned them white in the eyes of mainstream America. The monograph is an excellent example of how exactly racism became so ingrained and characteristic of American society. Sources: Ignatiev uses an abundance of sources in his monograph: from personal accounts of Irish immigrants, Irish liberators still in Europe, Irish journals and newspapers, to speeches, prose, and poetry. Garrisons the Liberator is a recurring source throughout the monograph, offering the anti-slavery Irish accounts. The authors of the Liberator continuously attempted to involve Irish immigrants in abolitionists cause. Futile in the end, the journal still communicated its ideas and brought Ignatiev an excellent source of information. In opposition to the Liberator, Ignatiev also presented views of the Boston Pilot and Catholic Diary, both of which condemned
2

130

slavery, but did not support abolitionists. Just from the few named sources in Ignatievs monograph, the ambiguities of the Irish stance toward Afro-Americans in the early period3 is apparent. Another source that shines a light on the changes of Irish thinking overtime is presented in Thomas Branagans work. Vigorously anti-slavery in his writing at first, Branagans voice began to shift toward ambiguousness regarding his attitude toward slavery and whether it was evil or necessary. The use of political cartoons at the end of chapters also smoothed the reading and displayed a transition through time. Devils Advocate: Today, the Irish heritage is something that most Americans are proud of. Having Irish roots is usually shown through Kiss Me, Im Irish shirts on St. Patricks Day and researching Gaelic. Unfortunately, the monograph fails to follow further Irish transformation into the twentieth and the twenty first century. It would have been incredibly insightful to include accounts of more modern Irish to see if they are aware of not just the Potato Famine or Irish oppression in Europe, but the Irish transition from oppressed members of the American society to their whiteness. At times, the choppiness of personal accounts also proved difficult to follow. While some chronological structure is evident throughout the monograph, some chapters did not seem to flow quite as well. It seemed like Ignatiev attempted to throw in as much information as possible into some chapters, while other chapters had more of a precise message. Success: The monograph successfully communicates reasons why abolitionism would have been opposed, not only by the South because of obvious economic concerns, but by groups in the North. It gives evidence of how racism became deeply rooted in the American society. Even with a harsh history of oppression by England, the monograph shows how hypocritical the Irish have become in their journey to whiteness. Ignatiev perfectly catches how America is built on hypocrisy, oppression, and stepping on heads in order to achieve the American Dream. The
3

61

monograph with much success captures the heartbreaking abandonment of Irish anti-slavery ideologies to compromise with white America. Connections: 1. If not for Irish necessity to prove their whiteness would the immigrants have avoided clashes against the Chinese and African Americans? 2. There is a strong connection between Irish negative attitudes toward blacks and the African-American negativity toward the Irish. Both seemed to despise each other for practically the same thing. How different would history have been if the Irish and the African Americans joined together in unions against white structure? Would racism have slowed down in the United States? 3. Since it was not in Ireland where the immigrants have learned their cruelty, were they simply the product of already racist society? 4. What could have Irish liberators, like OConnell have done differently to be more persuasive and to keep Irish immigrants on the side of abolitionists? 5. While the Irish struggled to keep their identity, it seems like through their struggle they completely Americanized themselves. So how is the notion of Irish pride so evident today? How can Irish Americans pride themselves with overcoming oppression in Europe, while they became part of the oppressive history here in the United States?