wmwvw; “2;; “.55 W U! FI'1\%I GUM Q o I‘:.’".Ii,II . ‘5‘" MIMI. “#2555522 '{L- '2' 2 "fif‘lh LIP-5, __ 51"; "(Q51 fi :fzgab \'551"3%§.3 £2535 . K. - 1"”!15‘55155 , -‘ “"555 a, I3 ,._~.1 2", _ 5 "55 ”5- “I" “ 4‘ 3’34?” ”{3‘5'III‘22 JP*“‘ 2%» "#3: -' ‘..t , Q I ,. .. P? 5‘54 . . ,' 1 I 4- , . . 55;“.5 55:55? , .5|;‘5I ”'3' '555‘ w, "‘h’tik “$2... $11”, Ht ' _ ‘ . :- ‘52 1‘ - '23-‘54. " " 5 54' " 51’ I I' "r710 I} III;- .-II I'Iilliisi' ’~ ”I W42"): _ .‘:II: . I : ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘5 ‘ :1 .5?" N - 5 ‘515 I I 5 ' L‘. I . .flp§~:.-V:I:g“ v1 5: I 1: {555::%:IJ; ..1, 53555555555“ .5 95:55’2Ifi,5;5 If 5'5, 5:. ,3"; _‘ .15 .35 515;: 4.135 h5nf¥5555l .,_ _ 3.5;: fifiklzf‘v‘figsagtgh '35::85': . ; 3.9543. F! ‘BIi',II.IL}3,I??,'I';I LIJ 5 ’91; 2’2 IUIN‘I'. [2:31. 14555 5" 5"“‘555 HI, I 5‘555'55I: 181$”; !; «1.7513 'Izggiarsiaé, ": "I "‘7I“'I'I‘I5I I'-""'II'I‘-5»"" ‘-' II‘ I I 'IT‘: III 331$“ -"-:,:'.I.I ' . 12mm s'-§‘.x.‘:lo‘.3:'. .,I ""'?=‘I£33 ‘ “I I.I:Ir=,-III.~..I....;,I;; W ' {232 I: I :W ‘I’"I‘I'I'1'I I ~ I‘II' 23.2 ' Ir IIIII'I-Irlm-IIEIII - -. I222 . I". '13.},2 I‘v' 5 55'; lflo‘II; ' “"'.' '5' "'v" ,I' '_ {I51 c v o; :33: . :5551‘45‘55555555h55. 153', III] 5 ”I 15 5 50:, {'1- I :0 ; aw . I!!! 5 $8“; tfi???’ .,: , B .5 I “If. WHIP? 'II'I; 555555 2,1,3 . ,4 t . . ‘ . ‘3 3,: , _ I5 3:155; {1'33 {027 . ,-. : 3!. 5:5" W55” ’I,“ ;.' I .2 I5:1 ;. 1... #1 :‘lg '5 55K: ) $555,“ 5555555». .w“ ‘ [SI ' II “I ;'III' . 3; ”III 455-! 51;' I“. I I III III 55555. 1;“an fat, 3, . fir. “.‘ I “3’2““ f .1 u .4: .:~ g. ‘1 ' “ 0"“.r2;‘|— k.’ .‘r m3 n... 3. g, . (a ’ "' v-Am W H 4‘5“») .c .‘b -‘ I v v Q 2‘ 51".};5‘5" IIIIIIII 25,71; :32»- 552.351, :55-‘1555‘I‘I5' .;I 2 _ . ‘2 » 15E‘I'I, 5551::5'II\?"":51;| f' 5|":555155fi 5 "55 x . I , ’ a“ ; 1|: 5-5 3 "5 535, I” 513151 “nil?“ if, . : . _.: '3 . _ . . .1. ,.\,?, ;IaII,Io -33}; L. - ugfr I .3. :1 JQE‘ ‘ 2‘} III- I' I1- I .‘I ‘ III II 2 .222 i ‘- 2:: .. ‘23II’2'2 .2’2 iwszsfig é 3 “5'“5555’: '14:“?! 5;\,. I 5' 1 «1.1“; ‘5' '25 ‘12}4] .2 . 3", u‘ .- fi‘cg: 3.3,; ' ':' a 1:533 . ,_ m :-I-:I 15'5’5‘61511I iI" "2 I1:~‘- 2v; HI! I‘ Ifié well. 2333,. 1:2:th Emu. , ' u “Ernst! :.I. III, I; 93 525W 2 III .‘ - 5’3 :«JJ “2- WV ' .3' . " iIIIII-III ." IIIIIIIII I... . - . v » h "%"5"' “‘yzul'ofl 555'5 5,?“ ; I 1 w I N.- ' ' 1‘32‘131'.‘ 1,133 “2:15.. 6 fl. ‘3 I :3l|"5’55 II 15’5‘35 "5555455951”? 5 " ' {595:5 ‘ :I #1. 2‘. 5117:: : ‘fi, 7 £5,223 ,I'Iéi; m; ,p, H, 2.3%,”: I ,.;,;,,;;“,,;III,. ; I. ,..2,5.1_L:,3;3%K . ... ("‘5‘ "5:5" , 13 15.“. ‘ ‘-‘"5:. I! 5!; :L.‘ ‘2' 'f _ 1 :. II.I 'I-.I%- WWII. I ... I.‘IIII . I: I: : ..- ' 3555355”?! 3: II II '1‘;',-‘.,55'5 5W5, "IIIIHHIF . 952%; ,‘3’ . 'I' 1 l’ a,” . ‘ H . 3 ‘ 51.1.3. ' I. .V . 1 155.1555 .55; ‘5‘. 3; H55; " : ‘ ." \f.‘|‘ .13 ‘ 1-.t ' 1 II . - '- ‘ '5; 5 H ‘ 2 .' '5‘ u D 5 ‘ ‘I'. o“ -‘ "a; ”.3335I1I55.5'I;5,:{;I “NW 5‘ 5 5"‘555 $1.22; 5 ‘i-I‘ , “'51 75‘51i5?:;5.5,9 . Ié. ' 5:" .23: . ‘ 7' .2 ' $5 "VIN-5131': 3:32, 2 “3,. 531,2 .‘I': «15:13, .3 .. .5.- . ‘ :,-;I§.~':;.;gfilzrggl(fi;¢ . a3,” git-.th‘ ' '22-»; “69:25:32 5.2I‘I.’ I; "I ,I. ’1IIII 2'23: II'IJ‘ ' ' . . .2 'IIz-WI.» 32:,«422; -:I a,» . r 2:331; {a iI'vII-TI {NIH 'I ' ‘ I ‘; ~ , - . ~.. 12:7 lrIJEifi '2 " ‘r‘ , :"-I- -.*é;," .JfifiwI$XIINII “5 MIE" . I5“ ' . hfitw§”£#a I I$£23 a. =*%§ ';.I‘2I$I:; I515. ,IIII ha.“- MIJLEI 555% ”II. I g . I. . ' . . .2: -, . g’ 3;; ' $42,192:: nil-I , L55’5 A.“ I 55553 ,i; (‘55,. 1i! ;' .1": f ‘. o I 5 t . ,, 2 ‘ ,3, “hi-{4" I22"; I” I, 515'5'5" . '55 5 5:5 (11%;!{502 5 5 ‘5 III: '. .'- ‘ I 5 5’ 5 EL“; . “35:! '92"- . 5"?“55IIIII11IL‘.‘ ‘5'”. 555-? 5% 5 '5I“ 5'55 ‘ x 5 . fl '2 " it's—ii. '§7‘§.§’-CI.5III..‘ ‘ .IzI 7511 I", I)“: I5I I-IEEI I ‘5‘“ 55,55 213' 4,). 5:. t 5531;: ‘2; 3 ‘. 31:53 ‘ ._ I“~"IIII-‘II="’iI!.II. .r; in fun. III {2. ”mfi “335121 "w. ..”‘ I ""2'HI.II." f'w.‘§:.“2I5:!%:'.‘5 l-f555IIII51’51'L'IEIII31}.-5" IIIthII'uIIitI'II ".32 ‘5'»?- '-._.I;.; 'I,‘..~I‘.III. :-II.2:I '1] . ‘ IJIII I. . 3'55. 355:5 Ii ’3: wt 413'? , {33.1 W": $535.51“ WEI IIIII. . Inf. 55 5 “51555555 [,1 I; "‘5‘ 1 “1,3; ,5 4'1? 1.. .; 3 ;3;II:§I,31213,;3 55‘.) .;,3 i'I‘II‘HK'; 55/1555” ;,.f‘, 1 15;», L33: , .3 ‘3 .. Igibflifih‘y: IIIIII'WU‘IE‘fifiz—{I‘Itg . 3“}, '., ,h ,,I 3“ . . . 2“,II:- I‘. "I; ‘41:? 5:5’1I;l:5,' 55:5; “5555' mv ‘ '11!“ ‘IH°".I"1I'I{5 III" ‘5“ hII III III fi;[:;.:55' ‘IIIII’I III.II _5 :5 ' ;;IIIIII’»II',jI.-31I2I2I,II7. _ '2. ”5:“: ,f -:,3;.I=:I' - 'It! €558 ‘,I' "I,” )5 tr. IIvII {If . .w ; ' I , ; I,’ .‘I:I ' » '- $332;- . 2525”,,“ ”5}” ,3“ “4.: I13,” gm». .2. . . 1 I l' I. it “-0 41".- .. ‘- 4.. .v... I 1‘} . - 5 u ‘5 'l I .2 . ‘ I’ A ' ', l. 5 . 51:5. I 5" ' 25.3; 0 " I5") Eff.“ ‘5. ygy.’ ‘ {55:55: 5 5" l, 5 5,-5.5, ‘ '5 ‘5').15: 1 {5 4“ 235;; :5: 53"! l)” :55 If" 15? ',EI.,',;"5 It 1:55 52' 5 I' II} L. I, , 55 2555'“555515555[flumtifi'j‘Iiz‘EI-fl} .5tt'fyéfi; {hfigfl' ‘. '5 I ".' “z‘ ‘- 1,555.. 2' ' ’I' .II..5 . ‘ 2'5 '5 I" i I 'SN'II'; 255511. ' 555555. ”‘55; “It 5 5‘5‘ 55555155555555.5555 5 5255 5 555 555,155555555’355 1‘. 55554;]! 57:)! Abs, téfl?‘ L2" 333 ‘ . 0'74".“ i’I;-3."I;':':.'- '4 III!“ 2' . . . “II '1': . gm." I» ”44545 5555W§IW=TI5 'hh¥$VJw55VIW2,5IgMIW.Rn Ing’ 5: I3 ' III I "'I ‘JIiIf 32%.: I.' I .I. ""' I 2%: . -, '5 HI I I“ Wd‘“ IWflWM”qu¢IWMW nIIIwudhfi“ fl . €505 [5:55, 1, I 5' '51::l.;-_. {0:35 9.1” t ‘2‘.” 54:2! ,3 ‘7' , L5 , fi:{ .. 5' L ix I v v . . I 5535-55 I _ "11.) 9.51;. ”3;... ;;,‘.I,5|1[t,.1“:2.', I I 55,545.:1H1"S;1’. 5 54:13.; .1 5‘; 15'55537551'55 M, £1" ‘1',“ 1;! {Ifi 3;. 1' I .5 35‘ g ,1) 5“ L93] [Lb f”- l ,5; I1'5I3331m15}; 5,:3 ,5, R1, l“; 33% "nth?" IIIEQ‘1‘I:II,55, 6155-155: 2:5- . I I 5 555 5 55 55 555’ 53.5"." :: 55 5' 245‘" '555'153 1' J I ' :.‘I I: I,I I . ,5, ' ol‘» . ...j;.‘..,._;-.;-'. . . ~7-..” A ..—..~.., _, * 9‘ Date 1’ ° ' I «y 437.53.?21': bib." y' Minn-:3. This is to certify that the thesis entitled RESIDENTIAL DISTRIBUTION, SPATIAL MOBILITY, AND ACCULTURATION IN AN ARAB-MUSLIM COMMUNITY presented by Mohammad Mahmoud Siryani I has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph o D 0 degree in Geographl KW '? 7. oe T. Darden Major professor October 11, 1977 0-7639 LIBRARIES “ MSU RETURNING MATERIALS? Place in book drqb'to remove this your record. check dt'from T 5 F_IN_S_will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. 91?) o-I . .; 3 APR “ ‘ fifihY 13f ,5 ;:5 dzéf } ‘ . . ;T;:-**v 'Wgfllgzfifithpx? ”9139;: Myfivz (20111 ' 7.1m é 0 19925“ M 2m ’s-fs‘ ‘, ‘. '996 éifiilé} 20:15 so } -_ " 5£P112008 r 1?? r 1 o W 251; 121 '9 RESIDENTIAL DISTRIBUTION, SPATIAL MOBILITY, AND ACCULTURATION IN AN ARAB-MUSLIM COMMUNITY by Mohammad Mahmoud Siryani A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Geography 1972/ ,............. 5» ....-_. 41, - ud—v v " ‘u-i-a-‘ae-v T 3* ———.~ -*’._.- ... '1 "F'IH‘~“"" -—rs~* .Au-r Wm”. .5.“ WWr‘V—‘wafiw WW‘T' 4"; _- “W"W‘E ABSTRACT RESIDENTIAL DISTRIBUTION, SPATIAL MOBILITY AND ACCULTURATION IN AN ARAB-MUSLIM COMMUNITY by Mohammad Mahmoud Siryani This study concerns the migration, residential distri- bution, spatial mobility and acculturation of an Arab Muslim Community residing in Dearborn and Southwest Detroit. The Arab Muslim immigrants began to live in this area in the early twenties. The reasons for their immigration were the bad economic situation in the homeland and the lure of a better life in the United States. The Ford Rouge Plant was the prime reason for their early settlement in the area. While the majority of the early immigrants were of Lebanese origin, the early fifties witnessed two Arab Muslim immigrant groups: the Palestinians and the Yemenis. The residential distribution of the Arab Muslim com- munity in the study area for the last fifty years reflects three distinctive patterns. The initial pattern between 1920 and 1945 is marked by establishing a core area that acted as a port of entry for new Arab Muslim immigrants. Between 1945 and 1967 the Arab Muslim population grew rapidly. The core area experienced a growing spatial concentration while Mohammad M. Siryani expanding territorially at the same time. In the last ten years the core area is dominated by the Arab Muslim residents in a Ghetto-like community. This Ghetto experienced a spa- tial concentration in the core and expanded its boundaries on the periphery. The core area resembles the South End of the City of Dearborn, while the periphery includes East Dearborn and Southwest Detroit. Intra-urban residential mobility within the area of the Arab Muslim community was found to be high whereas move- ment outside the area was found to be low because of certain restrictions such as lack of acculturation to the norms of the large society, lack of job opportunities outside their place of present residence and perceived discrimination from the host society. To measure the degree of adOpting the American behavior by the Arab-Muslim immigrants an acculturation scale was devised. Fifty-two percent of the Arab-Muslim community have a high level of acculturation while 48 percent have a low level of acculturation on that scale. Social mobility together with the higher number of years lived in the United States are found to be directly related to level of acculturation. The Ghetto-like community, which increases in-group interaction at the expense of social interactions with the American pOpulation, the strong relation with the old country, and discrimination from the host society are found to be inversely related to level of acculturation. I 0 0 Q 1 - A‘ifif} I —&.tl‘ ’\ u ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this dissertation has benefited from the interest and assistance of many individuals. Dr. David Stephenson, Doctoral Committee Chairman, guided this research from its inception. His suggestions and criticisms throughout the entire study are appreciated. I am eSpecially indebted to Dr. Joe Darden who chaired the Doctoral Committee when it became impossible for Dr. Stephenson to attend the exam. I am also indebted to Dr. Darden and Dr. James Zuiches for their constructive suggestions which contributed immeasurably both to the research and the writing of this dissertation. Dr. Dieter Brunnschweiler and Dr. Lawrence Sommers kindly agreed to serve on the committee at an extremely late date. Their valuable assistance is deeply appreciated. My appreciation is directed to the Arab-Muslim com- munity in Dearborn whose trusting and cooperative attitudes made the study possible. I owe a great deal to the community leaders, Imam Abdul Gafour Barakani, Imam Jawad Chirri, Mr. Fouzi Meri, Mr. Hussain Maklad, Mr. Allan Amen, Mrs. Aleya Hassan and Ms. Zahe Khalil who have contributed in time and information during the frequent_prolonged interviews. I wish to express my gratitude to the members of the American Muslim Society, Arab Center, Beit Hanina Social ii Club and Community Development Department, especially Mr. Manarino, City Director of the Department, for their help and cooperation. Finally, I would like to express my sincere appreci- ation to Mrs. Margaret Hudson who carefully typed the many drafts of this thesis. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapter I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Study Area. . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem. . . . . . Methods of Research . . . . . . . . Field Observation . . . . . . . . Interviewing. . . . . . . . . . City Directories and Other Sources. Sample. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . Data Analyses ... . . . . . . . . . Organization of the Study . . . . . . II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE. . . . . . . . . . Studies on the Arab Muslim Community Hm-W‘M of Dearborn . . . . . . . . . . . Studies on the Arabs in America . . . ’Studies of Acculturation. . . . . . . Studies of Spatial Mobility . . . . III. MIDDLE EASTERN IMMIGRATION MOVEMENT . . The First Wave of Immigrants to the United States 1860-1917 . . . . . . The Second Wave, 1918-1945. . . . . . The Recent Arab Immigration to the U.S., 1945-1976 . . . . . . . . . . Immigration Movement to Dearborn. . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. PATTERNS OF RESIDENTIAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE ARAB MUSLIM COMMUNITY. . . . . invasion . . . infiltration . consolidation. concentration. Initial Arab Muslim Residential Pattern 1920—1945 0 o o o o o o o 0 iv Page vii ix p..- 36 38 42 52 54 57 57 57 57 59 V. VI. VII. Crystallization of Arab Muslim Residential Patterns 1945-1967. . . The Contemporary Arab Muslim Ghetto 1968-1976. . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ARAB MUSLIM COMMUNITY . . . . . Place of Birth. . . . . . . Place of Residence. . . . . Age . . . . . . . Sex . . . . . . . Marital Status. . Household Size. . Tenure Status . Income. . . . Education . . . Employment. . . Occupation. . Kinship Ties. . Religion. . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . SPATIAL MOBILITY OF THE ARAB MUSLIMS . Intra-Community Residential Mobility. Inter- Urban Mobility. . . . . Hypothesis. . . . . . . . . Residential Mobility Analysis . . . . Housing Supply. . . . . . . . . . Inter-Urban Mobility Analysis . . . Socio-Economic Characteristics and Mobility. . . . . . . . . . . Neighborhood Satisfaction and Mobility. . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ACCULTURATION OF ARAB-MUSLIM COMMUNITY Assimilation. . . . . Acculturation . . . . Acculturation Scale . . Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Socio-Economic Characteristics and Acculturation . . . . . . . . . Discrimination and Acculturation. . . Residential Distribution and Acculturation . . . . . . . . . . . Interurban Mobility and Acculturation Factors Affecting Acculturation . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page 63 67 71 73 73 76 76 76 78 80 84 85 88 92 95 98 100 192. 102 107 112 114 122 125 125 127 134 136 136‘ 138 145 146 150 153 156 159 160 Page VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . 162 APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 vi Table 3.1 LIST OF TABLES Syrian Emigrants Admitted to the U.S. from 1897 to 1932 O O O O O O I O O C O O O 0 Number of Immigrants to the U.S. by Country of Origin for the Years 1953 to 1974 . . Number of Professional Immigrants by Country of Origin for the Years 1961 to 1974 . . Date of Entry to the United States . . . . Place of Birth of the Heads of Household . Place of Residence by National Subgroups . Age of Heads of Household by Place of Residence. Age of Heads of Household by National Groups Marital Status by Subareas . . . . . . . . Marital Status by Place of Birth . . . . . Spouse Descent by National Groups. . . . . Household Type by Nationality. . . . . . . Household Size and Number of Children by National Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . Homeownership by Place of Residence. . . Homeownership by National Groups . . . . . Income by Place of Residence . . . . . . . Income by National Groups. . . . . . . . . Income by Education by Nationality Groups. Education by Nationality , , , . . . . . . vii 44 47 51 74 76 77 78 79 79 80 82 82 84 84 85 85 87 88 Education by Place of Residence. . . . . . Employment by Place of Residence . . . . . Employment by Nationality. . . . . . . . . Occupation by Place of Residence . . . . . Occupation by National Groups. . . . . . . Kinship Ties Among Arab Muslim Immigrants. A Summary of Operationalization. . . . . . Moving Plans by Socio-Economic Character- istics of the Heads of Household . . . . Distribution of Household Who Expect Difficulty in Finding New Residences . . Difficulty Reasons by Subareas . . . . . . Zero-order Correlation Between Background Variables, Satisfaction Index and P 1 an to Move 0 O O O I O O O O O O O O 0 Relationship between Index of Area Satisfaction and Mobility. . . . . . . . Reasons for Movement out of the Study Area Reasons for Moving out of the Area by Generation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Assimilation Variables . . . . . . . . The Components of the Acculturation Scale. Acculturation by Socio-economic Variables. Discrimination by Acculturation and Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Acculturation by Place of Residence and Mobility Plans . . . . . . . . . . . viii 89 93 94 96 113 115 122 123 129 131 131 132 138 141 148 152 156 Figure 1.1 4.1 LIST OF FIGURES StUdy Area 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 Household Distribution of Arab Muslim Community in Dearborn, 1930. . . . . Household Distribution of Arab Muslim Community in Dearborn, 1940. . . . . Household Distribution of Arab Muslim Community in Dearborn-Detroit, 1950. Household Distribution of Arab Muslim Community in Dearborn—Detroit, 1960. Household Distribution of Arab Muslim Community in Dearborn-Detroit, 1970. Household Distribution of Arab Muslim Community in Dearborn-Detroit, 1976. The Determinants of Who Considers Moving ix 61 61 64 65 68 69 110 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Since the dawn of mankind, migration has always been an important phenomenon affecting the patterns of pOpulation distribution, cultural diffusion, and acculturation. Immi- grants carry their own cultural heritage and create distinc- tive communities in the heart of the major papulations that receive them. Immigration has played a very important role in the pOpulation dynamics of the United States. EurOpe provided most of the migrants during the earlier formative years of the country. At that time, millions of immigrants represent- ing numerous ethnic backgrounds made their contribution to the cultural and settlement pattern developing within the United States as they filled the frontiers and pOpulated the cities. In the thirteen original colonies, the pioneers were practically all British, Irish, Dutch and German, with a few French, Portuguese and Swedes. Since the colonial period and especially since the late 1800's, however, immi- gration to this country has brought peOple from almost all races and cultures. The prOportion coming from Eastern and Southern EurOpe dominated the migration stream. Russians, Poles, Italians, Romanians, and Czechs rose rapidly to make up seventy percent of the total immigrants. 2 During the last half of the 19th century, peOple of the Middle East discovered America. The exact number of the emigrants is not known. Estimates vary widely. It is clear that more Lebanese than any other group migrated, and of these, far more Christians than Muslims tended to move. They were all attracted to this country for the same basic reasons as their EurOpean predecessors; economic Opportunity and escape from political and social Oppression. There were numerous subgroups within this broad category of the Middle Eastern immigrants--ninety percent of them held religious minority status in the homeland of the Middle East. Examples are the Christian Maronites, the Christian Melkite and the Druzes of Lebanon and Syria. A few of them are refugees, such as the Palestinian refugees. In recent times, some are members of the educated "brain drain" phenomenon. The majority of the Arabic-speaking immigrants came from small towns and villages in the rural areas of agricul- tural societies. However, in this country, they did not work in agriculture. They initially became peddlers and small merchants. Later, they and their descendants became larger merchants, white collar workers and professionals (Aswad, 1974:1-17). While the lines separating earlier Middle Eastern immigrants from.American culture have become somewhat blurred with the passing generations, the more recent Arabic-Speak- ing peOple have not had time to be accepted and absorbed into 3 the more general American pattern. Much like the French Canadian and Black American, the Arabic-speaking residents usually remain as an identifiable minority group. While they h0pe and try hard to fit into the general‘a cosmopolitan atmOSphere of the multi-ethnic pOpulation of large cities, their employment and financial conditions result in their accepting inexpensive housing in the older areas. Their limited knowledge of the English language is a further handicap often standing in the way of promotiOn and setting them apart from.other peOple. This results in the formation of distinct Arabic-speaking areas in certain large cities such as Chicago, New York, and Detroit. These areas act as ports of entry for other new immigrants of similar cultural background, who often come and settle with friends and relatives. Study Area The focus of this research will be on a specific Arabic-Speaking community: The Arab Muslim community. Although the religious affiliation of the vast majority of peOple in the Arab countries is Islam, Muslims are one of the smallest religious categories in America. They are a minority even among Arab-speaking community in this country. Of approximately one and one-half million Arabic peOple in this country, only ten percent are Muslims (Elkholy 1966: 17). Perhaps the largest single concentration of Arab Muslflms is in Dearborn, a suburb of Detroit, Michigan (Aswad 1974:53). 4 Dearborn, Michigan experienced the influx of large numbers of Arab Muslims in recent decades. There are approx- imately 7,000 Muslims within the Detroit area. The majority of them live in the east side of Dearborn and the southwest side of Detroit. This area extends from the Rouge Plant complex in the west to Clark Street in the east and from Tireman Street in the north to West Fort Street in the south (Figure 1.1). Within this area which delimits the broad boundary of the Arab Muslim community there is a focal point referred to locally as the "South End" where the majority of the commun- ity live. The South End is located between the city limits of Detroit on the east and the River Rouge plant of Ford Motor Company on the west. The northern boundary of the area is John Kronk Avenue and West Fort bounds it on the south. The community is surrounded by the Ford Motor Company, Levy Asphalt Company, General Patton Memorial Park and Wood- mere Cemetery. The neighborhood is often not associated with the City of Dearborn. Many persons think the area is a part of the City of Detroit (Figure 1.1). Since World War I the economic base of the study area is industry. On the site of the present Rouge Plant, sub- marine chasing boats were built for the United States govern- ment. After the war, the facilities were converted to automobile production. By 1925 the Rouge plant was producing 10,000 cars a day and more than 98,000 employees worked in it (League of Women Voters, 1976:18). moud hpsum a“ :05 . s w w t N » I >¢wpuzmux x momo >Jorr-t d. $ ‘5» C >2<¢200 mOkOE omOu I ll JUNO. .H musmflm O'IIUIII” 1‘ ZdOEu.’ OIIIOA. zmom Pm Ilslbl O‘IJIJHLNOI V 55:; \w 6 Thousands of immigrants from all over the world have been attracted here by high wages and the magic of the Ford name. A school survey taken in 1930 showed that 49 different languages were spoken in the homes of Galina area (South End), close to Ford Rouge plant (ibid:19). The majority of the immigrants were from central and southern EurOpe, mainly from Poland, Romania, Italy, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Through the 1920's and into the 1940's, the South End was composed largely of Italian, Romanian and Polish groups. The Arabic-Speaking p0pulation was small at these times, but grew larger in the period from the late 1940's to the present time (Aswad 1974: 55). With the rise in their socio-economic standards, the Poles, Italians and many other ethnic groups in the South End have moved into the middle class and the more affluent areas of Dearborn, which have expanded greatly over the last forty years. However, the South End has remained as an area which has continuously received immigrants who are primarily of the unskilled laboring class. The concentration of the Arab Muslims within this area is due to a number of factors, one of which is the pre- vailing occupational pattern of the Arabs. A great majority of them are employed as laborers within the automobile industry. ' The South End of Dearborn exhibits a Specific Arab character due to the concentration of the Arab peOple in a 7 specific area. Many traditional customs are maintained. Along Dix Avenue, the main street, the Arabic atmoSphere is marked. Numerous coffeehouses are interSpersed with Syrian restaurants and grocery stores which import much of their food from the old country. Advertisements are written in Arabic. Arabic is the main language Spoken on the streets. The Arab Muslim community occupies not only a physical but also a cultural niche in the urban pattern. Dearborn, therefore, Offers a unique Opportunity to study the development Of the Arab Muslim Community in the United States. It is an ideal case study for the examination of community formation and the internal organization of the community itself. Statement of the Problem Since the turn of the twentieth century, social scientists have become increasingly concerned with American ethnic groups and have produced a vast literature focusing on the dynamics of minority group behavior. The utilization of the Arabic-Speaking communities as study groups is timely because they have received little attention in the social science literature. This study specifically concerns the migration, resi- dential patterns, spatial mobility and acculturation of the Arab Muslim immigrant group.‘ More Specifically, the purpose of the study is to: 1. describe the migration of Dearborn's Arab Muslims from their places of origin to the United States. 8 analyze changes in the Spatial organization of their residential patterns through time and describe the emergence of the Dearborn community as an Arab Muslim Ghetto. determine the spatial mobility patterns of the community residents. provide further understanding of the forces, both external and internal that influence their accul- turation to the new life in this country. In carrying out this research, the following questions will be addressed: 1. Why did the Arab Muslims leave the Middle East for the United States? And why did they eventu- ally concentrate in the study area? What has been the character of their immigration as part of the general immigration pattern into the United States? What has been the role of information flow and kinship ties between the homeland and destination? What are the Spatial characteristics of the evolving pattern of Arab Muslims within the city, including the internal structure of the settle- ment area? And what factors are most influential in its formation? What is the nature of the presence of Arab Muslim pe0p1e in the landscape and institutional organization of Dearborn? In the course of their adjustment to the life in the United States, what is their Spatial mobility ! .j.l.l‘ : 4|" lii‘l‘t 1\ l,‘l.;4ll:l‘l.l)\lll‘.l. (ll- .1 (Wain/Mm l1..(.|ll4‘.l.ll¢ ‘1 4! Jirr‘. 3. A IVA m 4 4'4 4 . A 4 1 9 behavior between cities and regions and within the city boundaries? What factors underlie their mobility? To what extent have they adOpted the norms and behavior of the host society? Methods of Research Several methods were used in obtaining the data on which this study is based: field observation, interviewing, city directories, and published materials. Field observation Considerable time was spent in the community, simply talking to peOple and Observing group activities. During my stay there I fully participated in the various life activities of the group: recreation, visits,festivals, parties, worship and gossip. At these activities I tried to circulate with friends and acquaint- ances and talk to as many people as possible. At such gatherings it was possible to make many informal interviews and often to develop good informants. I found it very useful to spend some hours in coffee- houses daily talking with those who drifted in and out. Coffeehouses are an important Observation post in the com- munity, as most peOple come into them.many times during the day to drink coffee, meet friends and transact business. Each group of friends has its own favorate caféhouse. As it was easy for them to notice a stranger, many would come over to find out what one was doing there. Many valuable bits of information were obtained and friends made from such casual encounters. 10 Interviewing» Aside from general participation and the resultant observation, interviews were the main source of information. The questionnaire contained some 82 items, ranging from simple background questions, to questions regarding mobility, community perception, acculturation and migration history. These questions were devised by reviewing the per- tinent sociological and social geographical literature. Much insight was also gained on mobility and environmental perception from the instruments develOped by Harold Rose, who employed similar measures in his investigation of the residents of all Black towns across the nation, from Joe Darden in his study of Environmental Perception by Ghetto Youth in Pittsburgh, and from Eric Moore and Alden Speare in their studies on intra-urban migration and residential mobility. (Rose 1971:141-142; Darden, 1970:19-22; Moore 1969:113-116, 1971:200-15 and 1972). Barbra Aswad's Study of the Urban Renewal in Arab Community in Dearborn guided this research on Background Information and Migration History Of the Community (Aswad 1974:53-84). For the pur- pose Of pretesting the questionnaire, it was submitted to any one who would agree to be interviewed, from the peOple found in social clubs, coffeehouses and mosques. Some items were changed and modified according to the responses. The questionnaire then was administered in the study area and a total number of 214 heads of household were interviewed. There were 25 cases Of rejection, where the respondents 11 refused to answer questions concerning their life experiences and aspects of community history. These were easily substi- tuted by other members of the community. In almost all the cases information was given by the heads of household or by the elder son in the family. Arabic language was used in the interview except for the members of the second generation where English language was the only choice. City Directories‘and Other Sources To portray the phases of Arab commu- nity growth as reflected in changing Arab residential pattern, cross-sectional analysis similar to that employed by Jakle and Wheeler in their study of the Kalamazoo Dutch, was employed (Jackle and Wheeler 1969:441—60). In this analysis the location of the Arab populace was examined in each of seven years, 1926, 1930, 1941, 1950-1951, 1960, 1970, and 1976. Choice of these Special dates was made on the basis of data availability, reflected by available published city direc~ tories (Polk and Co., 1926, 1930, 1941, 1950-51, 1960, 1970 and 1976). The main purpose is to identify residence places occupied by persons or families with Arab Muslim surnames. Houses and apartments, so identified, have been designated as Arab households and mapped for each respective year. Locations of Arab Operated businesses and public buildings were determined by field inSpection. ‘\\\m Background information about Dearborn and the study area was Obtained from the reports and publications of the City Hall, eSpecially the Community Development Department, 12 Assessor's Office, and the City Planning Commission. The newspapers of the city were also inspected from the early fifties to the present for stories and articles on the activities and history of the community in Dearborn. The vertical files of the Dearborn Press, Dearborn Times- Herald and Dearborn Independent newspapers were the main source on the tOpic of the city's relation with the Arab community. Sample The population from which the sample was drawn con- sisted at first of the Arab Muslim community who were residing in the City of Dearborn. But later it was dis- covered that this community has an extension in the part of the City of Detroit adjacent to the City of Dearborn. A decision was made to sample some peOple from this area also. According to the 1976 Polk City Directory of Dearborn there are more than a thousand households with Arabic sur- names. The majority Of them reside in an area called the South End, while the rest of them are disPersed throughout the east section of the city. very few peOple live in the west section of the city so it was excluded from the study area; and instead the study area was extended to include some parts of the City of Detroit where there is an extension of the Dearborn Arab Muslim Community. A controlled selection sampling procedure was chosen for the City of Dearborn. A 25 percent sample was taken from the South End area and a 10 percent sample of the rest of 13 the city. The sample was drawn from each street according to the total number of the Arab Muslims living in that street. The households were identified and listed through the use of the City Directory from which persons having Arabic surnames were chosen. In order to keep the balance in the geographi- cal distribution, the lists of Dearborn's Arab Muslims were classified into two groups: the South End group and the East Dearborn group. In the South End where the majority of the Arab Muslims live, every fourth Arab household in every street was selected for interview, while in the other area a random table was employed to select the sample households. A total number of 141 households from the South End area and 45 households from the rest of the city were chosen for interview. Due to the absence of a recent City Directory for the part of Detroit adjacent to Dearborn another kind of sampling procedure was followed. The snowball technique was used to obtain interviews. I began with the names of some of the people whom I met in the Mosque. With each person I inter- viewed I asked for the names of other individuals in their neighborhood. From these names given to me, I selected those persons I wanted to interview. The criterion for selecting these individuals was the location Of the residence the potential interviewee lived in; since I wanted to inter- view peOple living in all parts of the neighborhood, a total number Of 28 interviews were conducted with this procedure, bringing the whole sample to 214 interviews. 14 Data Analyses After all the questionnaires had been administered, the data were then coded and placed on cards. All the compu- tations were done by the 6500 MSU computer using available statistical programs. The primary method Of statistical analysis used was gamma which is a measure of association. 0.. This measure was chosen for several reasons. It is appro- mh. a .- _ "-7— _ - ,— . u - “man-'- Haw priate for measuring associations between ordinal variables, and almost all of the variables used in this thesis can be interpreted as having an ordinal level of measurement. Gamma also has the advantage of being directly interpretable. "The numerical value of Gamma disregarding signs, gives the percentage of guessing errors eliminated by using knowledge of a second variable to predict order (Costner,1965:34l-53)." Therefore, gamma has both a value and a Sign (+ or -) with a range of -l.0 to +1.0. All computations for gamma are based on the united pairs for the particular variables in question. It is a symmetrical measure of association, and, therefore, the prediction of order can be from either variable on the other on the basis Of one calculation. A multiple correlation and regression analysis was used to examine the importance of several independent vari- ables as predictors of the dependent variables. This statis- tical technique has underlying assumptions which should be met in order to maintain the validity of the model. It calls for linear relationships in the data. In this study, no alterations were made in the data to transform it to linear form although some of the variables used were not linear. 15 Variables were also assumed to have normal distributions which was not the case in all our variables. Only common sense was used to solve the problem of multicollinearity in the data (high independence between variables). The above violations in the model assumptions should be kept in mind when evaluating the results of these analyses. Organization of the Study The remainder of the study is divided into seven chap- ters. Chapter II includes a summary of the pertinent theory and research which provides the basis for the hypotheses to be tested. Middle Eastern immigration movement to the United States and to the study area is described in Chapter III. The phases of the Arab-Muslim community growth as revealed in changing residential patterns are examined in Chapter IV. Detailed information about the socio-economic characteristics of the Arab-Muslim community in the study area is given in Chapter V. The central problem of Chapter VI is the expla- nation of the process of spatial mobility among the members of the community. In this chapter intra community residential mobility and interurban mobility are explored. Chapter VII is designated for the community adjustment to the new life in the United States. In this chapter acculturation of the Arab- Muslim community is examined. Chapter VIII gives major find- ings and recommendations for subsequent research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The literature reviewed for this project deals with material related to the following four categories: (1) Arab Muslim community in Dearborn; (2) Arabs in America; (3) Accul— turation of racial and ethnic groups, and (4) Spatial mobility. Studies in these areas have a common contribution to make to the present work. Beyond their methodological importance to the investigation at hand, their findings and conclusions directed the attention of the investigator to certain aSpects and insights, giving a wider base upon which comparison and contrast of the peOple under this investigation could be made. Aside from their common pertinence, each area reviewed has its unique contribution to the different phases of this study. Studies on the Arab Muslim Community of Dearborn There are four sociological studies that dealt with the Dearborn Arab Muslim community. El-KhOly was concerned with comparing the degree of religiosity of the three gener- ations of the community with that Of the Arab Muslim group in Toledo, Ohio. He emphasized the conflict between the immigrants and their descendents, the increasing weakness in the degree of religiosity, and the Arabic political attitudes of the immigrants (EL-Kholy, 1966). 16 l7 Wasfi's unpublished dissertation (1964) analyzed the social organization, particularly marriage patterns of the Lebanese in the community. He described the cultural back- ground Of this group and traced their marriage patterns in the Lebanese village, followed by marriage patterns in the Dearborn community. Comparing this with the American middle class marriage patterns, he_emphasized the impact of American culture upon the community. Also he discussed the general I aspects of culture contact, referring to two types of accul- turation: forced situations and voluntary ones. Some fac- tors of accelerating acculturation and other factors Of delaying acculturation were discussed (Wasfi, (1964:302-339). Aswadi's study (1974) analyzed the problem of urban renewal in the area. She reviewed the closeness of primary social and economic ties in the community and their positive sentiments toward it. She discussed in detail the history of the community struggle with the city to prevent its destruction and showed that this struggle by a weaker force against a city the nature of Dearborn created division within the community as well as provided a new Organization and in many ways their struggle is found to be analagous to those of coloniZed communities (Aswad, 1974:53-85). Wigle's study (1974) analyzed kinship, religion, com- munity and nationality among the Arab Muslims in Dearborn. She argues for the importance of the extended family. She also notes the position of the Zaim, or influential politician and its adOptation to local politics. Islam she finds is 18 strongly associated with the other variables and is associ- ated with the political events in the Middle East. The identification of persons in this area as Arabs is stronger than in most of the other Arab communities (Wigle, 1974: 155-176). Studies on the Arabs in America One of the earliest studies of the Arabs in the United States was made by Louise Houghton in 1911, who described the immigration movement of the Syrians and Lebanese and the formation of their colony. .(Houghton, July 1911:481-495; August 1911:647-665; September 1911:787-803). Philip Hitti wrote a small history of the Syrian and Lebanese colony in America in 1924 where he analyzed the causes of immigration and the economic and social life of the immigrants up to 1924 (Hitti, 1924). Another more recent history of the Middle Eastern immigration is Habib Katibah's article "Syrian American" in 1939. Tannous' article, “Acculturation of Arab Syrian Community in the Deep South," has made perhaps the first scientific study of a Syrian com- munity in the process of acculturation (Tannous, 1943:264- 271). Benyon's article "The Near East in Flint, Michigan" dealt with the Arab Durzi community in Flint (Benyon, 1944: 259-79). \“ The mid-seventies showed a growing interest in the Arab Speaking communities in the United States. In 1974, Crowley, in his paper, "The Levantine Arabs: DiaSpora in the New World" discussed some of the issues concerning the 19 VJ ( C" Arab Americans (Crowley, 1974:137-142). Edward Wakin worte a little book on the "Lebanese and Syrians in America" where he discussed the early occupation of those immigrants and how they started with peddling and ended with high professions (Wakin, 1974:15-98). The Association of Arab-American University Graduates (AAUG) in the last ten years published a series of books which aim at promoting knowledge and understanding of cul- tural, scientific and educational matters between the Arab and American peOple. Three monographs are related to this study. Each book contains several social science studies which deal with peOple from the Arabic-speaking Middle East who live in American cities. Most of the papers were pre~ sented at the annual conventions of the Association of Arab- American University Graduates. The first monograph was "The Arab Americans: Studies in Assimilation," edited by Eliane HagOpian and Ann Paden, 1969. Among the articles in this monograph: "The Arab- Canadian Community" (Abu-Laban, 1969:18-36), ”The Institu- tional Development Of the Arab-American Community of Boston," (HagOpian, 1969:37-49); “The Growth of Arabic Speaking Settlements in the United States," (Younis, 1969:102-111), and "The Arab Americans: Nationalism and Traditional Preser- vations," (EL-Kholy,l967:3-17). All the above articles dealt with the historical, demographic and socio-economic processes associated with communities' formation and the adaptation of Arab immigrants to the American environment. 20 The second book, "Arabic Speaking Communities in American Cities," edited by Barbara C. Aswad, 1974 has focused on some of the Arab communities in North American cities in general and in the Detroit region in particular. Some of these communities are distinguished primarily by religious identification such as the Maronites of Detroit (Ahdap-Yehia, 1974:139-154), some by the origin of their village or city in the home country, such as the Ramallah ‘EEEEHD1L¥__(§wan and Saba, 1974:85-119L_ some by special location and socio-economic status in this country, such as the South End auto workers of Dearborn (Aswad, 1974:53-85). Most communities share a combination of these factors, a common general location and a general occupation or class level. Turning to the differences and similaritiesyAswad divides these communities into two categories: The ethnic pri- mary communities SUCh aS‘fiE Dearborn Muslim community which has its geographical localization and close social relation- ships, but the main economic and political controls are out- side the community. Another category which is termed Ethnic secondary communities such as the Maronites and the Ramallah ~ community. In this category there is no compact geographical m clustering although there is often a larger regional cluster- ing, and the community is a voluntary association organized 3/ around a church or other type of association. -»—--——> ‘w‘m.—_.t . _ .u-p — —..._-—- The third book was "The Arabs in America; Myths and Realities" edited by Abu-Laban and Zeadey, 1975. It contains 21 some of the papers which were presented at the Seventh Annual Convention of the AAUG which was held in Cleveland, Ohio in October, 1974. The central concern of the essays included in this book is'the problematic relationship that currently exists between the Arab American community and the larger society." It examines the structuring of information about Arabs in the mass media of communication and in reli- gflmg and educational institutions, and discusses more Specifically, the treatment of Arab workers in selected American and EurOpean settings. Beside the above literature there are several unpub- lished materials which deal with the Arabic-speaking communi- ties in the United States. Among these, the "Syrian colony in Pittsburgh" (Zelditch, 1936); "Some Near Eastern Immigrant Groups in Chicago" (Stein, 1922); "The Maronites" (Gasperetti, 1948); "The Arab Community in Chicago Area" (Altahir, 1952); "Some Cultural and Geographic Aspects Of the Christian Leban—l ese in MetrOpolitan Los Angeles" (Dlin, 1961); “The Coming of the Arabic Speaking PeOple to the United States" (Younis, 1961); TEES—pgggiifioffiRammallah_(Kassees, 1970); "The Social _,_.— wu— Assimilation of the Rammallah Community residing in Detroit" M ———.—-—_. (Saba, 1971) and "Conflict and Persistence in the Iraqi- Chaldean Acculturation" (Al-Nouri, 1964). Studies of Acculturation Since the turn of the twentieth century, social sci- entists have become increasingly concerned with American ethnic and racial groups. They have produced a vast p—_-'- -_-——— 22 literature focusing on the dynamics of minority group behav- ‘ior. The first conceptual develOpment came when anthrOpolo- gists, primarily concerned with the American Indian, intro- duced the concept of acculturation to describe cultural changes precipitated through prolonged inter-group contact. Sociologists, concerned largely with modern ethnic and racial groups of EurOpean, Asian, and African origin have perfected a related concept: that of assimilation. Centered on acculturation and assimilation, anthrOpo- logical and sociological studies of American ethnic minori- ties include bgth in-depth‘gaseflstudi§§*and tOpically.—FH4F oriented comparative analysis. Examples of the former include treatment Of Arab-Syrian, Chinese, Greek, Hindustani, Italian, Dutch, German, Black and Norwegian racial and ethnic groups (Tannous, 1943:264-271; Fong, 1965:265-273; Treudley, 1949: 44-53; Dababhay, 1954:138-41; Gans, 1965; Campisi, 1968:93- 103; Candill, 1952:3-102; Schnore 1965:126-133; Taeuber and Taeuber, 1965; Taeuber, 1964:42-50; Wittke, 1967 and Jonassen, 1949:32-41). Largely descriptive, these investigations are —_-..-——.-— aimedfiprimarily at the results of acculturation and the x '_.___--——t H... -...._. i—a-L —-————r———-——_—--—u -I"- '- dynamics of the acculturation process. _-—....-—.— ___.__.— ““h— _ m The tOpical analysis, which frequently involves cross- group investigation includes analyses of economic, political an“-.. and social behavioral patterns Shared by minority groups in N an.“ '7 ' ~~ W.— general (Powell, 1966:100-16; Schnore and Pinkerton. 1966:491— 99; and Goldsmith and Lee, 1966:207-15: 23 This growing interest in acculturation has been con- comitant with numerous recent studies of ethnic group segre- gation, the antithesis of acculturation (Duncan and Lieberson, 1959:364-74; Lieberson, 1963). Out of the myriad of case f—a’ . _—-.. studies and comparative analysis came a growing realization m... M'- _1___.___ .... .. ~——-—-—---—-. ._ ._...-—————-————"* —-———.— that absolute assimilation was rarely, if ever, achieved; _‘q.__ ——— -_...-.—-_ ‘_ .7 —- —__...._._._.— -_1_.._ rather, most ethnic minorities continued to sustain selected ._._._—--F— — —.-—-—_. duo-u—n———__—_———-- __..._,_.. ~......-. .- -—-- <— --..— -._. _"_ ’ cultural differences at the expense of complete cultural _-- m—F-F. homegeeséty- Of particular interest to geoqraphers, however, came recognition of both place and physical distance as factors influencing human interaction. Sometimes disruptive, these influences may curtail the acculturation process and foster ethnic group segregation (Lieberson, 1961:52-57). Yet accul- turation's spatial dimension has been only tentatively inves- tigated in several urban ecological studies and in several analyses Of ethnic residential patterns (Jakle and Wheeler, 1969:441-60). Geographers, long interested in ethnic and racial minorities in the United States and Canada, have proceeded largely incognizant of the acculturation and assi- milation concepts. Some exceptional works are Bjorklund, (1964:227-41); Meinig (1965:191—220); Velikonja, (1965), and Doeppers (1967:505-22). The geographical literature largely treats ethnic and racial ghetto emergence, ethnic group pOpulation distribution, and distributional changes through time. Recent efforts have 24 focused on Chinese, Dutch, Finnish, French Canadian, German, Italian, Black and PuertO Rican minority groups (Ward, 1968: 343-59; Sas, 1958:185-94; Sas, 1956:181-88; Davis, 1935:382- 94 Cleef, 1952:253-66; Gerland, 1961:141-47; Jenson 1951:1- ‘0 41; Nelson, 1955:82-97; Hart, 1960:242-66; Morrill, 1965:339- 61; Rose 1964:221-38; 1969:3-6, 1971: 1-17; Darden 1973, 1976a, 1976b; Novak, 1956:182-86 and Clark, 1960:312- 44). The historians have crystalized several basic ap- proaches to American minority-group study (Gordon, 1964; 9 Handlin, 1957). The first is that of Anglo—conformity, long" _ 35 used to formulate public immigration policy. It assumes even- tual assimilation of all ethnic minorities by a white-Anglo- Saxon Protestant majority. The second is the American melting pot which eXplains the continent's distinctively "American Culture" (which, indeed, varies regionally in response to varying foreign cultural inputs) as a hybrid culture,different from,and perhaps greater than the sum of its individual parts. Much of the early literature pro- ceeded from this viewpoint.ZZFina11y,»the—cenceptmofhcul- tural pluralism recognizes the persistent survival of ethnic cultures despite lengthy acculturation periods (Glazer, 1963). Studies of Spatial MObility As a general introduction to the subject of Spatial mobility, the difference between the American white pOpulation and the other ethnic and racial groups is worth mentioning. In general, the white pOpulation has the freedom of choice to 25 live wherever they want within their socio-economic level, while the other racial and ethnic groups are restricted in their mobility. The following pages will discuss some of the most important research literature done in this field. The major study of residential mobility was made by Peter Rossi in the early 1950's (Rossi, 1955) Although first published in 1955, it is only in recent yeara,with the growing interest in the behavioral approach, that the work has received attention in the social science literature. The frequency with which the study is footnoted in papers on mobility is a summary measure Of the importance now attached to it. A primary aim of Rossi's research was to demonstrate the utility and rewards of the survey method for this sub- ject area. Rossi approached the study of the process of residential mobility from three standpoints: area mobility, household mobility and factors in the decision to move. Rather than focusing on past mobility, this study defined mobility in terms of desires and plans for moving. Mobility is interpreted as the mechanism by which housing is brought into adjustment with housing requirements (Rossi, 1955). MOrgan has strongly criticized Rossi's selection of evidence in support of the overwhelming importance of the life- cycle in influencing changes of residence. He points out that Rossi employed no tests of statistical significance and selected poor control variables in the construction of relevant contingency tables (Morgan, 1973:124-129). 26 Gerald Leslie and Arthur Richardson examine residen- tial mobility with a combination of life cycle and career pattern variables. Four variables emerged as sufficient to account for the .76 correlation of all eight variables to mobility intentions. These were, in descending order of importance, social mobility expectation, perceived class differences, attitude toward house and education. The pre- dictive equation based on these four variables proved to be highly accurate without the inclusion Of any life cycle variables (Leslie and Richardson, 1961:894-902). Alden Speare (1970) examined the effect of home ownership and life cycle stage on residential mobility. The results showed that there was little variation in mobi- lity rates by duration for homeowners while the mobility rates for renters declined with duration. Speare used the same data in another article (1974:173- 180), to develop a model Of residential mobility. In this study residential satisfaction acts as an intervening variable between individual and residence variables and mobility. His results indicate that residential satisfaction at the first interview is related to desire to move and to mobility in the year following the interview. Individual and reSidence characteristics such as age of head, duration of residence, homeownership, and room crowding are shown to affect mobility through their effect on residential satis- faction. Bach and Smith elaborated Speare's model and applied 27 it to intercounty migration. A survey in Durham, North Carolina and a unique mobility follow up over eight years were used to test the model. Results support Speare's general formulation (Bach and Smith, 1977:147-167). The influence of number and ages of children on resi- dential mobility was discussed by Larry Long (1972:321- 382). He found that married couples without children are more geographically mobile than those with children, at least through age 45. Among husband-wife couples with children, ages of children exercise a consistent mobility differential; when age of family head is controlled for; families with children under 6 years Old only are the most mobile both within and between counties. The relationship between num- ber of children and the probability Of moving within counties has a reverse J-shape for family heads at each age under 45; after age 45 the relationship assumes a more normal J-shape. Number of children is inversely related to the probability of migrating (moving between counties) for husband-wife in which the husband is under 35; after age 35 the relationship is erratic. The effect of ages Of children generally holds for each size Of family. Kenneth Land (1969:133-133-140) eXplained the relation- ship between duration Of residence and migration risk. His conclusion is that a negative nonlinear relationship is found between the probability of moving to duration status. Albert Chevan used residential and family histories to determine the effects Of marriage duration and child- 28 bearing on moving within the local area. (Chevan, 1971:451- 58; 1969:18-20). The findings from this study indicate a decline in rate Of moving as the duration of marriage increases. Higher rates of moving occur when children are born during a period, but this rate declines "from one period to the next, indi- cating that the birth Of a child in one period does not have the same effect as if it had occurred in a previous period." The effect of the birth of children in one period is influe enced by whether a move was made in the previous period. Chevan also finds a family life cycle effect on moving which is independent of the birth and growth of children. The housing adjustments of many childless couples tended to be concentrated in the early years of marriage with the decline in rate of moving as marriage progressed being more gradual than the decline of couples with children. In 1964, Butler et al. conducted exploratory research which evaluated a series of measuring instruments that were used in determining the association between residential mobility criteria and demographic and social psychological variables (Butler, 1964:39-54). His results showed that family type proved not to be an important differentiator of movers and non-movers, while the age of the head of house- hold distinguished movers from non-movers more frequently than other variables. The assumption that housing satisfaction would be negatively related to residential mobility was substantiated; 29 on the other hand social mobility and neighborhood percep- tion which were assumed to be positively related to resi- dential mobility were not substantiated. Moore preposed research strategies for intra-urban mobility which would give rise to a strong theoretical case (Moore, 1969:113-116; Brown and Moore, 1971:200-15; Moore, 1972). His major emphasis was on the actual decision to acquire a new residence, the search for a new dwelling, and the incorporation of the aggregate moves into a model whereby questions concerning neighborhood composition and change could be answered. Moore emphasized the role of friends, real estate brokers, land developers, and lending institutions in mobil- ity decisions. Values are also quite important in the decision to seek a new residence. They include site and situational attributes of the dwelling. Wolpert has referred to these as place utility (Wolpert, 1970:300-308). Dwelling conditions and living space are the major source of dissatisfaction with present residence. There is too little Space for a growing family or an older family with too much Space. I The general condition of the neighborhood has been found to be a major indicator of the desire to move. But housing costs, eXpressions of concern regarding stressful conditions and the impact of accessibility to work and ameni- ties appear to be weak determinants of residential mobility. 30 Moore concluded that non-whites have a greater desire to move than whites because they are more likely to reside in poor quality residences, to have large families, and to be recent arrivals in the urban area (Moore, 1972:45). In 1971 Wheeler discussed the social interaction of urban residents and the elements which facilitate or restrict these social communications or interactions. Mobility, in this instance, is a subsidiary factor. (Wheeler, April 1971: 200-203). In the same year he published "The Spatial Inter- action Of Blacks in MetrOpOlitan Areas" in which he dealte with the trip structure of blacks in a low-income ghetto in Lansing, Michigan. Mobility within the ghetto was found to be high whereas movement outside the area was found to be restricted with reSpect to residential choice, medical facilities, and workplace Opportunities. He deduced that increased mobility Options external to the ghetto would reduce crowding, a negative aspect of ghetto life (Wheeler, November 1971:101-12). Deskins looked at Black residential mobility in Detroit ever a 128 year period, 1837-1965. (Deskins, 1972). His Objective was to give insights concerning the effects of residential segregation on the mobility patterns of blacks and whites from.a historical perspective. His research revealed that the whites with higher level Skills had greater mobility than Blacks, and within the group, mobility was higher for those blacks and whites with greater incomes. Nevertheless, neighborhood inequality and social distance 31 between racial groups remained constant through time. A major conclusion was that "Negroes have been residentially restricted to specific areas within the city. (Deskins, ibid:169)." Rose, in a 1969 study, dealt with the residential separation and spatial clustering of racial and ethnic groups and particularly the urbanization and ghettoization of low income Afro-Americans. He surmised that blacks and whites are "conditioned to respond to a dissimilar fashion in their attempts to secure housing. (Rose, 1969:8)" Mobility behavior is linked to discrimination. Elsewhere he has noted that white and nonwhite moves within urban Space are quite similar to interregional movement in the nation as a whole. (Rose, l970:3). In each case the non- white moves are Of shorter distance whereas the whites have a greater prOpensity to engage in long distance moves. Data collected by Boyce in Seattle, Washington, for the years 1962-1967 were used to answer several questions concerning how and why peOple change residence. (Boyce, 1971:338-343). He found that in the inner city black areas, most movement was internal and movement out of this zone was shown to be highly restricted and funneled to nearby and newly forming Black areas. But most other low and middle class residential neighborhoods showed greater dispersion of movement. However, the dominant type of move in both instances was to higher valued housing. It was concluded that the urban Afro-Americans' residential mobility patterns 32 exhibited little similarity with those of the white pOpu- lation. Darden related this dissimilarity between white population and non-white population to past and present forces of racism and discrimination. Blacks have never had the total freedom to live in any area of the city. The influence of personal preference cannot be adequately measured because of the discriminating forces which Operate to segregate residential areas on the basis of race. Darden identifies six major discriminating forces: real estate brokers and salesmen, real estate organizations, white owners, financial institutions, newspapers and home builders (Darden, 1973:41-55). CHAPTER III MIDDLE EASTERN IMMIGRATION MOVEMENT During the last half Of the nineteenth century and the first thirty years Of the twentieth century, thousands of peOple from the Middle East, mainly from Syria and Lebanon, for the most part Christians, migrated to countries in Africa, the Americas, Europe, Western Asia and the Islands of the Pacific. Important colonies developed in all the larger cities and lesser groups settled in smaller towns. At pres- ent, there are few urban centers of any size in the Americas, East Africa, Australia, and New Zealand that do not contain peOple from the Middle East. This movement was in the nature_gfma diaSpora thatm“ _ __.-—w-"'—' ' “hwmfi—n "’ affected every town and village in Lebanon and to a lesser -—.._—-—I-I- degree Syria and Palestine. The exact number of immigrants is not known. Estimates vary widely; however, more Lebanese than Syrians or Palestinians migrated, and far more Christians than Muslims (Knowlton 1955:21 and Hourani l945:5). Factors which led them to break established ties and risk a new start in strange countries were complex and varied. Geographical conditions aggravated by increasing population and the struggle for existence prompted these peOple to croSs the Mediterranean and the Atlantic and look for a new land 33 34 in which to better their economic conditions. The wages of agricultural laborers were very low because of low product- ivity. The use of primitive methods of cultivation and irrigation, the irregularity of the rainfall, and the sudden fluctuations in price made farming unprofitable. SO the fellah (peasant/farmer) faced with ruin sold his land to the first bidder. Land problems were an important factor in <:i;> creating social evils. The_homelandwwaswin_the grip of the %. 7L feudal systemehich led the_peasants to seek security else: .47 whg£g_(___Tah1r 1952 52). (%7 During the late days Of the weak administration of ' the Ottoman Empire, the Arabs, both Christians and Muslims, were subjected to numerous restrictions and afterwards to W f fi' active measures Of persecution. During the 1860's a civil war took place between the Maronite and Druzes of Syria, which ended With a series of massacres between 1860 and 1861. When the dispute was settled, it brought about EurOpean intervention to the area. The American missionaries divided MM— the Maronite territory into sections. A missionary was in ”— "u- -.—--.._-_.o .._.-.._._ charge of each section and visited all its inhabitants weekIy or monthly to distribute relief. Within a few months, the missionaries were in close contact with almost every Christian village, which develOped a very favorable Opinion toward the American peOple among the Christians of Syria and Lebanon. Shortly after the civil war was ended, the Christian element began a series of migrations that carried thousands of their 1 numbers out of Syria and Lebanon. In comparison, few Muslims emigrated. 35 (Egg) Another political cause of emigration was the exist- ”X ence of compulsory military service. Because of the many successive wars in which Turkey engaged, military service was very burdensome, and many young men sought to escape from it by emigrating. (1;) The encouragement of the earlier migrants impressed vé§9 the relatives and friends in the homeland. Before long, money was being sent for investment, buying new land or build- ing conSpicuous red-roofed houses, each one serving as an advertisement to the merits of living in America. (Hitti 1924:36-35) . g The activities of ticket agents and money lenders were “\K very important in promoting emigration. Ticket agents passed through the villages holding meetings in which they told of the glowing Opportunities in foreign countries, the easy technique of money-making by peddling, and almost every- thing that the prospective emigrant needed to know (Gordon 1930:153-166). Money lenders were willing to lend money to emigrants (; at exhorbitant rates of interest secured by mortgages on MU”- emigrants' properties. They often sold tickets for the steamship companies and made large profits from the migra- tion movement. A good example of how 'migrants were secured is related by the following missionary report. ...The emigrant business has been very profitable one. A native, usually one that has been to America visits a village, holds meetings, tells of the wonderful way to make money, where to go, what to do--in fact everything necessary to an 36 emigrant to know. It is a poor day when he does not obtain a number of deposits for steamer tickets. This man is one of a long chain whose links are located all the way from Syria to North and South American seaports. From time to time, this chain of workers will send and receive warn- ings to avoid or to go this or that place. Word will come to avoid New York if diseased; then go to Mexico and then go north, etc. No doubt this is an ingenious plan for making favorable com- missions from steamship companies (Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. 1907:431-432). The First Wave of Immigrants to the United States 1860-1917 Most historians agree that the year 1860 was the begin- ning of the Arab migration, especially of the Christian- Syrians, to the United States and other parts of the world. At first it was confined to just a few villages but spread until by 1880 most of the villages were involved. By 1890 the emigration movement had grown into a flood. Although emigration statistics are not available, missionary reports provide a few interesting impressions of the movement. The fifty-second Annual Report of the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the United States for the year 1889 states one of the moving forces of the year in Mt. Lebanon has been the spirit of emigration. It is estimated that 25,000 Syrians have left Mt. Lebanon within two or three years for North and South America (The Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church 1889:72-73). The following quotations from the reports for 1891 and 1892 illustrate the force of the emigration fever in these years. 37 ...immigration like a mighty .leven is stirring every village and hamlet in our field. The peOple are all in motion, and no one seems willing to remain who can by hook or crook get money enough to carry him over the seas. The modern Syrians bid fair to rival their ancient ancestors the Phoenicians...There are men, boys, women, and children from Zahleh in every large city of the New World, in Australia, and in the islands of the sea. The stories of their experiences will make a strange chapter in the history of modern Syria. They have crossed the United States from east to west, and from.north to south, they have journeyed by land from Rio de Janeiro to Montreal and Quebec, they have traversed the Pacific Ocean from island to island in small boats, and not a few have circled the world, and have come home by way of Jerusalem. The letters they send, the stories they tell, and the money they bring, are adding momentum to the movement. “he Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. 1892:250-252). Beginning with 1897 the official data of the immi- gration department of the United States began to differenti- ate between Syrians and other Turkish subjects. Statistics of the immigration department show that most Syrian immi- _grants were of Christian faith. The main factors of their immigration were adverse religious, political, and economic conditions (AL-Tahir, 1952:27). The biggest flow of Syrian immigrants was during the years preceding the first world war, especially the years 1913, 1914. The highest numbers in these years were due to the fact that many immigrants fled the compulsory military service at that time. Most of the immigrants (Christians and Muslims) were farmers and laborers, usually representing the lower strata of society, but we find that among Christians there were men from the professions and skilled and unskilled occupations. In both groups the first immigrants were in 38 the prime of youth and capable of work of any kind requiring manual force and strength. According to the reports of the United States Commis- sioner-General of Immigration and Records of the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization, there were 97,747 people of Christian faith only--65,620 males and 32,127 females--who were admitted to the United States between 1897 and 1918 (Table 3.1). Over 6,220 of these peOple had been in this country before (AL-Tahir 1952:24,37). The Second Wave, 1918 to 1945 The second wave of immigration began at the end of World War I and extended to WOrld War II. It had its own social, economic and political characteristics. After 1918 Palestine was occupied by British trOOps and Syria1 by French mm _- .mm‘em _.——-—-—-——-——"" _,,__...—-—-—_-.e trOOps. Those two countries were the main source for immi- .gration in this period. There had been years of drought and a very destructive plague of locusts. The farmers, who con- stituted the bulk of the immigrants had naturally suffered from the effects of the war; the result being that they had been forced into debt and the money lenders had been busy. Unemployment was common. There was fear of more war and fear of destruction of the farms. In addition to all these factors, a shortage of labor in the United States accentu- ated the situation and1motivated the Arabs to migrate to America. Most of the immigrants of this group came to join 1Syria at this time includes what is called Syrian Republic and The Republic of Lebanon. ____.....-—..—— - - 39 Table 3.1 Syrian Emigrants Admitted to the U.S. From 1897 to 1932 Sex Year Male Female Total 1897 3203 1529 4732 1898 2651 1624 4275 1899 2446 1262 3708 1900 1813 1107 2920 1901 2729 1335 4064 1902 3337 1645 4982 1903 3749 1802 5551 1904 2480 1173 3653 1905 3248 1574 4822 1906 3927 1897 5824 1907 4276 1604 5880 1908 3926 1594 5520 1909 2383 1295 3678 1910 4148 2169 6317 1911 3609 1825 5434 1912 2646 1879 4525 1913 6177 3033 9210 1914 6391 2632 9023 1915 1174 593 1767 1916 474 202 676 1917 690 286 976 H7 7L,7 1918 143 67 210 4” ' 1919 157 74 23 4. 1920 -- -- -- 1921 2783 2322 5105 1922 685 649 1334 1923 606 601 1207 1924 801 794 1595 1925 205 245 450 1926 184 304 488 1927‘ 302 382 684 1928 226 387 613 1929 245 387 632 1930 249 388 637 1931 103 241 394 1932 114 170 284 \ (5‘5 '5 Total 72280 39082 111362 «—¢£;" '*“" IaJ Source: Annual reports of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S. Department of Justice. 40 their relatives and friends. Many had their passage paid by relatives (AL-Tahir, 1952:37-38). The figures of the U.S. Immigration reports give an idea about the volume of immigration to the United States from Syria (Table 3.1). These figures show that the years following the first world war witnessed an increase in the immigration volume on a level quite similar to that which was before the war. This volume had decreased after 1925 to a minimum level. The reason for this decline is that the majority of the Syrian immigrants began to migrate to South and Central America. The French authorities in Syria made a sincere attempt to protect the interests of the emigrants, and to help main- tain good relations with their families and relatives in the homeland. Accordingly, the French government established six consulates in America and Egypt, where Syrian colonies were particularly important, i.e., in Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Santo, Mexico, New York, and Cairo. The statistics on the total number of Syrian immigrants to the U.S. are not available after 1932. Syrian immigrants were tabulated under the heading: immigrants from French UL —-——____‘ colonies, in the reports of immigration and naturalization M department. h... m- ,__. , _.__.—.———- Literature on Syrian immigration in this period shows that during the depression there was a surprising decline in the immigration to the United States. This period witnessed l \ 41 the return of thousands of immigrants from the United States. This might explain the increased number of immigrants to South and Central America (AL-Tahir, 1952:37-46). --' 1‘ N\\\~ The_great damage to private and public property as a \ i- 3. result of the disturbances and strikes in Palestine in 1936 marked the beginning of a flow of immigrants from Palestine, which extended until now. The structure of the Palestinian immigrants was characterized by single men and men whose families are in the homeland. The uneasy life in Palestine since the late thirties and especially during the second world war obliged the early immigrants to send for their families and relatives. This modified the age distribution of the Palestinian immigrants, because it brought new immi- grants Of youth and vigor who could help their relatives in their stores or carry the suitcases for their peddler-fathers (Al-Tahir, 1952:52). This period witnessed also the early immigration from Arab countries other than Lebanon, Palestine and Syria. Some Christians came from Iraq. Other Muslims came from the British Crown Colony of Aden--since 1967, the PeOple's Democratic Republic of Yemen. The primary reason for their immigration was the extreme poverty of the land. The immigrants of this period used the same occupa- tional ladders of the first wave. They were peddlers, fac- tory workers and small business owners, (bars, restaurants, and grocery shOps). 42 The Recent Arab Immigration to the U.S. 1945 - 1976 Since World.War II, the Arab countries have undergone rs which acted as push factors for emigration from several wa the Arab countries to other parts of the world including the United States. A word about these wars and their effects on emigration is worth mentioning. 1. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War forced hundreds of thou- sands of Palestinian peOple who lost their land to migrate. The Suez Canal War of 1956 encouraged the emi- Agration from Egypt and Gaza Strip. 1967 Second Arab-Israeli War and the occupation of West Bank of Jordan and parts of Syria and Egypt resulted in the displacement of thousands of peOple who found emigration as one channel of relief. The Civil War of 1970 in Jordan between the Jordanian Army and the Palestinian guerrillas participated as a push factor for many Palestinian and Jordanian citizens to leave the country. The 1973 third Arab-Israeli war has caused further pressure which resulted in further migration. and finally the recent civil war in Lebanon has brought great grief and anxiety which obliged peOple to seek safety elsewhere. 43 The above wars and troubles did not show a dramatic increase in the volume of immigration to the United States. The reason is that the doors of emigration are Open to other rich Arab countries, which need the expertise of those immi- grants such as Saudi Arabia, Libyia, Kuwait and United Arab Emirates. On the other hand, the laws of immigration to the United States closed the doors in the face of any mess migration to this country. The following points are reflected in Table (3.2) which shows the volume of immigration to the United States during the last 25 years: 1. Lebanon and Jordan,1 the first sources of Arab immigration to the United States since the last century are still important in sending immigrants to the United States. Most of the newcomers join their relatives who are living here. Immigration from these two countries increased in the last ten years as a result of Middle East crises. 2. Although Iraqi immigrants came to the United States since the early twenties their volume was not big enough to appear in the U.S. Statistics of Immi- gration until the late fifties, when they show a continuous increase over time. 1Until 1948 Palestine was the second Arab state in volume of immigration to the U.S. Afterwards Palestine was divided into three parts: The State of Israel, the West Bank which joined Jordan and Gaza Strip which was given to Egypt. Most of the Palestinian emigration was from the area of West Bank which joined Jordan. So we find Jordan became an impor- tant source for immigration to the U.S. of Origin for the Years 1953 to 1974 44 Table 3.2 Number of Immigrants to the U.S. by Country Country of Origin Year Total 35rdan Lebanon Iraq Egypt Syria Others 1953 1,026 304 261 125 168 -- 168 1954 1,528 364 324 162 264 -- 414 1955 1,500 411 276 159 214 -- 440 1956 2,126 819 390 163 272 -- 482 1957 2,486 994 411 180 332 -- 569 1958 2,169 528 366 215 498 -- 562 1959 3,076 608 433 238 1,177 -- 620 1960 3,030 536 511 304 1,061 -- 618 1961 2,572 558 498 256 643 -- 517 1962 2,432 771 406 314 384 -- 557 1963 3,224 752 448 426 760 226 612 11964..m§;l§§_ 627 410 331 828 244 643 1965 3,581 702 430 279 1,429 255 486 1966 4,480 1,325 535 657 1,181 333 449 1967 6,142 1,604 752 1,071 1,703 555 457 1968 6,642 2,010 892 530 2,124 644 442 1969 10,042 2,617 1,313 1,208 3,411 904 589 1970 12,385 2,842 1,903 1,202 4,937 1,026 475 1971 10,680 2,588 1,876 1,231 3,643 951 391 1972 9,755 2,756 1,984 1,491 2,512 1,012 -- 1973 8,868 2,450 1,977 1,039 2,274 1,128 -- 1974 10,432 2,838 2,400 2,281 1,831 1,082 -- Total 111,309 29,104 18,796 13,912 31,696 8,360 9,491 Source: Annual reports of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S. Department of Justice. 45 3. Immigration from Syrian Arab Republic was not important before the late 1960's. Political instability is a major factor in the emigration movement from this country. 4. Egypt Opened the door freely for emigration to the United States after the 1967 war. The number of emigrants in this period exceeded the number of emigrants of any other Arab country. The government of Egypt soon discovered that nearly all the emigrants were of high professions. This led to the tightening of the flow of emigration. The Egyptian emigration to the United States reached a peak in 1971, then began to decrease gradually since then. 5. The other Arab countries constitute Yemen and countries of North Africa, especially Morocco. 6. There was no emigration to the United States from the oil countries of the Arab world. Most of the migrants are from countries which lack the eco- nomic expansion or suffer from pOpulation growth. Two main sources feed the stream of emigration from the Arab countries: the kins of the Arab-American citizens 9\ MM ”Wm“..- ...w. in the homeland and the outflow of highly skilled personnel, . such as physicians, engineers and social and natural scientists. $3.9“..gc/QH¥\7 we (1.8441414... \e ,3,“ (\C‘ €1’)~\)\(‘A ‘(‘\\L‘IO.A, v 1 ’V\ L 51(‘14'.W‘) gawk (\0‘ V j a (V'\vu V‘ ‘ " \Dk” M1 46 Kinship ties and their effect on immigration to the United States will be discussed in more detail in Chapter V. Concentrating on professional migration Or as it is called, the brain drain, we find that it ranges between 15 and 35 percent of the total migration stream.from the Arab world. It consists of professional, technical and kindred workers, such as scientists, engineers and medical personnel. Thus the Arab brain drain involves the migration of the highest levels of skills. As shown in Table (3.3) the migration of talent from the Arab countries is not sporadic, but rather a new dimen- sion in the life of the Arab elite. There has been a con- tinuous movement over the past decade at a rate between 12 and 26 percent and an average of 17 percent of the total immigrants to the United States. The factors that stand behind the Arab brain drain are the same causes of Arab MLQEQELQB in general. The eco- ngmic factgrfiiswthe_mainwgag§g_for this type of emigration. Brains like all production inputs, reSpond to the price w. mechanism and flow whereyfingwgéflmégmgggytg the relative1y M’~wwww"w*m~w—ep- ...uy... “ iflflvfl' most productive use. Salaries are low in the Arab states and high in the United States and so there is a brain drain from the former to the latter. The second group of causes for the brain drain emerges not only in the form of political instability and wars in the Arab countries but also because of the reactionary social structures which act as push factors contributing to the 47 Table 3.3 Number of Professional Immigrants by Country of Origin for the Years 1961 to 1974 % of Total total Country of Origin Year No. immig. JOrdanfiLebanon Iraq Egypt isyria Other 1961 369 14 85 76 52 119 -- 37 1962 371 15 91 72 65 97 -- 46 1963 503 16 87 89 76 151 56 44 1964 528 17 89 91 103 142 45 58 1965 500 ll 70 71 79 171 56 53 1966 660 15 124 91 105 226 58 56 1967 1,023 17 175 133 180 394 76 45 1968 1,177 18 181 123 131 599 89 54 1969 2,133 21 222 156 187 1,365 148 57 1970 3,252 26 254 225 226 2,301 177 69 1971 2,293 22 249 229 239 1,355 163 58 1972 1,776 18 300 232 228 847 169 -- 1973 1,356 15 259 189 140 585 183 -- 1974 1,272 12 221 231 187 467 163 -- Total 17,210 17 2,405 2,008 1,998 8,819 1,403 577 Source: Annual reports of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, U. S. Department of Justice. emigration of skilled persons to societies whose political, social and cultural structures are more satisfactory (Adiseshiah, 1972:31-51) Immigration Movement to Dearborn The first Arab Muslbm immigrants to Dearborn were about 10 peOple who came to the United States before 1914. They were living in Michigan City, Indiana, and working at a plant called Huskel Railroad Company (Wasfi 1964:80). In 1914, most of these pioneers and many other newcomers came 48 to Detroit to work at the Ford Highland Park Plant. Their number increased gradually. Most of the newcomers were either kin of the pioneers or from the same village. They were Syrians of Lebanese origin. Those pioneers came first to make some money and to return to the old land afterwards. They did not intend to live permanently in the United States. According to the Older peOple of the community the majority of the pioneers who came before the first WOrld War returned to the old land after saving some money. Most of those pioneers worked at the Highland Ford plant. They constituted a small community at Highland Park. They were either single or married but with wives in the homeland. The reasons for their immigration to the United States were mainly the bad economic situation in the homeland and the lure for a better life in the United States which stirred the imagination of the Muslim villagers as it did to their Christian neighbors twenty years earlier. Following the general trend of Arab emigration, the years preceding the First_World.fl§r witnessed an increase MW 1‘“ ww-mtwwm‘r‘" —, Mat-a— “VWb-fl'rmmw )- uw-W W N in the Arab Muslim immigrants. The most important factor was v—Fm "-I‘II‘ -—. . the desire to avoidmconscriptioniintp.théiQEEgman Army: a . -.sma “A... c- r}:- ‘w ecu-...a«v fate at best was uncertain. Five out of seven peOple in our sample stated the previous reason as the important immediate factor in their decision to emigrate. Because young men were usually drafted at about the age of 18, most of the immigrants in this period left home in their early teens. This conclusion supports the finding of Wasfi on the early immigration of this 49 community (Wasfi 1964:78) and Swanson's study of Muslim Spruce River (Swanson l970:6). When the First WOrld War was over, the peOple of the devastated countries of the Middle East waited to see what the future might bring. When they found out that independ- ence was to be denied them, they began to migrate again in large numbers. Many immigrants who were living temporarily in the United States returned to investigate the social and political situation. Not liking what they saw of French and English rule, they returned to the United States accompanied by their families and kins. Their reports on the situation of the homeland led the majority of their fellow countrymen not to return to Syria and Lebanon. Another flow of Arab-Muslim immigrants came to Dearborn in the period between 1918 and 1922. Those immigrants, in addition to the original pioneers, constituted the nucleus of the actual Dearborn Arab-Muslim.commun1ty which began _W- - ..-—..-. H'vr‘ settling in the area since 1916. M “Hm. The Ford Rouge plant was the prime reason for this Hfiwflr yr»-.. h” .7 settlement. Many of the Highland Park pioneers moved to the South End of Dearborn to work in the new plant. They sent N ...rrv' letters to their relatives, fr1ends, V111age-fellows, per- ...cw—v ""‘“" ..p. suading them to m1grate to Dearborn where they could work and save money. 7 During the early thirties the City of Dearborn was faced with the problem of a severe economic depression. The automobile industry was hit early and hard. Many family 50 heads Of the Arab-Muslims lost their jobs and the salaries of those who still work had to be cut. Some people left Dearborn for other areas of the United States and some others either sent their families or accompanied them to the homeland. Conditions gradually improved after 1933. Dearborn's growth in industry and business continued and accelerated. This brought about a new flow of Arab-Muslim immigrants to the city. Immigrants who returned home, came again with new relatives and friends. Children of the pioneers that had reached the age of marriage were sent or accompanied by their fathers to the old land to get married and to return with their spouses. The relationship of the Dearborn com- munity and the home land has been strengthened since this flow. World War II brought thousands of immigrants to Dearborn from all parts of the world. The Arab-Muslims were not an exception. In fact, most ofwthem§£3b3Muslim immigrantstoDearborn came1after World War II. Eighty:nine percentof the1ArabjMuslim immigrants came to the United States in the periodbetween 1948 and 1977. Only 11 percent immigrated before 1948. (Table 3.4). The big flow of the Arab Muslim immigrants which ._m __.. 1.“, followed the second World War was mainly from Lenanon. These ‘__.._. r k immigrants were either relatives or friends of the already existing Lebanese community in Dearborn. In fact, most of them were from two or three villages in South Lebanon. 51 Table 3.4 Date of Entry to the United States Total National Subgroups Emigration Data Percent % Leban. ’§_Palest. % Yemen Before 1918 3 7 0 0 1918-1948 8 8 3 2 1949-1959 14 24 10 10 1960-1969 26 12 39 36 1970-1977 49 49 48 52 Total 100 (183) 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) While the majority Of the immigrants to Dearborn was of Lebanese origin, the late forties witnessed another Arab- N-w— _vo..,,_‘ Muslim group: the Palestinians and the Yemenis. The Palestinians began to migrate to the United States in the twenties, but they represent a relatively new group in Dear- born. They came in waves after the three Arab-Israeli wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973. gee...1y'£5...“i.‘.”..."iafi.x ’ from occupied territories of the West Bank of Jordan "in what appears to be an agreement to reduce the pOpulation in that area by the government of Israel and the United States (Aswad l974:63)." The Palestinians consisted of family Wst-a' groups and single men. The major part of the sample from the Palestinian group marked the political reason as the prime cause of their immigration. Although the Yemeni pOpulation has a few members who have been in the Detroit region some 40 years, the majority of the group has migrated in the last fifteen years or so. There are few Yemeni families in Dearborn. The majority of 52 them.are single men and men whose families remain in Yemen. In general the profile of the Arab-Muslim immigrant to Dearborn whether he is Yemeni, Palestinian or Lebanese bears many similarities and some important differences to that of the Arab immigrant. He is undereducated, even slightly more so than the typical Arab immigrant and also underskilled. He has the tradition of working in heavy industry. His limited past experience and present associ- ations with the United States have been mostly with the automobile industry. Summary During the last half of the nineteenth century and the first thirty years of the twentieth century, thousands of peOple from the Middle East migrated to countries in Africa, the Americas, western Asia and the Islands of the Pacific. Factors which led them to migrate were complex and varied. Geographical conditions aggravated by increasing pOpulation and the struggle for existence prompted these people to look for a new land in which to better their economic conditions. The exact number of .migrants is not known. Estimates vary widely; however, more Lebanese than Syrians or Palestinians migrated, and far more Christians than Muslims. Emigration to the United States began around 1860. Most of the emigrants were Christians from the rural areas of Lebanon and Syria. At the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century Muslims discovered America. They followed their Christian neighbors to the 53 United States. Most of the immigrants during this period were from Lebanon, Syria and Palestine. After World War II, some other Arab countries such as Iraq, Egypt and Yemen beside Lebanon, Syria and Palestine began to send emigrants to the United States. The main sources which fed the stream of emigration from the Arab countries are the kin of the Arab-American citizens in the homeland and the outflow of the highly skilled personnel. Dearborn Arab-Muslim immigrants began to live perman- us-w. 1ent1y in the study area in the early twenties. The reasons for their emigration were the bad economic situation in the w- .. .,,. «or- ‘W Own‘fi- ixv-M... 1., homeland and the lure of a better life in the United States. -...~.. NW , The Ford Rouge Plant was the prime reason for their settle- ment in the are;:n While the majority of the early immigrants were of Lebanese origin, the early fifties witnessed the arrival of two Arab-Muslim immigrant groups: The Palestinians and the Yemenis. All these immigrant groups sought employment in Ford Motor Company and Other 1ndustr1a1 companies in the Detroit Metropolitan area. CHAPTER IV PATTERNS OF RESIDENTIAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE ARAB MUSLIM COMMUNITY The pattern of Arab Muslim residence varies through time because of the changing rate of pOpulation increase. Innumerable distributional patterns, ranging from widely dis- persed to highly segregated patterns might be postulated. The phases of the Arab.Muslim.community growth as re- vealed in changing residential patterns are examined at three periods in time, 1926-1945, 1946-1967, 1968-1976. Choice of these periods rests on distinct differences affecting residen- tial changes. The assumption is made that the process of invading the area reveals a sequence of stages which manifests varying prOportions of Arab Muslims. Use of prOportions as an index simplifies the develOpment of defined stages of succession (Meyer 1970:125). Since invasion-succession is a dynamic process changing through time, a series of maps are required to adequately examine and delineate patterns of ethnic resi- dential change in the area. The above assumptions follow from a model devised by Duncan and Duncan to describe the expansion of the Black com- munity in Chicago (Duncan and Duncan, 1957). This model is also used by Meyer and Rice to describe the changing Black 54 55 residential patterns in Lansing and Grand Rapids, (Meyer 1970; Rice 1962). Assume that during the period before the Negro population began to increase rapidly as a prOportion of the total pOpulation of the city there was a 'core' settlement of Negroes, i.e., an area of predominantly, though not exclusively, Negro residences. With the beginning of large-scale Negro in-migration, migrants began to take the places of whites remaining in the 'Core,‘ and the 'consolidation' of the 'core' became so great that some of the residents were compelled to find residences elsewhere. Their movement out of the 'core' amounted to an 'invasion' of other areas. With the continuing pressure of Negro pOpulation, invasion areas would become consolidation areas, and new invasion areas would appear. The areal expansion, however, would not take place rapidly enough to prevent a rising density of pOpulation in older areas of Negro residence. Finally, assume that in-migrants would continue throughout this period to make the old 'core' their 'port of entry' and that the invasion of new areas and the early phases of their consolidation would be accomplished by older residents of the city. The latter, having lived in Chicago for longer time, would be more 'assimilated' than the recent arrivals and would have risen to higher levels of socioeconomic status. (Duncan and Duncan 1957:252-253). The above model was followed to show the replacement of the Italian, Polish and Irish immigrants by the Arab Muslim immigrants in the South End area and to portray the Arab Muslim encroachment to other parts of Dearborn and Detroit. It should be noted at this point that invasion-succes- sion will be considered as one process by which one group of pOpulation in an area is replaced by another group. To empha- size the point the term "invasion-succession" will be used rather than the single term of succession. This is not to S6 assert that the two processes never occur apart from one another, for invasion may occur without ever proceeding to a completion of the succession process. Invasion in this thesis will be considered the initial phase of thqueneric process which will be referred to as the invasion-succession process. As mentioned above, the invasion-succession process involved the element of time which shows that, once blocks or areas are invaded say by Arab Muslims, they tend to con- tinue along the process of succession to the final stage. Then it may be assumed that blocks showing a low prOportion of Arab Muslims at any single point of time are in the early stages of this process. Likewise blocks showing a high pro— portion of Arab Muslims at a single point in time suggest that succession is near the final stage. This model assumes that the Arab Muslim community grew from an early settled core area. With the beginning of immigra- tion of Arab Muslims, immigrants settled in this core area causing pressure for some Arab Muslim residents to find residence elsewhere. Their movement out of the core area involved invasion of the surrounding areas. As the Arab Muslim immigration continued, these areas of invasion would become consolidated and be taken in as part of the original core area. Again on this basis, core areas at any period of time would be those blocks with the highest prOportion of Arab Muslim residents. Areas of invasion would be those blocks farthest from the core area with the lowest prOportion 57 of Arab Muslim residents. Between these two extremes would fall many variations of prOportions of Arab Muslims, each revealing a certain stage of the process depending upon the proportion of the Arab Muslims in residence. Although it remains difficult to specify stages of succession, the need for devising some terms is necessary for the discussion of the succession pattern. Such a procedure is highly arbitrary but the following are the terms to be employed in categor- izing stages of succession for the Arab Muslim community. 1. invasion represents the initial entry of the Arab Muslims into an all non Arab Muslim occupied block. A block in the invasion stage has 0.1 to 9.9 percent of its pOpulation of Arab Muslim origin. 2. infiltration occurs with the movement into the block of significant numbers of Arab Muslims. The percentage is usually between 10 and 49.9 percent Arab Muslims, with less than 25 percent marking the initial stage of infiltra- tion, and 25 percent and over marking the advanced stage. 3. consolidation marks sustained growth in number and prOportion of Arab Muslim residences in a block while almost proceeding to complete occupancy by Arab Muslims. The consolidation stage occurs when 50 to 75 percent of pOpulation residing in a block are of Arab Muslim origin. 4. concentration with continuing influx in numbers and increasing of prOportion of Arab Muslims in a block, the stage of concentration is attained. The percentage of the Arab Muslim population in this stage is between 75 and 100 58 percent of all pOpulation. The first two stages-~invasion and infiltration--mark the dispersed pattern of residential distribution for the Arab-Muslim community. The other two stages--consolidation and concentration--mark the segregated pattern. The cutoff point is 50 percent of the total pOpulation in an area of an Arab-Muslim origin. In other words, less than 50 percent marks the dispersed pattern and over 50 percent marks the segregated pattern. There are perhaps more factors to con— sider than merely the proportion of Arab Muslims in a block; however, the general process of invasion-succession is removed from the abstract to the concrete by the use of such a scheme. In this study the description and analysis of residen— tial distribution and residential change is shown through a series of maps, showing the prOportion of Arab Muslims by blocks for 1930, 1940, 1950-1951, 1960, 1970, 1976. In con- structing these maps, blocks of 1970 census were used as the base for the South End area and census tracts were used for the other two areas. Names of households with Arab-Muslim sur- names were taken from Dearborn and Detroit city directories for the above years. The approximate percentage of Arab-Muslim households in each block for the South End and each census tract of East Dearborn and southwest Detroit was calculated. Then the blocks and census tracts were classified into five intervals in terms of their prOportion of households with Arab-Muslim surnames. These intervals coincide with the above four stages of the invasion-succession process. 59 The intervals remained constant in all maps and ranged from blocks with no Arab Muslims to blocks with 75 percent or more Arab Muslim pOpulation. The classification of blocks serves to show whether significant differences develop between areas in different stages of succession. The assumptions are that the process of invasion-succession passes through all stages, may st0p or be interrupted at any time, exhibits no sharp lines of demarcation between stages,and does not reverse itself after entrance into the infiltration stage (Meyer 1970:127-128). The hypothesis to be tested is that the residential distri- bution of the Arab Muslim community has several patterns, ranging from widely dispersed to highly segregated patterns in the Dearborn-Detroit area. Initial Arab Muslim Residential Pattern: 1920-1945 As mentioned in the previous chapter, the establish- ment of the Ford Highland Park Plant and the universal announcement of the "five-dollar" day in 1914, were important factors in increasing the number of Arab Muslim immigrants to Detroit area. Most of the Arab Muslim pioneers and many other newsomers came to work at the Ford Highland Park Plant. In 1916 the Ford Rouge Plant at the South end of Dearborn1 began to need workers of any type. Many of the Highland Park 1Before 1928 this part of the city of Dearborn was called Fordson City. 60 workers moved to the South End of Dearborn to work in that new factory. Although the Arab Muslims remained highly mobile because the majority of them is either single or married, with wives in the homeland, they established perma- nent residences in the area. By 1926 there were 12 Arab residences in Dearborn, both Muslims and non-Muslims. Seven of them were located on Wyoming and Salina Streets south of Dix Avenue. By 1930 there were 28 households identified with Arab surnames in the area. Representing over a decade of Arab Muslim occupancy, the map of 1930 (Figure 4.1), indi- cates a clustering of Arab Muslim residences in the South End area south of Dix Avenue, in a 2-3 household nuclei along Wyoming, Salina, Ferney and Canterbury Streets. The majority of them had the same family name--Berri and Chami-- reflecting kinship relations and village solidarity of the homeland. While no heavy concentration of Arab Muslim resi- dences develOped in Dearborn, neither did the Arab Muslim find himself restricted to any particular section of the city. The Arab Muslims generally lived in 2-3 household clusters in ethnically mixed blocks adjacent to their place of work at Rouge Plant. Between 1930 and 1940, Dearborn's Arab Muslim pOpula- tion grew from 28 to 65 households. With this growth a per- manent Arab Muslim.commmnity finally evolved. The map of 1940 (Figure 4.2)ShOWS also the clustering of Arab Muslim resi- dences along Salina, Wyoming and Canterbury in the area south of Dix Avenue only. 61 HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF * ARAB - MUSLIM. COMMUNITY |930 C“ \ Hui “’0 ,, <3 I g ’ ( ‘ ° 3 x 9.1 .. 9 5‘ fl“; ‘3 0‘" e ’06 (O \ 7 a it ,,1 A“; % Q, ( \r’ 0‘“ \ a. "o 8. ATION \\ 9% ‘, MEMORIAL \ It" a ~ ARK “0“ v 9‘ ‘3‘ \ 'r" o WOODMERE FORD MOTOR fir” \ COMPANY o CEMETERY\ - 15¢? ’ \ a a a 6‘ 6‘ \ SOUTH END, . O D*EARBORN BY CENSUS BLOCKS K" . I, \ 25 c“ \ uni *‘fio ’1’ O. (‘\ 90“ 2’» 13,, “{fl E‘OV $06 ‘9 (o \ 7 ‘2. ,. 95'“ ’5 9t V’ V. % \ A ’o a mum \\ 4‘1. 7; (v, _r \ 6;"; E, MEMORIAL \ 1. 1. ‘1 ° 9. 3 PARK ““0“ v o \ Or” WOODMEQE FORD MOTOR 3 CEMETER;\ COMPANY V $ 9 SOUTH END, ) DEARBORN .. *ev CENSUS BLOCKS LEGEND ( 0.| - 9.9 ‘70 EACH DOT REPRESENTS) ONE HOUSEHOLD I0.0 - 24.9 °/o 62 In the late thirties the.Arab-Muslim community was strong enough to establish two associations, a sunni reli- gious association called Manarat el-Hoda and a shiat associ- ation called the Hashimite Renaissance. A social club and a mosque were established in 1936 and in 1938 on Dix and Vernor Streets. The club, as well as the Islamic mosque, had a combination of religious, educational and social functions (Wasfi, 1964:85-86). Fortunately for the Arab Muslim immigrants, the South End area was undergoing a building boom during the late thir- ties. As a result, available housing for rent or purchase helped concentrate the new immigrants in the blocks in which Arab Muslims were already living. Although the pro- portion of the Arab Muslims in a block increased, the blocks remained integrated. Most likely some doubling up of Muslim immigrants occurmfl.until a permanent residence was located. The area acted as a port of entry for the newcomers to Dearborn. The choice of housing location for the newcomers was influenced by several factors: (1) a desire to live among their friends, relatives and members of their ethnic group, (2) nearness to place of work, (3) limited income due to occupational status, and (4) ethnic and racial prejudice which might be faced with outside this area. As a summary of the evolving residential pattern of the Arab Muslim community before the second WOrld War, the early settlement showed an invasion stage to the area south 63 of Dix Avenue, which acted as a core area and a port of entry for the Arab Muslim immigrants for the next decades. However, all the invaded blocks had less than 10 percent of its pOpu- lation of Arab Muslim origin. Crystallization of Arab Muslim Residential Patterns: 1945-1967 During the next three decades, the Arab Muslim pOpula- tion grew rapidly, both in absolute and relative terms. As in earlier periods of immigration to Dearborn, the newcomers sought a port of entry in the existing core settlement of the Arab Muslims. Either one or two things could happen: (1) the area could absorb more occupants--increased Spatial concentration--or (2) neighborhoodSOpen to Arab Muslims could expand spatially and gain new territories. The general trend of the Arab Muslim distribution after the second World War showed an intensification of residential segregation as well as a dispersed residential pattern through- out Dearborn. A comparison of Figures 4.3 and 4.4 indicates that the dominant trend focused upon the Arab core area, which experienced a growing spatial concentration while expanding territorially at the same time. The map of 1950-51 (Figure 4.3) shows a somewhat dense concentration of the Arab residences in the core area south of Dix Avenue. Nearly all the blocks in this area have more than 10 percent of its population from the Arab Muslim immigrants. This area entered in a new stage of the invasion-succession process, that is the infiltration stage. The northeast blocks on SOUTHFIELD 64 HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF ARAB - MUSLIM COMMUNITY,I950°5(' WARREN DEARBORN-DETROH' BY CENSUS TRACTS - ‘ LEGEND .’C a 'o ”A 9'“ 15% ‘ (\ , . s. 1*. myp~ \ . O.I - 9.9% 35‘ q, a MEMORIAL \ (EACH DOT REPRESENTS) ’s a ' ONE HOUSEHOLD ‘1‘. 0 g. 3 PARK In“ 0 . -, I0.0 - 24.9 % O wOODMERE FO D M T R ‘ ‘ o a o o WNW, 25.0 49.9 /. COMPANY ' ‘ SOUTH END, 22f ) DEARBORN *av CENSUS BLOCKS ’ ,. 65 HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF ARAB- MUSLIM COMMUNITY, I960* SOUTHFIELD TIREILN . O . O . O ' o o .0. . l . '9' ° II wanna“ O O. N o I 3 r o 3 i a. ‘2 "ICHIO‘ ‘1‘ fi’ 1 . é a S u \ 0 V g 0 19 ’a O \ 2 Q;SOUTH ) ”p“ . . O {0‘ END I L- .3 I MILE *BY CENSUS TRACTS \ o 25 a \ MILE «0" I!" x’ an \VR" 9'39 0 $05”; % $3 0 $0 a o -" ' ‘ LEGEND 7 ‘z. ,1 b’é 13?. o (\I ‘ .7 f “a . PATTON \ . O.l - 9.9% ( ’ agec‘, * . "EM-OR,“ \ (EACH DOT REPRESENTS) f. 1. ONE HOUSEHOLD I0.0 - 24.9 ‘70 FORD MOTOR COMPANY :"sr' "I-,. W“ ,,- woooMEIfE o '51:?" \ y. E 25 . O - 49.9 V0 . CEMETERY\ -. _ .. s." . . :4: 'i, “I . P; \ . I g.“ '1 . ,n'.‘ ',- '13}, t I '3'! : ' ) SOUTH END 3:61 * DEARBORN *av CENSUS news I 66 Essex, Burley, Whittington and Canterbury have 25-49.9 per- cent of its population of an Arab origin, while the rest of the area falls in the early infiltration stage of 10-25 percent of Arab Muslim occupants. The map of 1950 shows also the encroachment of the Arab Muslim immigrants to the area north of Dix Avenue for the first tnme. The majority of the blocks in this area were invaded by the Arab Muslim immigrants. As a result the Arab area expanded to include a new territory after a three- decade spatial concentration. In this period very few residences were found in East Dearborn. They were mainly peOple who lived in the South End in the early twenties and thirties. They usually consisted of one or two families.in the block. The general trend in the Arab Muslim distribution as shown in the 1960 map fostered an intensification of residen- tial segregation in the South End. Figure 4.4 indicates a decrease in the number of dispersion blocks--O.l-9.9 percent Muslims--in the South End, whereas an increase occurred in the infiltration stage especially the advanced stage with 25-50 percent Muslims. This indicates that the dominant trend focused upon the core area, which experienced a growing spatial concentration. In the same time, a slight increase occurred in the invaded blocks in East Dearborn. Southwest Detroit for the first time is being inhabited by some of the Arab Muslim community. 67 Although the spatial impact of the newcomers centered on the core area as they filtered into blocks already occu- pied by Arab Muslims, this port of entry did not become con- gested or overcrowded. Furthermore, concentrations did not attain ghetto proportions. Two reasons stand behind the uncrowded conditions: 1. Immigration from the Middle East slowed down and reached the minimum limits in the period between early fifties and mid-sixties. 2. The rise of the socio-economic standard of the peOple of the South End encouraged the movement of both the Arabs and non Arabs from the South End to the suburbs or other better parts of Dearborn. The Contemporary Arab Muslim Ghetto 1968-1976 In the last ten years, the Arab Muslim community has witnessed a growing spatial configuration, continued rapid population growth, and an increasing intra-city movement. Natural increase has added to the recent growth of the Arab Muslim pOpulation; however, migration in this period repre- sents the major component of pOpulation growth since 1967. Arab-Israel struggles in 1967 and 1973 as well as the civil war in Lebanon since 1975 accelerated the volume of emigration. from the Middle East to the study area. The exact numbers of both new immigrants and the old ones are not available, but we found that more than fifty percent of our sample had 68 HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF * ARAB - MUSLIM COMMUNITY, I970 SOUTHFIELD . TIREMAN . .0 . 0:... 01" .0 I O ' 000.00.... I O 00 O 00.. ° O O. OO . o . . '0 o ’3' 00’... j WARREN ' . . o. 9'... 0 I N . . . . .. ..z. . . I . . . . . o. 0 o o ' a; . o . o 0 . v: . r . . . O . O 0 0 o z 0 _ . O O O a O O O “I . FORD... .0 \ ' ,9 MICHIGA . I3 0.00 . " o O ’9‘ 0 E . '. ‘ a ' A U 0 0 o . ° . \ o 9 ’3‘ g .0 O. . . 4‘0 o . 00°.“ O . o o . . \ . . . 0 o t 0 r n o (I; SOUTH ) ““0. O . O . . . o 9 . . o o ' 0 0 (0“ O . 0 END I 0 0 o 0 . OO O O O 5 I . . O - 1 1 MILE D*EARBORN - DETROIT BY CENSUS TRACTS .25 g \ MILE 6“" o <9.“ 11939.". A. A., LEGEND 6 ( ° \ , ,. - 0.I — 9.9 °/. 4‘. 15 T’ a , \ (EACH DOT REPRESENTS) 1...? ‘33, pArT'ou \\ ONE HOUSEHOLD 4% 2,2" MEMORIAL \\ I0.0 ._ 24.9 O/o ‘1 It ' o3 PARK Mac“ FORD MOTOR ’t’u." .“ . I 1;: ‘ wOODMERE .. .. :5 ~ CEMETERY‘ fifirw‘ SOUTH END. *5 a DEARBORN 3- *av CENSUS BLOCKS ,4 I ...... ........... ........ 25.0 - 49.9 °/o - 50.0 - 74.9 °/. 69 HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION OF * ARAB- MUSLIM COMMUNITY, l976 DEARBORN - DETROIT * BY CENSUS TRACTs FORD MOTOR COM PANY SOUTH END, DEARBORN *ev CENSUS BLOCKS \ PATTON \ " \\ MEMORIAL \ 3 PARK ““0“ I r” KNOODMER‘E \ CEMETERY\ LEGEND [:3 0| - 9.9% EACH DOT REPRESENTS ( ONE HOUSEHOLD ) D I0.0 - 24.9 °/. 25.0 - 49.9 °/o - 50.0- 74.9% - 75.0-IOO% 70 migrated since 1969. Households with Arab-Muslim surnames have been sur- veyed in 1970 and in 1976 from the city directories of Dearborn and Detroit. The distribution of these households is shown in Figures 4.5 and 4.6. The 1970 map shows that some of the blocks in the South End reached the consolidation stage. Fifty percent of its population were from the Arab-Muslim community. This marks the beginning of the Arab-Muslim Ghetto in the study area. On the other hand, the rest of the blocks in the South End are in the last stage of infiltration where 25-49 percent of the blocks' population were Arab Muslims. The area of East Dearborn is still in the invasion stage but the number of Arab Muslims in each block has increased. Numerous blocks were invaded by the Arab Muslim immigrants in the southwest Detroit area. The map of 1976 (Figure 4.6) shows that all the blocks in the South End area have 50 percent or more Arab Muslim residents. A great number of these blocks, especially those on Wyoming, Salina and Canterbury have reached the concen— tration stage, where 75 to 100 percent of the total popu- lation are Arab Muslims. Southwest Detroit for the first time was invaded on a large scale by Arab Muslim immigrants. Nearly all the blocks in this area have some Arab Muslims. The area adjacent to the South End passed the limits of the invasion stage to the early infiltration stage where more than 71 10 to 25 percent of the pOpulation are Arab Muslims. Most of the inhabitants are new immigrants who, due to shortage of housing, high rent and overcrowding in the South End, sought residence in this area. This area probably will be the focus of the Arab—Muslim immigrants for the next decades. Two elements can be seen in the residential distri- bution of the Arab-Muslim community: the core area and its fringe or periphery. The core area represents the area of earliest settlement, where highest concentration in terms of the prOportions of Arabs-non Arabs reside in the area. The fringe blocks are identifiable from a low prOportion of Arab MMslims to non Arab Muslims residing in the area. The fringe area is an example of the invasion-succession process, while the core is an example of the segregation process. The core area coincides with the South End while the fringe represents East Dearborn and southwest Detroit. The last two areas have less than ten percent of their population of Arab Muslims, while the South End has the high- est concentration of Arab-Muslim population. Summary The above analysis showed that there are three distinct patterns of residential distribution of the Arab-Muslim com- munity. The initial pattern between 1920 and 1945 was marked by the establishment of a core area which acted as a port of entry for the new Arab-Muslim immigrants. Between 1945 72 and 1967 the Arab-Muslim population grew rapidly, both in absolute and relative terms. The dominant trend in this period focused upon the Arab core area. Other parts of the study area such as East Dearborn were initially inhabited by Arab-Muslim immigrants. In the last ten years from 1968 to 1977, the area became a Ghetto. It experienced a Spatial concentration in the core area and expanded its boundaries on the periphery. The core area resembles the South End, while the periphery includes East Dearborn and southwest Detroit. The first pattern did not show a heavy concentration of Arab-Muslim immigrants. Also the Arab Muslim did not find himself restricted to any particular section of the city. The second pattern showed a somewhat dense concentra- tion in the core area but the area did not become congested or overcrowded. The third pattern shows that while the Arab-Muslim community is extending the boundaries of the area of the Arab-Muslim residence, nevertheless, the degree of segregation seems also to increase in the core area. This supports the main hypothesis that the residential distri- bution of the Arab-Muslim community has several patterns, ranging from widely dispersed to highly segregated patterns. CHAPTER V SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ARAB-MUSLIM COMMUNITY The previous chapters have touched briefly on the reasons of migration of the Arab Muslims to the United States and to the study area and sketched the areal distri- bution of the community. This chapter gives more details about the Arab Muslim community in the study area. It is concerned with the areal differentiation within the study area as well as the different segments of population within the community itself. The major hypothesis to be tested in this chapter is that the socio-economic characteristics of the Arab-Muslim community vary spatially and differ among the national sub- groups within the community. The following analysis will be focused on the socio- economic characteristics of the different segments of the community as well as the spatial variation within the study area. Place of Birth Respondents were asked about the place of their birth. The results are given in Table (5.1) which shows that 85.5 percent of the respondents were born in the Middle East. 73 74 They are the members of the first generation immigrants.l Only 14.5 percent of the total respondents were born in the United States. The majority of them were born in Dearborn. Some others were born in Detroit, Michigan: Brooklyn, New York, and Chicago, Illinois. These are members of the secondz, third, and sometimes fourth generation. All of them are of Lebanese descent. Table 5.1. Place of Birth of the Heads of Household Place of Birth Percent Lebanon 34.6 Palestine 15.2 Yemen 34.3 U.S. 14.5 Other Arab countries 1.4 Total 100.0 (214) The respondents who were born in the Middle East, 34.6 percent came from.Lebanon, 34.3 percent came from Yemen3, 15.2 percent came from Palestine4. The other 1.4 percent came from other Arab countries such as Egypt and Syria. 1First generation immigrants are the members of the community who were born in the Middle East and migrated to the United States. 2Second'generation are the children of the first generation who were born in the U.S. or who were born in the Middle East and arrived to this country before the age of 12. 3Yemen in this study refers to (l) The Republic of North Yemen; (2) The PeOple's Democratic Republic of Yemen (South Yemen). 4Palestine includes Israel, West Bank of Jordan and Gaza Region--in other words it refers to the area of Palestine before 1948. 75 The above table shows that the majority of the popu- lation are from Lebanon. The Yemenis came second, followed by the Palestinians who rank the third in terms of numbers. According to our sample, 77 percent of the heads of household came from villages of rural areas of south Lebanon, southeast North Yemen and West Bank of Jordan; while only 23 percent came from cities of the above three countries. The majority of the rural immigrants indicated that they had been engaged in agriculture in their villages. Most of them de- clared that they owned their land. Some of them were also of sharecropping backgrounds. Some of the urban immigrants were merchants, clerks, skilled and semi-skilled labourers. The rural-urban dichotomy is not sharp in the Middle East because most of the urban dwellers are from rural areas. Cities in the Middle East are mainly a mere agglomeration of rural population. On the other hand, the rural population have an urban type of experience. In our sample 46 percent of the rural pOpulation worked in one or more cities in their homeland more than a year. Many of the Yemenis previously worked on ships and other unskilled labor jobs in cities. Also there are close connections between most Lebanese and Palestinian villages and cities. These villages are mercan- tile oriented and peOple in them have had a long history of selling their products in the neighboring cities. This keeps close connections with the city and lessens the gap between the two segments of the pOpulation. Bearing in mind that the urban eXperience in the Middle East is totally different from a highly industrialized urban society such as the United 76 States, I believe that the differences in experiences, values and life style of the urban area immigrants are not great from those of the rural immigrant pOpulation. Place of Residence Table 5.2 shows the distribution of the respondents by place of residence in the study area, whether in the South End, East Dearborn or Southwest Detroit Table 5.2 Place of Residence by National Subgroups National Subgroups Area % Leban. % Palest. % Yemeni’ % Sec. Gen. South End 68 45 98 40 East Dearborn 31 9 0 60 Detroit 1 46 2 0 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) It is obvious that the South End has people from all the three Middle Eastern nationalities as well as Arab Americans from the second generation. While East Dearborn is dominated by Lebanese immigrants as well as peOple from second generation who are also of Lebanese origin, Southwest Detroit is a place for Palestinians only. A93 Table 5.3 shows the age distribution of the heads of household by place of residence in the study area. Over 47 percent of the heads of household are under 35 years of age and 75 percent are under the age of 45. 77 Table 5.3 Age of Heads of Households by Place of Residence Subareas Age % Total E Soutfi End % East Dearborn % Detroit 18-24 16.4 18 16 11 25-34 30.8 26 31 57 35-44 27.1 30 18 25 45-64 20.1 18 33 7 65+ 5.6 8 2 0 100.0 (214)100 (141) 100 (45) 100 (28) The youth of the Arab Muslim heads of household may be indi- cated in contrast with 1970 census data showing that only 45 and 60 percent of total Dearborn heads appeared in these two categories. The above table shows that the South End is the major place for the Muslim elderly. These represent the first pioneers of the community. The majority of them are widowed or divorced of ages in 75 to 86 brackets. On the other hand, East Dearborn has 33 percent of the total heads of household in the 45-64 category. These represent the majority of the immigrants who came after the Second WOrld War, established themselves in the South End, then moved to East Dearborn. The situation is quite different in the Detroit area Ninety-three percent of Muslim heads of households are less than 45 years of age. They don't have elder peOple because most of them are recent immigrants of prime youth. Table 5.4 correlates the place of birth of the heads of household together with their age distribution. The results show that thirty-nine percent of the Lebanese 78 immigrants are over 44 years of age, while only 17 percent of the Palestinians, 28 percent of the Yeminis and 10 per- cent of the American born Muslims are in the same age brackets, This might be explained by the fact that most of the Lebanese migrated before World War II while in their early twenties. Thus they are in their late fifties and sixties, while the Palestinians and the Yemenis migrated in the fifties and six- ties so they are in the lower age interval. Table 5.4 Age of the Heads of Household by_National Groups NatiOnal Sibgroups A— Age % Lebanese % Falestine % Yemeni % Sec. Gen. 18-24 8 20 17 29 25-34 21 41 27 45 35-44 32 22 28 16 45-64 31 13 22 7 65+ 8 4 6 3 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) Sex The households surveyed had 94 percent male heads and 6 percent female heads. Out of 214 households, only 12 were headed by females. The females were members of Lebanese origin only. The majority of them were born in the United States. They live in East Dearborn and South End. Marital Status Tables 5.5 and 5.6 show the marital status correlated with the subregions in the study area as well as the nation- ality‘groups. 79 Table 5.5 Marital Status by Subareas Subareas Status % Study Area 5 South End? % E.Dearbornffi§ Detroit Single 19 18 31 7 Married 75 72 69 93 Divorced 3 5 0 0 Widowed 3 5 0 0 Total 100 (214) 100(141) 100 (45) 100 (28) The above table indicates that three-fourths of the respondents are married in the study area. The percentage is quite higher in Detroit area, while it is almost the same in the other two areas--South End and East Dearborn. The table shows that there is a high percentage of single peOple in East Dearborn. This might indicate that the second generation have higher age of marriage than most of the Arab Muslim immigrants. On the other hand, all the divor- ced and widowed are in the South End where there are 14 heads of households who are either widowed or divorced. Table 5.6 Marital Status by Place of Birth Status % Lebanese % Palestin. % Yemeni % Sec. Gener. Single 18 20 19 23 Married 72 76 81 65 (wife here) 100 90 11 100 (wife abroad) 0 10 89 0 Widowed and divorced 10 4 O 12 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) Table 5.6 shows that second generation members have higher percentage of single peOple, while the percentage is quite the same among all other nationality groups. The table 80 also indicates that the divorced and widowed pOpulation is found mainly among Lebanese and American born Muslims. Another aspect is clear in the above table and worth mentioning. That is, ninety percent of the married Yemens have their wives in the homeland, while only ten percent of the Palestinians have their families abroad. On the contrary, all the Lebanese immigrants are accompanied by their wives and families. Table 5.7 (Spouse Descent by National Groups National subgroups Spouse Stock Lebanese Palestinian Yemenis Sec. Gen. Arab 77 93 93 9 American 19 2 O 55 Arab—American 4 5 7 36 Total 100 (57) 100 (41) 100 (44) 100 (22) Concerning spouse stock shown in Table 5.7, we see that nearly all the Palestinians and all the Yemenis have their Spouses either from the homeland or from Arab-American stock. Only 77 percent of the Lebanese have Arab Spouses. The rest of them have either American or Arab—American spouses. People of the second generation are quite different. More than half of the U.S. born Muslims have American spouses, and over a third have Americans from Arab origins. The percentage who have Arab Spouses is very small. Household Size The household in this study refers to a housing unit or a living quarter which is occupied by: 81 l. A single person 2. A group of peOple identified with the head of household 3. A group of friends and/or relatives living together. The above definition is quite different from the cen- sus definition of the household in the sense that it includes arbitrarily defined households with members who are not identified with a head but they live together in one living quarter. The question designed to measure household Size was: How many peOple are living in this house? How many of them are a) children; b) relatives; c) friends? These questions were generally effective in identifying the fact that two or more households might occupy what may appear to be a Single-family structure and to see the relation of the people in the household with the head. In the study area 65 percent of the households have family type of households where there are the father and/or the mother and the children living in a housing unit. The other 35 percent of the households have either relatives living with the family or groups of friends and relatives live together (Table 5.8). 'The breakdown of Table 5.8 by ' place of birth shows that all the second generation American Muslims live in housing units which have only members of their families, while the maiority of the Yemenis live in housing units with other Yemenis. Only 32 percent of the Palestinians 82 and 18 percent of the Lebanese live within a family-relative type of household. They differ from the Yemenis in the sense that the peOple living in the household are identified with the head of the household, but it has a brother, a sis- ter, or cousin in the family. Table 5.8 Household Type by Nationality Household National Subgroups _4_ Type % all % Leban. % Palest. % Yemeni % Sec. Gen. Family only 65 82 68 17 100 Relatives and friends 35 18 32 83 0 Total 100(214) 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) The Size of the household tended to be large ranging upward to 11. The mean household size is 4.4. The number of children is also high and ranges between 1 and 8 with a mean of 3.4. Table 5.9 shows the relationship between the household Size, number of children and national groups. Table 5.9 Household Size and Number of Children by National Groups No. of PeOple Interval and Children % Leban. % Palest. % Yemeni % Sec Gen. 1-2 a) household Size 28 24 62 61 b) no. of child. 10 30 33 61 3-5 a) household Size 52 43 34 26 b) no. of child. 35 30 33 28 6+ a) household Size 20 33 4 13 b) no. of child. 55 40 33 11 Total a) 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) b) 100 (29) 100 (20) 100 ( 3) 100 (18) 83 The above table shows that 72 percent of the Lebanese households have over three persons. Fifty-two percent of them have 3-5 persons and 20 percent have 6 peOple and over. The Palestinians have relatively larger Size of households. Thirty-three percent of the sample have 6 peOple and over in the family compared to 20 percent for the Lebanese and only 4 percent for the Yemenis. The Yemenis and peOple from second generation have smaller Size of households. The reason is that the Yemenis are without their wives and children and the second gener- ation usually have the norm of the American peOple who pre- fer, in general, smaller families. Concerning the number of children in the family we see that 55 percent of the Lebanese have Six to eight child— ren, while only 40 percent of the Palestinians have this figure. This is not a Sign that the Lebanese have larger families than the Palestinians rather that the Lebanese heads are older than the Palestinians. This is reflected in the 1-2 children category where 30 percent of the Palestinians have 1 to 2 children while only 10 percent of the Lebanese have this number of children. Members of the second genera- tion tend to have smaller families. Sixty-one percent have 1-2 children and 28 percent have 3-5 children. The figures of the Yemeni children are not reliable because there are only 3 families who have children in our sample. 84 Tenure Status Figures concerning tenure status are Shown in Tables 5.10 and 5.11, broken down by place of residence and national groups. The two tables emphasize the following: Table 5.10 Homeownership berlace of Residence Tenure Subareas Status % Study Area % South End % E.Dearborn % Detroit Owner 56 53 91 54 Renter 44 47 9 46 Total 100 (214) 100 (141) 100 (45) 100 (28) Table 5.11 Homeownership by National Groups Tenure Status % Leban. % Palest. % Yemeni % Sec. Gen. Owner 72 52 23 74 Renter 28 48 77 26 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) Fifty-six percent of the households in the study area own their homes, while 44 percent are renters. The same ratios are found in the South End and Detroit area. East Dearborn is totally different where the vast majority--9l per- cent of the total sample live in their own homes. Among national groups, the large majority of the Lebanese as well as members of the second generation are owners--72 and 74 percent respectively. The Palestinians are almost half owners and half renters. The Yemenis are renters in general. Seventy-seven percent of them live in rented houses, multiple dwellings or rooms in hotels. 85 Income The income levels of the households range from less than $3,000 to more than $30,000 per annum. It varies among the segments of the pOpulation sample. Tables 5.12 and 5.13 Show the breakdown of income levels by place of residence and nationality. Table 5.12 Income by Place of Residence ' Subareas % Study % South % East Income level Area End Dearborn % Detroit Less than $5,000 8 ll 0 7 5,000-10,000 ll 13 0 14 10,000-15,000 30 33 18 36 15,000—20,000 23 20 31 28 20,000 and over 28 23 51 15 Total 100 (214) 100 (141) 100 (45) 100 (28) Table 5.13 Income by National Groups National Subgroups Income level % Leban. % Palest. % Yemeni % Sec.Gen. Less than $5,000 4 6 14 14 5.000-10,000 8 11 20 3 10,000-15,000 26 30 46 16 15,000-20,000 24 22 20 30 20,000 and over 38 31 0 35 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (28) The first table Shows that 51 percent of the sample have more than $15,000 a year, another 30 percent have be- tween $l0,000 and $15,000. A total of 76 percent of the sample earn more than $12,000 a year. The U.S. Labor Depart- ment suggests $12,600 are needed for a family of four to be 86 classed in the intermediate income range (Farrell, 1974:73). Assuming that the mean household Size in the sample which is 4.4 persons per household is representing the household Size in the study area, there will be more than three- quarters of the pOpulation who are in the intermediate income range. The other 25 percent are in the low income range. The variations in the income levels are not high be- tween the South End and Detroit areas. They are Similar to the average of the study area in general. However, East Dearborn residents have a higher level of income. Fifty-one percent of them earn more than $20,000 a year, while the other 47 percent fall in intermediate income brackets. Table 5.13 shows no dramatic variations among the nationality groups in the study area except the Yemenis who are in general at the lower income level. Thirty-four per- cent of them have less than $10,000 a year. Almost half of the Yemeni pOpulation earn between $10,000 to $15,000 a year. No Yemenis earn more than $20,000. The higher figure of the second generation in the less than $5,000 category is explained by the fact that all peOple in this category are students who work part time during the year. To see whether the income level is a function of education, income and education were correlated while controlling for place of birth. AS Shown in Table 5.14, among the Lebanese pOpulation there is a very weak correlation between income and education (gamma .09). The majority of the Lebanese--57 percent--who 87 have less than a high school level of education earn more than $15,000. Income among the Lebanese is mainly related to seniority in the job, or to the type of job which is mainly business (bars, restaurants, grocery stores). Table 5.14 Income by Education by National Group Education Less than High School College and Over Income Sec. Sec. Level Leb. Palest. Yemeni Gen. Leb. Palest. Yemeni Gen. Less than $5,000 4 9 13 33 15 0 50 10 5-10,000 ll 9 17 0 10 16 0 3 10-15,000 28 37 47 17 15 29 0 17 15-20,000 20 24 23 17 45 13 0 33 20,000+ 37 21 0 33 15 42 50 37 Total % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total # 55 43 50 6 15 ll 2 25 Among the Palestinians and members of the second generation, the higher the educational level, the higher the income will be. Forty-two percent of those who have higher level of education among the Palestinians and 37 percent of the members of second generation earn more than $20,000 per annum. A Somewhat stronger correlation between income level and educational attainment is found among the Yemeni popu- lation (gamma .33). But the figures are not reliable be- cause of the limited number of peOple in the high level of education--2 only. 88 Education Tables 5.15 and 5.16 Show the level of education among the reSpondents, broken down by nationality and place of residence of the heads of household. Table 5.15 Education by Nationality National Subgroups School Years % Lebanon % Palestin. % Yemeni % Sec. Gen. 6th grade or less 35 24 60 0 7th to 12th 45 55 37 0 College 14 15 3 33 College + 6 6 0 67 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (31) Table 5.16 Education by Place of Residence % % % % School Years Study Area South End E.Dearborn Detroit 6th grade or less 33 43 7 25 7th to 12th 41 41 31 57 College 17 15 31 7 College + 9 1 31 11 Total 100 (214)100 (141) 100 (45) 100 (28) Table 5.15 shows that the educational attainment of the heads of household in the sample is relatively low; 33 per— cent had completed six or fewer years of schooling and 41 percent have 7th to thhgrade level of educational attain- ment. We see that the peOple in both the South End and Detroit areas are quite similar to the study area in general, while in East Dearborn there is a higher level of education; 89 62 percent of the respondents had a college education and 31 percent had a high school education. Table 5.15 shows that the Palestinians and the Leb- anese are quite the same in their educational attainment with less Palestinians who have lower level of education. On the other hand, the majority of the Yemenis have less than six grades of schooling. Only 37 percent have 7th to 12th grades. Of these, very few--6 percent had received the high school diploma. Table 5.17 Employment by Place of Residence National Subgroups Employment % Study Area ’i'South‘End % ETDearbon1% Detroit Employed 69 60 91 82 Unemployed 14 18 0 14 Student 5 4 7 4 Retired 12 18 2 0 Total 100 (214) 100 (141) 100 (45) 100 (28) Table 5.18 Employment berationality National Subgroups Employment % Leban. % Pales. % Yemeni % Sec. Gen. Employed 63 76 58 77 Unemployed 20 15 17 7 Student 1 5 2 13 Retired 16 4 13 3 Total 100 (74) 100 (54) 100 (52) 100 (28) 90 Employment Employment figures Shown in Tables 5.17 and 5.18 indi- cate that 69% of the heads of household are employed, 14 percent are unemployed, 5 percent are students and 12 percent are retired. The breakdown of the data by subareas reveals spatial differences. The South End has the highest figures of unemployment and retirees followed by Detroit area. Thirty- six percent of the total sample are either unemployed, laid off, or retired. The figure of unemployment might be explained by two reasons: a) The large influx of the Lebanese immigrants to the South End because of the recent civil war in Lebanon. b) The peOple of the Southend are associated with auto- mobile industry which was hit by the recession in the last three years. A laid-off policy was adOpted which resulted in leaving thousands of employees out of their jobs. Arab Muslims were no exception. East Dearborn pOpulation are higher in their employment figures. Ninety-one percent of the heads of household are employed. No one of the sample is out of work; unemployment is zero. Also the retirees are small in number compared to the South End. The breakdown of the data by place of origin (Table 5.18) Shows that the Lebanese have higher figures of unemployment and retirees. Unemployment figures are as we said due to the influx of the new immigrants because of Lebanese Civil War. 91 Higher figures of retired peOple is mainly due to their relatively older dates of immigration to this country. The Yemeni and Palestinian pOpulation are quite Simi- lar to the Lebanese immigrants in their employment pattern, except that the Palestinians have less retirees. This is mainly due to their recent coming to Dearborn and Detroit. The members of the second generation have less than U.S. unemployment figures-—7 percent only, and they have less retirees because of their relatively low ages and finally they have more students which reflects also their youth. ReSpondentS were asked about the establishments they are employed in. Thirty-nine percent of the total sample reported that they work in Ford Motor Company. Seventeen percent work in Chrysler and the other 15 percent work in other industrial factories within the Detroit Metropolitan Area, such as American Standard, Inc., Kasle Steel and Aluminum Corporation and Alco Chemical, Inc. The breakdown of data by place of residence and by nationality did not Show any pattern. All the sample popu- lation have nearly the same percentage in the above places of employment. The high figures of Arab Muslim workers in the auto industry, especially Ford--39--is eXplained by the fact that the auto industry is the major pull factor for the Arab Muslims as well as other immigrant groups. Ahmed in his paper "Organizing an Arab Worker's Caucus in Detroit" gives the following reasons for the agglomeration of the Arab workers 92 in Ford and Chrysler: "1. During the last several years there has emerged a practice of paying a $500 for a Special letter of introduction allowing one to be hired in preference to other workers. This practice has helped newly arrived Arab workers get jobs in one of the best-paying industries in the country without having to learn English. "2. With-the growth of the Black Liberation movement in the late 1960's, there appeared revolutionary black plant organizations....which led two successful wildcat strikes that jolted the whole auto industry. From that time on, Chrysler began making a conscious effort to re- place black workers with what officials consid- ered to be more docile Arab workers. "3. Once Arab workers became concentrated in certain factories, they provided a friendly base from which other Arabs could search for jobs. Workers would let their friends know when plants were hiring, would help them arrange transpor- tation, would translate forms and applications and so on (Ahmed, l975:l97)." Respondents were also asked if they work in the nearby factories or they commute to work. The results Show that 64 percent do not commute. Thirty-Six percent commute. Most of the commuters are the workers in Chrysler and the other industrial factories located outside the City of Dearborn, while the majority of Ford Motor Company workers are non- commuters. The distance commuted is ten to forty-five miles a day. Occupation Tables 5.19 and 5.20 show the occupational pattern of the respondents broken down by nationality and place of resi- dence. Table 5.19 shows that 45 percent of the sample are 93 laborers, another 44 percent fall in the categories of pro- fessional-technical, managers and service workers. The rest of the sample, which is 11 percent, are Operative, craftsmen and sales workers. Most of the professionals are either teachers or technical and kindred workers. Nearly all the managers are self-employed. They own bars, restaurants and grocery stores. The service workers are mainly those who work in cleaning and food services. Nearly all laborers work in the Ford Motor Company, Chrysler Company and other indus- trial factories within the Standard MetrOpolitan Area of Detroit. Table 5.19 Occupation by Place of Residence. % Subareas Occupation Study Area % Southend’% E.Dearborn §iDetroit Prof. Tech 12 2 39 0 Managers & Self Employed 17 14 24 13 Salesworkers 5 1 10 13 Clerical 1 2 0 0 Craftsmen 3 l 5 4 Operative 2 4 0 0 Laborers 45 58 12 57 Service Workers 15 18 10 13 Total 100 (150) 100 (85) 100 (41) 100 (23) The occupationsof the South End and Detroit population are factory workers, service workers and small business owners. Ninety percent of the South End pOpulation and 83 percent of the Detroit population work in these three types of occupations. On the other hand, the occupational pattern of East Dearborn pOpulation is quite different, only 12 percent 94 work as laborers, while 44 percent are sales and service workers. Thirty-nine percent are professionals, technicals, and kindred workers. Table 5.20 reveals that the Lebanese and Palestinians follow the same pattern of occupation; factory laborer first, followed by peOple who own their business--self employed-- followed by service workers. The only difference is that the Lebanese are higher in the percentage of peOple who work as professionals. Table 5.20 Occupation by National Groups National Subgroups Occupation 8 Leban. % Pales. i Yemenii %:§§c. Gen. Prof. Tech 13 2 0 28 Managers & Self Employed 17 20 3 28 Salesworkers 4 12 0 4 Clerical 4 0 0 0 Craftsmen 6 2 0 0 Operatives 0 5 0 4 Laborers 43 44 86 8 Service Workers 13 15 11 28 Total 100 (53) 100 (41) 100 (29) 100 (25) The majority of the Yemenis-~86 percent--work as hard laborers in the auto industry or seamen. The rest of them are service workers. No other occupations are followed by Yemeni population except in recent years, some of them began Operating small grocery stores. The majority of the second generation peOple work as professionals, managers and service workers. Only 8 percent work as laborers. There are professionals such as doctors, 95 lawyers, professors and engineers. Among the self-employed we find the real estate brokers and large business owners. Service workers are not of cleaning or food service type of workers but are protective service workers, health service workers and governmental employees. Kinship Ties In an attempt to measure the role of kinship ties, the immigrants were classified into three main categories: the independent immigrants who had no relatives in the United States who could help them enter this country; the dependent immigrants who had close relatives in the U.S. who helped them come to the United States, and the nominated immigrants who apply to the friends of an American citizen. This citizen usually holds reSponSibilities to provide care, maintenance and assist the immigrant in becoming established. Table 5.21 which Shows the distribution of our sample into the above three categories indicates that 76 percent of the Arab-Muslim heads of household reSponded that they came to the United States because they have kinsmen here. Ten percent came independently without any help and 14 percent came with the help of friends or members of the same village. Among the independent category we find that 70 percent were of the early immigrants who came to the United States at the beginning of this century. The other thirty percent are most recent immigrants and are skilled and semi-Skilled 96 immigrants. Most of them came in the last six years or so. Table 5.21 KinshipgTies Among Arab Muslim Immigrants Immigrant Status No. Percent Independent 19 10 Nominated 26 14 Dependent 141 76 Total 186 100 The reasonable explanation for having the two extremes, the pioneers and the most recent, is found in U.S. immigration laws, which facilitated the migration to the United States at the beginning of the century and Changed the Open policy to a regulated one which permits only members of the profession to come to the United States. Most of the nominated immigrants came in the Span of 1945 to 1955. In this period the American economy was booming and a need for hard labor, especially for certain hard jobs, made it easy for those to enter this country. The procedure, as we were told by some of those members, was that the alien resident or the Arab-American citizen here obtain an appli- cation from his company and send it together with a letter tOuthe American Embassy in his own country Showing his willing- ness and ability to provide care for his friend. Fourteen percent of our sample came by this procedure. The last twenty years did not have many of this type of immigrant due to the .regulated immigration and labor certification. 97 The majority of our sample responded that they came to the United States because they have kinsmen here. They are either sons, daughters, parents or brothers and sisters of Arab-American citizens. This reflects the immigration policy of the United States which places great emphasis on family relationships and family reunification as a basis for selection of immigrants. In this regard individuals with relatives in the U.S. receivedfirst priority in the acqui- sition of visas. Owing to these immigration laws, kinship bands are always strengthening. The immigrants rely heavily on the support of kin when they come to the United States. In this regard it is impor- tant to note that 77 percent of the respondents Spent the first three or four weeks in their relatives' homes when they first came to the United States. Eighty-two percent said that kinsmen and friends had helped them obtain their first job, and 20 percent of the sample were furnished with the money for their trip to the United States. Kinship is also important in launching emigrants in the place of origin. The kin group in the country of origin acts as a unit to support the emigration of individual mem- bers. This is rendered important when one considers the distance between the Middle East and the U.S. Emigration is a weighty economic undertaking. In our sample, 39 percent _got family help to come here while only 15 percent came with money from their personal savings. Consequently, those immi- _grants secure economic benefits for the kin group as a whole. 98 The general practice followed is that migrants send remittances back to their kin. The well-being of the home- land villages is dependent upon this flow of cash. In our sample 60 percent said that they send money back home to help family or to educate brothers or Sisters or for other purposes such as building a home or buying some land which is used by members of the extended family. On the other hand, while the immigrant is abroad he depends upon kinsmen to handle his affairs in the village, i.e., his wife and chil- dren if they are left behind and his land and other assets (Aswad, 1974:60-68 and Wigle, 1974:156-160). The ties to the homeland are also strengthened by fre- quent trips to the villages of origin, especially after the establishment of inexpensive air charter flights which pro- vided more frequent communication than had ever been possible. Seventy percent of the first generation immigrants went back to the homeland as visitors. Nearly half of them went three times. In the case of Yemenis, a visit to the homeland within two years is not unusual. Thus communication network which had never really been severed, is strengthened and old relation- ships are re-established and new ones are also created. Thus the information channels between the place of origin and the place of destination are kept Open. Religion The two major sects of Islam, Sunni and Shia, and two branches within Shia sect--Imami and ziadi--are represented in the community. 99 The majority Of the East Dearborn ArabeMuslim popu- lation is of the Shia sect, while the majority of the South- west Detroit Arab-Muslim pOpulation is of the Sunni sect. The South End is a mixture of both Shia and Sunni sects. Within the Shia sect, the majority is Imamis with some Zaidis. The breakdown of religious sects by national groups Shows that the majority of the Lebanese Muslim immigrants and members of second generation are of Imami Shia sect. All the Palestinians are Sunnis. The Yemenis are divided between Sunnis and Zaidi Shias. Because of the sensitivity Of this subject among the Yemenis, no data were gathered to Show which subdivision is larger among the Yemenis. Accord- ing to our informants,the Yemeni Sunni members are larger than the Zaidi Shia members. There are two mosques and a religious hall called the Hashimite Hall1 which serve the community. Within the South End there is the Sunni Mosque which was established in 1938. There is also the religious hall - the Hashmitie Hall - which was completed in 1936. Several miles away from the South End and in East Dearborn is the Shia Mosque and the Islamic Center. This mosque was built in 1964 and serves basically the Shia members of the community. These local religious institutions serve as places where men's and women's clubs meet, and wedding receptions and funerals are held. Most of the other Muslims—-Arab and 1The Hashimite Hall was damaged totally by fire which broke out after a wedding ceremony while the author was doing his research in the second half of April, 1977- 100 non-Arab--who live in the Detroit area attend the two mosques. Members of Detroit's Black Muslim community frequent the two mosques, especially the Sunni one in the South End. Thus the two mosques keep the Muslim communities in touch with each other, and bring some interaction between Muslim ethnic groups other than on the assembly line. Summary The above analysis showed four distinct social groups, based upon differences in the places from which the immigrants were born and reared. The Lebanese, the Palestinians, the Yemenis and the second and third generation Arab-Americans are the four groups. These four groups differ in their socio-economic characteristics. The Lebanese are old immi- grants, usually better educated, have a high income level and a high level of occupation. The Yemenis are leSS edu- cated, more recent, single or married to a wife in the home- land and are home renters. The Palestinians are better educated than the Lebanese and much better educated than the Yemenis. They, as the Yemenis, represent a new immigrant group. Within the study area there are three subareas:. East Dearborn, South End and southwest Detroit. No dramatic dif- ferences were noticed between the South End and southwest Detroit. Both of them act as ports of entry for recent immigrants. They have a high level Of unemployment and a relatively low level of income. The majority of the pOpu- lation in the two areas are factory workers. East Dearborn 101 is a middle class area. Its population are either Old immigrants or second generation members.. Both of them have high income levels, relatively high occupation levels, and high levels of education. The above analysis supported the hypothesis that the socio-economic characteristics of the Arab-Muslim community vary Spatially and differ among the national subgroups within the community. CHAPTER VI SPATIAL MOBILITY OF THE ARAB MUSLIMS The central problem of this chapter is the explana- tion of the process of spatial mobility. Spatial mobility in this study refers to change of residence within the com- munity as well as the change of the community itself. In other words, it refers to intracommunity and intercommunity mobility. Intracommunity residential mobility is commonly defined as intracounty mobility. In this paper it is defined as movement within or between the three subareas of this study: Southwest Detroit, South End and East Dearborn. While moving out Of these three areas to anywhere else is defined as intercommunity mobility, the topic will be approached from the standpoint of the households as well as from areal or Spatial standpoints. Two questions will be dealt with here: Who moves? and why do they move? Before analyzing the data we will discuss a conceptual framework for both intra and inter—urban mobility, set some assumptions and state our hypothesis. Intracommunity Residential Mobility Intracommunity residential mobility is conceptualized as the process through which a household attempts to balance its housing availability with its housing needs. Planned 102 103 mobility will be used as potential mobility in terms of plan- ning a future move. Therefore, planned mobility status will be either stable or mobile depending on whether or not a move is anticipated. This conceptualization of current status has been used in several studies following the check on its validity by Rossi. (Chevan, 1968 and 1971; Adams 1970; Leslie and Richardson, 1961; Speare, 1974 and 1970). Planned residential mobility is the primary dependent vari- able under consideration. The effect of family life cycle on residential mobility will be investigated primarily. Essentially the idea Of a family life cycle is that there is a succession of changes through which a typical family progresses from its inception to its dissolution. The various stages of this hypothetical family may be summarized as characterizing an expanding family in the early years, a stable one in the middle years, and a contracting one in the later years of its "life," (Abu-Lughed, 1960:97-118). The changing demands and resources of a family progressing through the cycle Should be reflected in changing housing needs, housing adjustments and expectation Of moving. Evidence of such a relationship has been provided by several studies as indicated in the literature review. Before elaborating on the conceptualization, it is necessary to state how it is to be related to the Arab Muslim pOpulation in our study area. The approach to be used is that of developing a paradigm for the general case of resi- dential mobility in American society. Hypotheses will be 104 derived which apply in general also. The data analysis will contain an evaluation of whether this ethnic group conforms or diverges from this conceptualization. The notion of adjustment is central to the paradigm of planned residential mobility to be developed. The elements to be considered in this adjustment process are (1) the stage in family life cycle, (2) housing requirements, (3) the pres- ent dwelling space, (4) the access of the household tO hous- ing and (5) the situation in terms of housing supply. The stage of family life cycle reflects the composition of the household. Once marriage occurs and the household is established, the size is constant until the child—bearing stage is reached during which size increases. The next stage, child-rearing, is represented by a plateau in terms of Size. Then there begins a decrease in household Size as children leave and become established outside the family. After this period size is constant again until the family is dissolved by the death of one of the partners. Each successive stage also represents the increasing age of the head of the household. If these typical stages were repre- sented along axes of size and time, the result would be a general increase in size through time up to a maximum during the child-rearing stage and a general decrease from there onward. Family life cycle is measured by the age of head of household and number of peOple at home. The changes in size occurring over the course of the family life cycle are a major consideration in the 105 adjustment process with which this thesis is concerned. The second element, housing requirement, refers to the Spatial needs of the household. These requirements are determined by the size of the household and are at a maxi- mum level during the child—rearing stage. The third element involved in the process Of adjust- ment is the present dwelling Space the household occupies. This refers to the physical Space available within the residential unit. The adjustment process is essentially an attempt by the household to balance its present dwelling Space with its housing requirements. Dwelling Space is measured by number of rooms in the present dwelling unit. The fourth element is the access of the household to housing. The concept of access is multidimensional. Three dimensions may be discerned. These concern the amount of financial resources, information and discrimination. The access Of a household to housing may be more free or more restricted according to its position on each of these three dimensions. Financial considerations affect not only the Size and quality of housing obtained but also the rental or ownership basis of its possession by the household. Access to the housing market also depends upon knowledge of 106 that market, and, therefore, on the information the house- hold has at its disposal. The third dimension refers to discrimination which may affect access. This includes any social or demographic characteristics of the household, e.g., ethnic, size, etc., which would tend to limit or enhance its position in terms of access. The final consideration in the adjustment process is the availability of housing. This is the physical supply of housing of all types. The four elements mentioned above Operate within this situation. Residential mobility as we mentioned before is the process through which the household attempts to balance its housing with its housing needs. Housing requirements re- flect the composition of the household and change as this composition changes. When a change in requirements is evi- dent, the household attempts to adjust its housing to meet them. This involves an adjustment to larger or smaller dwelling Space according to the new household size. The ability of the household to effect this balance is mediated by its access to housing, i.e., its financial and information resources and any impairment due to discri- mination. These housing requirements and the ability of the household to enter the housing market Operate within the context of the supply of housing extant. The effect of family life cycle on residential mobi- lity is expected to be a reduction in the amount of mobility from early to late stages. The compbte residential history 107 of a household would be expected to Show that adjustments are more likely to take place in the earlier part of the history than during the later part although readjustments may occur toward the end also. This is due to the higher probability Of household Size changes during the early stages, the likelihood of increasing financial resources, a decline in experimental housing adjustments and the inertia associated with home ownership which is more likely to occur as time passes. The psychological and financial ties to an owned dwelling plus the greater ability of an owner as Opposed to a renter to make structural Spatial adjustments in the house contribute to this inertia. This could also be considered as a component of the "axiom of inertia" prOposed in intercommunity migration (Land, 1969: 133-140). The assumption is that an individual's propensity to move is a function of, among other things, his length of residence in the community. Interurban Mobility The above conceptualization assumed that the prOpensity to move is related to characteristics of the migrants, of their dwelling units, or of their area of residence. Another approach to a theory of who moves is to view mobility as a response to stress. This approach is based on a concept of human decision-making. According to this model the indivi- dual decision maker is limited in the capacity to formulate and to solve problems and to acquire and retain information. 108 To COpe with these problems the decision maker constructs a Simplified model of the situation and acts rationally with respect to that model. In this model, only a subset of the alternatives are perceived and that payoffs are evaluated only as satisfactory or unsatisfactory. In solving a prob- lem a search is made for outcomes which are satisfactory, and the search is terminated when a satisfactory alternative is found (Spear, 1974:175). This approach was adOpted by Rossi in 1955 in study- ing the relationship between housing complaints and mobility. More recently Wolpert (1970), Brown and Moore (1971), and Golant (1971) have viewed migration as a response to stress between the collective needs of the household and the char- acteristics of its environment. Speare (1974) formulated a residential satisfaction model, which draws heavily from the above works. He views the members of the individual households as tied to a par- ticular location by bonds to other individuals; attachment to the particular housing unit, attachment to a job, attach- ment to a neighborhood--based organization or other local bonds. The strength of these bonds is reflected in a general level of satisfaction, and the higher the level of satis- faction, the less likely the person is to consider moving. In most cases a highly satisfied person will not even con- sider moving despite the fact that he might be better Off somewhere else, were that person to calculate the costs and benefits. It is useful to think in terms of a threshold of 109 dissatisfaction at which point a person begins to consider moving. This concept is essentially the same as the stress- threshold concept used by Wolpert (1970). We prefer to Speak Of dissatisfaction, rather than stress, to avoid the conno- tation of mental tension. Once the threshold for dissatis- faction has been passed a person will search for alterna- tives and will evaluate these alternatives relative to his current location. If a satisfactory alternative location is found, the person will decide to move. In the evaluation Of alternatives, Objective factors such as the housing mar- ket, job market, cost of moving, etc., will enter into the decision. (Speare, 1974:175). In our study we will use Speare's model for measur- ing interurban mobility among the Arab Muslims of Dearborn- Detroit area. The factors Operating in this model and the relationship between them are diagrammed in Figure 6.1. Whether or not a household considers moving depends on the relative level of satisfaction with the current location. Since feeling of satisfaction tends to be relative to one's expectations and Since thresholds are also related to expectations, we are assuming that satisfaction can be measured relative to a person's threshold or dissatisfaction. Residential satisfaction is assumed to depend on character- istics of the location and social bonds between household members and other peOple. Moving plans, the dependent variable,is measured by the response to the following three questions. "Do you plan .ocw>oz mumoamcoo 0:3 mo mpcmcweumuma one .H.m museum 110 Oaumu mcHoSOHU mocmoflmmu mo coflumnso kucmulumczo OEOOSH coaumosom mod 0 I-INMQ'ln mowumwumuomumao oaonmmsom Ammqm ezmozmmmosz .HHH mca>oe Hmoflmcoo AmamaHm4> ezmozmmmov noun on» sun: coauommmaumm m>uumemm Amqm oszm>mmesz mono or» usonm cowcwmo Hamum>o xHO3 EOHM mocmumwo :Owusaflom moccaoucflmz mmmcwacmmao mummmm mmmcooozouo mom>flum mmfloz mocmummmmm HMOfimmcm O O O O O I O O O O H HNMQ‘Lfiml‘mO‘ mowumflumuomnmno cowumooq .HH AmmgmmHmm> ezmozmmmosz auacsfifioo on» no OHQOOQ on» usonm coacwmo .m mono on» SA mm>wu ImHmH ocm mocmwum .H mocom HMflOOm .H AmmqmeHma> ezmozmmmosz 111 to leave Dearborn (Detroit) in the near future? (If no) why so? (If yes) For what reasons do you want to leave? In the first question an attempt was made to identify those persons who might be considering a move out of the community. The next two questions ask.the reasons for moving or staying. The first question places no restriction on the period of time during which a move is anticipated. The assumption here is that the relationship between stated mobility incli- nation and actual mobility is strong and most of those who plan to move will actually do so. Previous research showed that stated intentions are a good indicator of actual be- havior (Rossi, Leslie and Richardson, Alden Speare: ibid). Not all mobility decisions begin with the develOp- ment of dissatisfaction to a point where one begins to con— sider moving. In some cases the decision to move is forced on the individual or household through eviction, job trans- fers, destruction of the housing unit, marital breakup, etc. In such cases the decision-maker is forced to search for alternatives and to choose among them. If we exclude cases where a person or household is forced to move, then the rest of mobility can be viewed as resulting from the increase in dissatisfaction beyond a person's threshold or tolerance level. There are several things which can lead to the increase of dissatisfaction beyond the threshold level. Dissatisfaction can result from a change in the needs of a household, a change in the social and physical amenities offered by a particular location, or 112 a change in the standards used to evaluate these factors. A frequent example of a change in needs of a household is family growth, which results in a demand for a larger dwell- ing unit. Examples of a change in amenities are the physi- cal deterioration of the dwelling unit or the neighborhood, a change in job conditions, or a change in the social bonds to other persons in the area. A change in standards could result from social mobility, social mobility aspirations, or the receipt Of information about opportunities elsewhere. The theory predicts that a highly satisfied person will not consider moving even though that person might be better off somewhere else. Although dissatisfaction is a necessary condition for the consideration Of mobility, it is not a sufficient condition. Some sources of dissatis- faction can be alleviated by adjustments in local conditions. For example, the person who hears about higher wages else— where can ask for a raise in pay and may receive it. If adjustments are not possible or they are not perceived or if they are perceived to be too costly, the person will then consider moving to a new location. A summary Of the Operationalization of the concepts involved in the present study is given in Table 6.1. Hypothesis On the base of the foregoing conceptualization, the following hypotheses are derived: H: 1 There are Spatial, generational and national subgroup differences among the Arab Muslim pOpulation in terms 113 of their Spatial mobility. H: 2 Single immigrants and immigrants who did not bring their families are more mobile than those who live with their families. H: 3 Spatial mobility rates have a linear relationship with income and education and a curvilinear relation- ship with age. H: 4 Residents who own their homes are less likely to move. H: 5 The larger the household Size relative to the living space available, the more likely a move is antici- pated by residents. H: 6 The longer the duration of residence in the present house, the less likely a move within the area is planned and the longer the duration of residence in the community the less likely a move outside the community is planned. H: 7 The higher the degree of satisfaction with the pres- ent community, the less likely a move to another area is planned. Table 6.1 A Summary of Operationalization Concepts/variables Indicators 1. Family life cycle age of head of household 2. Housing requirement household size 3. Dwelling size (Size of present unit) number of rooms 4. Access to housing market income 5. Inertial influences a. time in present house years in house b. tenure tenure status 6. Planned mobility move plans 7. Relative satisfaction satisfaction index with the area 114 Residential Mobility Analysis Planned mobility as we mentioned above, refers to the status of moving plans for a household. Those anticipating no move are classified as "stayers" and those anticipating a change in residence within the area are classed as "movers." In our sample of 214 households, 93 (43.5%) planned to move for another house and 121 (56.5%) planned to remain. In comparison to American figures this represents a high degree of residential mobility in the Arab Muslim population (Table 6.2). The movers and stayers in our study area vary Spati- ally. In the South End 45 percent are movers; in East Dearborn the percentage is as high as 51 percent, while in the Detroit area it is only 25 percent who plan to move. East Dearborn pOpulation in this sense are more mobile than the peOple of the other two areas. The explanation for this is that the peOple of East Dearborn are either second gener- ation or old immigrants who established themselves and adOpted the norms of the American peOple. East Dearborn is a middle class residential area. Among national subgroups, the Yemeni pOpulation are higher in their residential mobility than the Lebanese or the Palestinians (48, 35, and 41 percent respectively). This is mainly due to the fact that nearly all the Yemeni pOpulation are either Single or married whose wives are in the homeland. There are also differences between generations in terms of residential mobility. AS Shown in Table 6.2, 115 Table 6.2 Moving Plans by Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Heads of Household Plan to leave Plan to leave Variable house city Total % yes % no % yes % no Moving plans 44 56 32 68 100 (214) Place of residence 1. South End 45 55 38 62 100 (141) 2. E. Dearborn 51 49 22 78 100 ( 45) 3. Detroit 25 75 21 79 100 ( 28) Gamma .12 Gamma = .33 National groups 1. Lebanese 35 65 23 77 100 ( 74) 2. Palestinian 41 59 32 68 100 ( 54) 3. Yemenis 48 52 37 63 100 ( 52) Gamma -.42 Gamma = -.26 Generation 1. First gen. 41 59 31 69 100 (183) 2. Second gen. 81 19 52 48 100 ( 31) Gamma -.52 Gamma = -.43 Marital Status 1. Single 59 41 44 56 100 ( 41) 2. Married 42 58 29 71 100 (159) a. spouse here 28 72 24 76 100 (102) b. Spouse not here 46 54 35 65 100 ( 43) Gamma .38 Gamma = .37 Age of head (yrs) 18-24 63 73 54 46 100 ( 35) 25-34 55 45 32 68 100 ( 66) 35-44 29 71 26 74 100 ( 58) 45-64 37 63 19 81 100 ( 43) 65+ 17 83 50 50 100 ( 12) Gamma -.42 Gamma = 0.25 Hsehld Income-(1000) less than S 56 44 67 33 100 ( 18) 5 to 9.9 30 70 35 65 100 ( 23) 10 to 14.9 41 59 28 72 100 ( 64) 15 to 19.9 40 60 26 74 100 ( 50) 20+ 51 49 51 69 100 ( 54) Gamma -.09 Gamma = .18 116 Table 6.2 Continued Plan to leave Plan to leave Variable house city, Total % yes % no §yes 8 no Education 6th grade or less 33 67 33 67 100 ( 70) 7th to 12th 38 62 26 74 100 ( 88) College 70 30 57 43 100 ( 39) College+ 58 42 ll 89 100 ( l9) Gamma - -.36 Gamma = .04 Tenure status Owner 34 66 26 74 100 (119) Renter 56 44 40 60 100 ( 45) Gamma -.43 Gamma = -.31 Household Size 1-3 51 49 42 58 100 ( 86) 4-6 37 63 24 76 100 ( 90) 7 and over 42 58 29 71 100 ( 38) Gamma .17 Gamma = .25 NO. Of children Less than 5 58 42 25 75 100 ( 43) 6 and over 24 76 24 76 100 ( 29) Gamma .46 Gamma = .21 Years lived in house (community) 1-4 55 45 39 61 100 ( 55) 5-9 38 62 42 58 100 ( 34) 10 and over 44 56 21 79 100 ( 34) Gamma .18 Gamma = .42 117 first generation immigrants are less mobile than those of second generation pOpulation. Marital status as shown in Table 6.2 affects resi— dential mobility. Single heads of household Show higher mobility than their married counterparts. Among married heads, those whose families live with them in the United States are less mobile than those whose wives are in the homeland. The results of the correlation between age of the head of the household, which has been taken as an indicator of family life cycle and the planned residential mobility are given in Table 6.2. These results indicate a relatively high significant assOciation between age and planned resi- dential mobility, and echo the findings of all research on residential mobility. The relationship is curivilinear, representing a high mobility up to the age of 35, then it declines sharply in the age interval 35-44, rises again between the age of 45 to 64 then falls down to the minimum after the age of 65. These results diverge from the American norms of mobi- lity which accelerate after the age of 35 to 44. The expla- nation is found in the demographic characteristics of the Arab Muslim immigrants. It is possible that the early age of marriage among Arab Muslims and the tendency for child- bearing to begin soon after marriage may account for the greater proportion of movers in the younger age groups. The sharp decline in the mobility of the age group 35 to 44 is 118 result of the early adjustment of the housing needs which is necessitated by early child-rearing stage. The high fig- ures of mobility in the age interval 45 to 65 is mainly a result Of two important factors: 1. The socio-economic status of the heads of the household, by this age is relatively high. This might bring a change in the housing needs and housing requirements. 2. By this age the children begin to leave the fam- ily as a result of marriage or work outside the community. This brings about an adjustment and balancing between the household size and housing requirements. After the age of 65 planned mobility falls sharply to its minimum. Seventeen percent of those who are 65 years and over plan to move, while the majority-~83 percent--plan to stay. Income and education were correlated with residential mobility plans (Table 6.2) Among the two variables edu- cation only showed a Significant inverse relationship (Gamma = -.36). The figures Show that the higher the education up to the Bachelor degree the higher the mobility. Those who have degrees beyond Bachelor showed less intentions for planned residential mobility. This might be explained by the fact that these peOple are older, home owners, and have job stability. Some of them are also recent immigrants. Income showed a very weak association with residential mobility (gamma = -.09). This Shows that level of income is not a good indicator for residential mobility. The high 119 figures of mobility in the less than $5,000 income category might be explained by the fact that most of the peOple in this category are singles who either work part-time jobs or students or people under 20 living with the family and all of these have high mobility intentions. The prOportion of stayers in the second lowest income category may reflect the lack of financial resources to gain access to the housing market. The high prOportion in the highest income category may reflect resources sufficient to have made a satisfactory adjustment in housing since this group has the greatest ability in terms of income to accomplish the adjustment. The relative effect of income might be seen on home ownership. We hypothesized that the higher the income, the greater is the probability that a household owns its dwell- ing. The results Show that 80 percent who earn less than $10,000 are renters while those who earn $10—l5,000, 60 percent Of them are renters. In the income level beyond $15,000, 25 percent only live in rented homes. Tenure status has been examined in relation to moving plans of the household. The results are as hypothesized that owners are less likely to be movers than renters. A weak association appeared when correlating household size with planned mobility (Gamma = .17). The results did not support the hypothesis which says the higher the number of peOple in the household the higher their mobility. Those who have higher mobility intentions are found in smaller 120 households. Households with 1-3 peOple showed higher mobi- lity. This discrepancy in the data might be explained by the fact that most of those small households are not of family-type households. They are either friends or relatives living with each other, because their wives are in the home- land and they were Operationally defined as households. Those, as we have seen before, have higher mobility than their counterparts who have their wives and children here. To eliminate their effect, we correlated number of children with moving plans. The association Showed a relatively high significance (Gamma = .46) but once again did not support the hypothesis. Instead it showed an Opposite direction indicating that the higher the number of peOple in the family the less likely a move is anticipated. Controlling for number of rooms and relating household size with planned mobility did not help the situation. According to previous research, the results are more varied. Rossi with a large, heterogeneous sample found that moving plans were more likely among large households. (Rossi, 1955). Abu-Lughed with a center city sample found no rela- tionship as did Leslie and Richardson, Adams, and the present study (Abu-Lughed, 1960:387-390; Leslie and Richardson, 1961: 894-962; Adams, 1970:65). Long found an inverse J-Shape relationship between number of children and moving plans within counties (Long, 1972:371-382). The longitudinal study by Chevan may provide an explanation in this area. When 121 controlling for duration of marriage, he found no relation— ship between moving plans and the number of children. How- ever, when examining the households in successive three-year periods, the addition of a child does not affect moving plans. The housing adjustments which occur earlier may retard future moves as additional children are merely accommodated into existing space. Chevan states that the presence of children of itself is not a good predictor for future move. This may also Offer an explanation for the Arab Muslim sample. Giving the financial resources available for these peOple, the addition of children may cause a strain on the budget, that is more salient than the strain on dwell- ing Space. The last item in Table 6.2 refers to duration of residence in the present house. It is expected to be associ- ated with lower probability of planned mobility. The data presented in Table 6.2 Show that the relationship is not so clear-cut. The likelihood of planning a move is 55 percent among those who lived less than five years in the present house. It decreases to 38 percent for those who lived 5 to 10 years, then it increases up to 44 percent to those who lived more than 10 years in the present house. The associ- ation between the two variables is weak. The relationship is more curvilinear than linear as was hypothesized and reflects the adjustment of the household to housing needs and requirements which usually occur after ten years of living in the same house. 122 Housing Supply, Most of the research dealing with residential mobility assumes that housing supply is constant, but in our study area it is not the case. The physical sup- ply Of housing is not available all the time. Two follow up questions were asked Of those who plan to move: You are planning to move from this house to another house in the area; do you think that you will have trouble finding the kind of house you want at the price you can afford to pay? If yes, what is the reason for that? Respondent answers to the first question are Shown in Table 6.3. Sixty-three percent of those who plan to move expected difficulties in finding new houses. There are spa- tial variations among those who expect such troubles. PeOple from East Dearborn and Southwest Detroit perceive no diffi- culties, while the majority of the South End heads of house- l'old expect difficulties in obtaining new residences. Table 6.3 The Distribution of the Households who Expect Difficulty in Finding New Residences r7 Subareas _ Response % all % East Dearborn % South End % Detroit Yes 63 13 89 0 No 37 87 11 100 Total 100 (93) 100 (23) 100 (63) 100(7) Reasons for those difficulties are tabulated in Table 6.4 which shows the respondents' answers to the second question. Excluding East Dearborn from the analysis because of the small figures in its cells, it is quite clear that 123 that there is a housing shortage in the South End area. Ninety percent of the respondents cited shortage of housing supply as the main reason for their difficulties in finding new houses. High rent, the second important cause, is mainly due to housing shortages. Table 6.4 Difficulty Reasons by Subareas Reason % all % East Dearborn % 8. End Shortage in houses 90 100 84 Rent is higher than I can afford 10 0 16 Total 100 (59) 100(3) 100 (56) The decision Of the city nearly 20 years ago to re- zone the area to heavy industry has had a great effect on the housing market and the housing supply. Between 1960 and 1970, the U.S. Census shows that there was a 25 percent reduction of dwellings in the area. During the last ,thirteen years, the city has acquired 356 lots (Aswad, 1974:71). The frequent shifting of clear- ance boundaries by the city planning committee led to much confusion, uncertainty and division in the community. Since 1962, nine different renewal projects have been prOposed in the section north of Dix Road. Many of them have overlapping boundaries. The Southeast Dearborn Community Council (SEDCC) brought their classification suit against the city in 1971. An Opinion was given by the judge in favor Of the community. 124 Among the thirty-three allegations brought against the city, the judge agreed with twenty-eight. He found that Dearborn forced peOple to sell to the city by denying or delaying building permits, requiring residents to perform maintenance or install items not required by the city building code, discouraging repairs and leaving city owned vacated lots in unsightly and unkept state. . . .He said the private market in the area was destroyed by announcements from the city Officials that FHA insurance was unavailable in the area. The judge found that the city had allowed its prOperties in the area to remain unprotected and posted signs reading "Free at your risk. Take any part of the house, hurry." He ruled that the city has not been Offering fair compensation to the homeowners. He enjoined the city from acquiring any addi- tional property, posting signs, soliciting sales and en- gaging in other acts designed to encourage sales, and he forbade zoning changes for five years and gave the 350 dis- placed homeowners the opportunity to sue the city (Amen, 1973 and Aswad, 1974:73). The above policy shed some light on housing shortage in the South End area, and explains the appearance of numer- ous scattered vacant lots, the several blocks with no houses on them, the growing number of playgrounds and parking lots and the numerous unrepaired homes. 125 Inter-urban Mobility Analysis Socio-economic Characteristics and'MOBility In our sample Of 214 households, only 69 (32%) planned to move to another area and 145 (68%)planned to remain. In comparison to American figures this represents a relatively low degree of inter-urban mobility. Looking for the socio-economic characteristics of movers (Table 6.2) we see that the residents of the South End are more mobile than the other two areas. Thirty-eight per- cent Of them plan to leave the South End, while only 22 and 21 percent of East Dearborn and Detroit pOpulation plan to leave their own areas. This might reflect the problem of housing shortages which was mentioned in the beginning of this chapter. AS in residential mobility, among the national sub- groups the Yemenis Showed a higher shifting between cities than the Lebanese and Palestinians. The same reasons men- tioned in their high residential mobility may give a clue for their inter-urban mobility attitude. Table 6.2 shows also differences in generation in terms of mobility. Second generation heads of household are more mobile than members of first generation immigrants. The single heads and heads who are married and whose wives are in the homeland are more mobile than those who live with their families in the study area. 126 Age of the head of household inversely correlates with moving plans from the study area. The higher the age the less the mobility inclination. The results Show a linear relationship quite different from the results of residential mobility which was a curvilinear one. The lowest and highest income groups Showed higher mobility than the middle income groups. The explanatiOn is that the lowest income groups do not have an economically big stake in the area, while the highest income group can afford to live in other areas. The middle income group is attached to the area because of jobs and other social bonds. Education showed a very weak association with moving plans. No pattern shows in the data except that those who have a college education are higher in their mobility inten- tions, while those who have degrees beyond the bachelor are the least mobile (Table 6.2). A discrepancy in the data appeared again when cor- relating household Size with moving plans. The direction showed the Opposite to what we had hypothesized. Number of children again has no effect on moving plans. Those who have less than five children are quite similar to those who have six children and over. Number of years lived in the community, when correlated with moving plans from the area showed the same results as in residential mobility. Those who live between 5 and 10 years are more mobile than those who lived less than five or those who lived more than 10 years in the community indicating a bell shape relationship with mobility. 127 Explanation for the above results were discussed in intra community residential mobility. Neighborhood Satisfaction and Mobility. It is not a Simple matter to measure and establish a scale for neighborhood satisfaction, because the components of such a scale are complex and the respondents' answers de- pend upon values and attitudes as well as personal Opinions. One of the goals of this research is to know how the Arab Muslims perceive their ghetto-like community, their perception of differing spatial organizations, and their attitudes toward their place of residence. Following Darden in his study of Pittsburgh youth in 1970 (Darden, 1970:19-22) we employed 12 statements in the interview schedule in an effort to determine the aggregate attitudes Of the community toward their neighborhood. The evaluative questions enabled the respondents to rate their neighborhood on a semantic differential scale ranging from an extreme negative to an extreme positive attitude. The questions dealt with the physical and social elements of the neighborhood. More Specifically they dealt with physical appearance, noise, privacy, crowdedness, safety, cleanliness, maintenance, pollution, reSpondents' view about the peOple in the community, nearness of the area from place of work, relatives as close neighbors, and overall evaluation of the neighborhood, (Figure 6.1 and Appendix). These items were taken as indicators for measuring the physical and social climate of the study area. 128 A Stepwise Multiple correlation and regression analysis was carried out between these indicators as independent variables and moving plans out of the area as the dependent variable. The results showed that all the variables yielded a multiple correlation coefficient Of (R) 0.3 and statistically account for only 9.3 percent of the moving-plan variable. Ten variables were retained in the analysis. The other two variables, maintenance and safety, were deleted by the computer Showing no association and no prediction power to moving plans. Out of the ten variables retained, five variables were not significant at the .05 level. These variables are: noise in the area, physical appearance of the area, crowded- ness, respondents' view about the peOple of the community, and nearness of the area from place of work. These variables did not contribute to the final regression equation, indi- cating that they are not good indicators for explaining mobility among the Arab Muslim community. The last five variables: privacy, friends and rela- tives as close neighbors, cleanliness of the area, pollution, and over-all evaluation of the area explained the nine per- cent of the total variation in the moving-plan variable, while the rest of the variables explained only .3 percent of the dependent variable. The above analysis failed to explain the prediction of a plan to move by variables constructed to measure area- satisfaction. Several different indices of area-satisfaction 129 were eXperimented with. These included a simple sum of all the twelve items for a single variable, called the index Of satisfaction. This index together with the socio-economic variables were correlated in a multiple agression analysis with the moving—plan variable. If this index is acting as an intervening variable as we hypothesized, it should be more strongly related to moving plans than to any Of the household characteristics, which are frequently associated with mobility. We shall begin with the zero-order correla- tion between the variables and then proceed to a discussion Of multiple correlation. Table 6.5 Zero-order Correlation Between Background Variables Satisfaction Index and Plan to Move Background Satisfaction Plan to variable index move Age of head .07 -,14 Education of head -.25 -.00 Family income -.10 —.15 Owner or renter .18 .15 Duration of residence -.04 .03 Crowding ratio .07 —.05 Satisfaction index -- .03 Plan to move .03 The zero-order correlation between the background variables, the satisfaction index and plan to move are shown in Table 6.5. The results are Opposite to what is predicted by the theory. Satisfaction with the area has the lower correlation with plan to move than any of the background variables (.03). It also is surprising to see that all the background variables which have been stressed in the literature 130 have very low correlations with the mobility variable. Among the background variables, home ownership, income, and age show some correlation with moving plans, while the other variables such as education, duration of residence and crowding ratios have almost no relation to the mobility variable. On the other hand, education has a relatively moderate correlation with satisfaction index, followed by home ownership and income. The relative magnitude of the correlations between the background variables and the satisfaction index tends to be the same as that of the correlations with the mobility variable except for a reversal of the Sign on age, duration of residence and crowding ratio. We can conclude that the background variables are not significantly related to either mobility or satisfaction with the area. To examine the relationship between satisfaction with the area and moving plan out of the area, the index of satis- faction was correlated with moving plans. The results are Shown in Table 6.6. The table shows that those who plan to move are not necessarily dissatisfied with the area of present residence. Only 11 percent Of_those who plan to move are dissatisfied. On the other hand, 15 percent are satisfied with the area, while the majority of the respondents (74%) are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. This reveals that satisfaction with the area of present residence is not the prime cause of inter-urban mobility. 131 Table 6 .6 Relationship between Index of Area-Satisfaction and Mobility Satisfaction Index Score No. Of cases % Planning to move 52a 39-51 26-38b 13—25 0-12c Total 10 51 01 07 69 15 74 l 10 100 acompletely satisfied bneither satisfied nor dissatisfied cmostly dissatisfied This descrepancy in our data and our failure to explain inter-urban mobility with the same tools which were used for studying mobility among American pOpulation led us to examine the data for every individual household who planned to move from the study area, to look for the reason of his migration out of the area ber of movers and the reason for their movement. Table 6.7 Reasons for Movement Out of the Study Area Table 6.7 shows the num- Reason Number of head Percent 1. My children want to move 46 67 2. Can afford to live in better area 15 22 3. Look for job 3 4 4. GO to the homeland 4 6 5. Do not like the community 1 1 Total 69 100 132 The above table Shows that 67 percent of those who plan to move cited family reasons for their movement, especially the desire of their children to move out of the area. Twenty-two percent said they can afford to live in a better area. The four percent who cited job reasons were either unemployed or laid off, while the other six percent who want to go to the homeland are either retirees or dis- abled workers. Excluding the last three items from the above table, we can say that two reasons explain the Arab Muslim inter- urban mobility: l. A high valuation on family living; 2. Striving for a high standard of living. The above two reasons are not separate. The high valuation of family living leads for higher standard of living and vice versa. When we correlated the above two reasons with gener- ation, a striking pattern emerged. This pattern is shown in Table 6.8. Table 6.8 Reasons for Moving out of the Wtion No. Of No. of Reasons Total lst gen. 2nd gen. High valuation of family living 46 41 5 Striving for a high Standard of Living 15 2 13 133 Forty-one heads Of household out of 46 who gave family reasons for their movement, were from the first gener- ation immigrants and 13 out of 15 who gave aspiration for a high standard of living were from the second generation. When we examined the data for members of the second generation on satisfaction, the majority of them have the lowest scores in the satisfaction scale. Also when we exam- ined their previous occupations we found that in 16 cases out of 18 there was an obvious career mobility through pro- motions and salary increases. We concluded that their decision to move might be affected by their social mobility which in turn affects their re-evaluation of their present area Of residence on new standards. No statistical analysis was made because the number is so small. Only 18 persons were from the second generation. Out of the 43 heads of household of the first gener- ation who cited family reasons as their prime cause for moving out of the area, 25 peOple were contacted again after we had problems interpreting their inclination to move. A question was asked by phone: You mentioned during the interview that you plan to leave Dearborn (Detroit), because your children want that. Why is that so? Also we had the Opportunity to talk to 17 children of ages 13-18 years Old and ask them why they want their family to move out of the area. Eighty of the heads of households said that their children from the ages 14 and over do not like the area, while 20 percent said they want better schooling for their 134 children. Eighty-eight percent of the children cited that they do not like the area. The overall conclusion is that members of the first generation have no Spatial mobility aspiration. Their root is among their community; they feel like strangers outside it. They always compare their situation now with their past situation in the homeland. The comparison supports their beliefs that they are lucky in their place. It is their children who always compare their situation with the standard American life and feel the difference. The children convince their parents that they are in a ghetto and they will never be better Off inside it. This pressure is the prime cause of moving out of the area and it is a sacrifice from the fathers to the future of their children, and as one respond- ent said, "I know I will be alone in Dearborn Heights (a suburb of Detroit he is planning to move to), but it is necessary for the future of my family." Summary The above analysis Showed that there are spatial, generational and national subgroup differences among the Arab-Muslim pOpulation in terms of their Spatial mobility. PeOple of East Dearborn are higher in their mobility inten- tions than the people of the South End and southwest Detroit. Among the national groups, the Yemeni pOpulation are higher in their Spatial mobility than the Lebanese or the Palestin- ians. First generation immigrants are less mobile than those of the second generation population. Single heads of house- holds show higher mobility than their married counterparts. 135 Among the married heads, those whose families live with them in the United States are less mobile than those whose wives are in the homeland. The age of the heads of household showed a curvilinear relationship with residential mobility and a linear relationship with interurban mobility. Income and education showed varied results when cor- related with inter and intra-urban mobility. No clear relationship and no Significant association were found between income and spatial mobility. Education showed a significant inverse relationship with intra-urban residential mobility and a very weak association and no clear direction with inter- urban mobility. The analysis also failed to prove that household size is a good indicator for measuring residential moves. Also duration of residence did not have the intended inverse relationship as it was hypothesized. The preference method approach used in the interurban mobility analysis failed to explain why people move out of the area. The socio-economic characteristics and the degree of satisfaction with the area proved to be not good indicators for moving plans outside the community. CHAPTER VII ACCULTURATION OF THE ARAB-MUSLIM COMMUNITY Definitional divergence surrounds many of the con- cepts employed in dealing with dominant-minority relations, and disagreement exists on the theoretical relationships Of these concepts for one another. Among social scientists, "assimilation." "acculturation," "pluralism" and related terms have numerous definitions, implications, meanings and connotations. The context of any study of minorities can be described only in the conventional terminology so it becomes imperative to avoid the pitfalls of conceptual inconsistency. To this end, an attempt is made to distinguish and Operationalize the following concepts: Assimilation Assimilation is a process in which persons of diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds come to interact, free of eth- nicity and race constraints, in the life of the larger com- munity. Complete assimilation would mean that no separate social structure based on race or ethnicity remained. As a concept in American sociology, assimilation has had various meanings. For some scholars it is synonymous with acculturation. According to Park and Burgess "Assimilation is a process Of 136 137 interpenetration and fusion in which persons or_groups acquire the memories, sentiments and attitudes of other per- sons Or groups and by sharing these experiences and history are incorporated with them in a common cultural life" Bass, 1970:10). Complete segregation and total assimilation are Oppo- site ends Of a continuum along which may be located varying degrees of limited desegregation, substantial pluralism, hypothetical integration which values structural and cultural differences while insisting on equal life Opportunities, partial assimilation, individual assimilation, and group assimilation (Sills, 1968:438). "The term assimilation literally means the process of becoming 'alike'...; as used in sociology it denotes (a) the process whereby a group, generally a minority or immigrant group, is through contact absorbed into the culture of another group; (b) the result of such absorption. Thus (it) denotes the process in which one set of cultural traits is relinquished and a new one acquired....the \ change is gradual and may take place in any degree. Full assimilation means the incorporation of new ‘ members into a society so that they are not dis- ,/ tinguishable from.former members....(Dictionary of Social Sciences, l964:38)." Gordon sees the assimilation process and its subpro- cesses as a matter of degree, but, complete assimilation would cover seven variables. This conceptual scheme provides the most satisfactory criteria yet prOposed for measuring assimilation and determining to what extent it is taking place (Sills, 1968:439). With regard to the term assimilation, there is a com- pelling need for a vigorous and systematic analysis of the concept which breaks it down into all the possible relevant factors or variables which could conceivably be included under its rubric. Some of the particular assimilation subprocesses or variables with their general names and Special names, if any, anagiven in the following table (7.1). Table 7.1 The Assimilation Variables Subprocess or condition Stage of Assimilation 1. Change of cultural patterns to those of host society Cultural or behavioral assimilation (acculturation) 2. Large-scale entrance into host society cliques, clubs and institutions on primary group level Structural Assimilation 3. Large-scale intermarriage Marital assimilation (Amalgamation) 4. DevelOpment of sense of Identificational peOplehood based exclu- assimilation sively on host society 5. Absence of prejudice Attitude receptional assimilation 6. Absence of discrimination Behavior receptional assimilation 7. Absence of value and power conflict Civil assimilation Source: (Gordon, 1964:6l,70-7l and Table 5 and Bass, 1970:13) Acculturation In the literature, acculturation refers to a group's taking on elements from the culture of another group. It has also been used as a synonym for socialization, the acquisition of ways of behaving and valuing by individuals. 139 "The term acculturation is widely accepted among American anthrOpologists as referring to those changes set in.motion by the coming together of societies with different cultural traditions. The term remains somewhat ambiguous but persis— tent usage gives it the meaning of cultural assimilation, or replacement of one set of cul- tural traits by another, as in reference to individuals in contact situations as more or less 'acculturated.'" "As defined by Robert Redfield, Ralph Linton and Melville Herskoits, as members of the Social Science Research Council, in 1935: 'Acculturation comprehends those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, which subsequent changes in the original cultural patterns of either or both groups'(Sills, 1968:21)" "Sociologists and cultural anthrOpOlogists have described the process and results of ethnic 'meet- ings' under such terms as assimilation and accul- turation. Sometimes these terms have been used to mean the same thing; in other usages their meanings, rather than being identical, have over- lapped. Sociologists are more likely to use assimilations; anthrOpologists have favored acculturation and have given it a narrower but generally consistent meaning (Gordon, 1964:61." In this study acculturation is defined as one of the sustaining processes whereby Arab Muslim minority groups are incorporated into the dominant American culture. The term refers to the changes in the Arab Muslim individuals whose primary learning has been in the Arab Muslim culture and who take over traits from American culture. Acculturation is used here as the first stage of assimilation which is referred to by Gordon as the cultural or behavioral assimilation. It is the first type of assimilation to occur when a minority group arrives on the scene; and this condition of accultura- tion may continue indefinitely without any other type of assimilation occurring. 140 This process of assimilation-cultural or behavioral is one of several subprocesses of assimilation...cultural, structural, marital, identificational, attitude receptional, behavioral receptional and civic. Important here is Gordon's distinction between cultural assimilation and structural assimilation. By cultural assimilation Gordon means the acculturation of ethnic minorities to the culture of middle class white Protestants...the "core society." Gordon main- tains that structural assimilation has not taken place in the U.S.; that is, minority groups in America have not entered on a large scale into cliques, clubs and institutions of the dominant white protestant society on a primary group level (Gordon, 1964:70-71). Acculturation Scale The above discussion revealed that acculturation is the first type of assimilation which occurs when a minority group arrives on the scene. This type, which is called by Gordon the cultural or behavioral assimilation, includes changes of cultural patterns to those of the host society. It is a new behavior in which material culture, every day language and secular roles are acquired (Marden and Meyer, 1968:35, 437). For purposes of this study, this aspect of the process was chosen as a means of measuring the degree of the Arab Muslim's assimilation into the American culture. Seven questions in the interview schedule were designed to measure the behavior of the Arab Muslim immigrants and how it conforms with or diverges from the American social 141 behavior. The items dealt with habits, social relationship and symbolic behavior. More specifically they dealt with language, food habits, social visits, social functions at cof- fee houses,dating, drinking and dancing. The questions and the respondents' answers are shown in Table 7.2. The ways Of life of the community members reveal that these members manifest four types of cultural patterns: 1. Arab Muslim standard patterns. These are regarded as survivals or unacculturated elements. 2. Arab Muslim modified and American modified pat- terns. These are considered as acculturated patterns. 3. American standard patterns. These are referred to as assimilated elements. In order to define the mechanism of acculturation, the cultural patterns of the community were analyzed on the basis of the above three types. Table 7.2 The Components of the Acculturation Scale Item Always Often Seldom Never Total Arabic language spoken at home 64 10 25 l 100 Eating Arabic food 66 27 6 l 100 Social visits to neighbors 50 22 22 6 100 Going to coffee- houses 40 24 21 15 100 Dating 29 23 19 29 100 Drinking 8 24 30 38 100 Dancing 19 23 27 31 100 142 Table 7.2 shows that the first four items: Arabic food, Arabic language, repeated social visits and coffee- houses social functions are regarded as old culture "standard" forms. The last three items: dating, drinking and dancing are regarded as American "standard" elements because they are not found in the original culture the way they are in the adOp- ted culture. Drinking and dating are prohibited by the Islamic religion and if they are practiced in the old culture, they are not social norms and the majority of the peOple consider drinkers and daters as deviaters from the norms of the majority. American dancing is quite different from that of the original culture and could be considered in its way among the American peOple as a quite new phenomenon for the Arab Muslim immigrants. By measuring the divergence from the original culture on the first four items and the conformity with the American culture on the last three items, we can see where those peOple stand on the acculturation scale. The scale assumes its beginning with the original culture as lowest point then it moves up to the adOpted culture as the highest point, leaving the Space in between for the modified culture. The responses to the first four items were scaled as zero for "always" response, one for "often" reSponse, two for "seldom" and three for "never" response. The last three items are in the Opposite direction. They were scaled as three for "always" reSponse, two for "often" response, one for ”seldom" and zero for "never." 143 The assumption is that the more the person diverges from his original culture, and the more he conforms with the adOpted culture, the more he is considered to be highly acculturated. The first four items showed a low level on the accul- turation scale (Table 7.2). Sixty-four, 66, 50, 40 percent of the respondents use Arabic language, eat Arabic food, per- form social visits to neighbors and go to coffee houses reSpectively. These high figures Show the dominance of the Old culture forms in the community. The following reasons might have effected these high figures. 1. Forty-two percent of the community are recent immi- grants who came during the last seven years. 2. Ghetto life of the community, where there are high percentages of relatives and friends. 3. The existence of native food and native ways of cooking. The last three items: drinking, dating and dancing Show a relatively balanced distribution between the two ends of the scale. The low percentages of alcohol drinkers might reflect some bias in the responses. The first question now is whether these seven items have anything in common, that is, whether they seem to measure a single variable; this variable we infer from the content to be the intensity of cultural assimilation into American society. The scores of the above seven items were added and dichotomized by the mean to differentiate between high and low 144 acculturation among the reSpondents. Forty-eight percent of the respondents have low scores on the acculturation scale and 52 percent Showed high scores on that scale.1 1During the field work some Of the interviews were held in coffee-houses where there were some peOple other than the interviewer and the interviewee. It was thought this might lead to false answers to some of the items in the questionnaire, especially those items that deal with dating, drinking and dancing. It was felt that although some of the respondents do drink alcohol, they are not ready to con- fess that they practice this habit. TO avoid this bias which might affect the scale of acculturation we selected five items which Show some other behavioral aspects of the community. These items are (l) eating with hand instead of Spoon; (2) sitting on carpet rather than chairs; (3) inviting neighbors and relatives when a guest comes; (4) style of marriage ceremony whether American or Arabic; (5) do children eat with guests? Observation was concentrated on these items. Record- ing of these observations were made after the interview. Thirty-eight cases were recorded. An acculturation scale was devised from these items. The results Showed that 50 percent have a high level on the acculturation scale, the other 50 percent have a low level on that scale. A test of significance between this sample and the above sample showed no significant difference between the two. This was done as a check for the validity of the scale. x 145 Hypotheses On the basksof the foregoing conceptualization, the following hypotheses are derived. H: l H: 2 H: 3 H: 4 H: 5 H: 6 H: 7 H: 8 There are spatial, generational and national subgroup differences among the Arab Muslim pOpulation in terms of their level Of acculturation. Single immigrants and immigrants who did not bring their families are less acculturated than those who live with their families. Immigrants with urban background have higher level on the acculturation scale than immigrants with rural background. Ethnic social bonds are inversely related to accul- turation level. Perceived discrimination from the host society is inversely related to acculturation level. Level of acculturation is directly related to time of arrival in America. Level of acculturation is directly related to resi- dential patterning: dispersed pOpulation are higher in their level of acculturation than concentrated pOpulation. Level of acculturation is directly related to inter- urban mobility. 146 Socio-economic Characteristics and Acculturation The acculturation scale was correlated with some of the socio-economic variables. The results are Shown in Table 7.3. Among the national subgroups, the Lebanese are higher than the Palestinians and the Yemenis. This might be a result of the early immigration of the Lebanese and the relatively recent immigration of the Yemenis, who showed the lowest on the acculturation scale. First generation immi- grants are lower than second generation members who were born and educated in this country. Single immigrants, as Shown in Table 7.3 are less acculturated than married peOple. This might reflect their recent immigration to the United States. Divorced members are the highest on the acculturation scale. It is found that all divorced heads are from the second generation mem- bers. Married heads of household who have wives and families here Show higher level of acculturation than those whose wives are in the homeland. Part Of the answer to this is that most of the immigrants who live without their families are not planning to stay forever in this country, so they do not care much about adapting their life style to the American culture. Spouse stock showed a Significant relationship. Heads of household whose Spouses are of Arab descent are less acculturated than those whose Spouses are either American or Arab-American born in this country. 147 Rural-urban background showed a weak association with the acculturation scale. The direction is Opposite to what we hypothesized. This might be due to the fact that there are no sharp differences between rural and urban pOpulation Of the country of origin. When correlating the date of migration of the reSpond- ents with the acculturation scale the results Showed the longer the duration of residence in the United States the higher the level of acculturation. The relationship is quite strong and in the same direction as we hypothesized. Income Showed a direct relationship with the level of acculturation. The data in Table 7.3 confirm the hypothesis that the higher the income, the higher the level of acculturation. Contrary to that of income, education Showed a very weak association and no direction with the level Of accultur- /:> ation. The lowest and the highest levels of education are quite the same on the acculturation scale. Six-graders are higher in the level of acculturation than 7-12-graders, and those who have college are higher than those who have Master's on the scale also. The higher level of acculturation among the lower level of education might be explained by their early immigration to this country which gave them the chance to live longer in the American society. On the contrary, most Of those who have degrees beyond Bachelor are recent immigrants, thus they show lower level than those who are college graduates. 148 Table 7.3 Acculturation by Socio—economic Variables Gamma = .07 Acculturation Variable % % Total Low High Acculturation scale 48 52 100 (219) National Groups 1. Lebanese 42 58 100 ( 74) 2. Palestinians 46 54 100 ( 54) 3. Yemenis 65 35 100 ( 52) Gamma = .100 Generation 1. First generation 51 49 100 (183) 2. Second generation 40 60 100 ( 31) Gamma = .27 Marital Status 1. Single 68 32 100 ( 41) 2. Divorced 36 64 100 ( l4) 3. Married 44 56 100 (150) a. Spouse here 36 64 100 (102) b. Spouse in homeland 56 44 100 ( 43) Gamma = .41, -.53 Spouse Stock 1. Arab 46 54 100 (134) 2. Arab-American + American 39 61 100 ( 33) Gamma = .28 Urban-Rural Background 1. Came from village 48 52 100 (141) 2. Came from city 52 48 100 ( 42) Gamma = -.08 Time of Arrival in America 1. Before World War II 38 62 100 ( 90) 2. 1948-1959 40 60 100 ( 47) 3. 1960—1969 43 57 100 ( 30) 4. 1970-1977 58 42 100 ( 16) Gamma = .27 Income (1,000) Less than 10 56 44 100 ( 41) 10 to 14.9 50 50 100 ( 64) 15 to 19.9 46 54 100 ( 50) 20 and over 42 58 100 ( 59) Gamma = .14 Education (years) 0- 6 49 51 100 ( 70) < 7-12 52 48 100 ( 33) College 38 62 100 ( 37) College + 47 53 100 ( 19) 149 Table 7.3 Continued Acculturation Variable % % Total Lo . Occupation High 40 60 100 ( 53) Low 53 47 100 ( 97) Gamma = .26 Relatives as close neighbors The majority of neighbors are relatives 53 47 100 (170) Few Of neighbors are relatives 40 60 100 ( 44) Gamma = .09 Occupation figures confirm the hypothesized relation- ship which states that the higher the level of occupation, the higher the level of acculturation. "Relatives who live as close neighborS’was taken as an indicator of ethnic social bonds. If the majority of neighbors are either relatives or from the same area, their reaction to the acculturation process will be less than those who live in an ethnically mixed area. Therefore, the higher the num- ber of relatives in the neighborhood, the lower the level of acculturation of the peOple of that neighborhood. Data in Table 7.3 support this argument. Forty-seven percent of those who live among their relatives showed high level of acculturation while 60 percent of those who responded that there are few relatives in their neighborhood have high level Of acculturation, but the relationship is very weak between the two variables (Gamma = .09). 150 Discrimination and Acculturation Among the factors that restrain the process of accul- turation are the prejudice toward and discrimination against ethnic and racial groups by the host society. Gordon men- tioned the absence Of the above two items together with the absence of value and power conflict as the last constraints for complete assimilation (Gordon, 1964:61-71). Early immigrants were faced with hostility and antago- nism. They were obliged to change their names and religion to be permitted in as immigrants (Elkholy, 1965:58). "The pioneers of the community during the twenties and thirties had suffered religious discrimination from some Americans who misunderstood the principles of Islam. This helped in the concentration of the community members and in develOping the self- inferiority feeling. Their concentration and such inferior feelings hindered the possible increase of interpersonal contacts between the two culture groups (Wasfi, l964:318)." Wasfi reported another aspect of discrimination against the members of the community, They were discriminated against in employment. "While Ford plants have accepted any laborer, in spite of his faith, color, or origin, some other companies refused to employ the Arab Muslim pioneers. This discrimination was another factor that persuaded the emigrants to concentrate in a ghetto-like community in the shadow of the Ford Rouge Plant. This concentration, in turn, hampered the process of acculturation (WAsfi: ibid)." Wasfi in his study in 1964, describes the interpersonal relationships between the members of the Arab Muslim community and the host society as friendly assuming,no discrimination against the members of the Arab Muslim community. 151 "[The] hostility has completely vanished with the increased number of literate and educated descend- ents in the community. Moreover the decline of self-inferiority feelings has played a partial role in ending this hostility......None of the very few members who have brown complexions reported racial discrimination. It seems that (f the absence of any Indian or Negroid physical features among the brown-complexioned members may explain the lack Of such discrimination. Thus we can say that the culture contact has been a friendly one. (Wasfi, l964:304)." In an effort to assess the situation as it is now, two questions were developed in the interview schedule to examine the presence or absence of ethnic discrimination by the host society. Knowing that the members of the commu- nity live either in an area dominated by Arab residents or in an ethnically mixed area, the question was designed as follows: "Do you feel that you would be discriminated against in other areas? Why would this be?" Respondents' answers are: Yes strongly, 45 percent; yes medium, 12 percent; yes weakly, 10 percent, and no, 33 percent. In other words, 67 percent of the respondents feel that the host society prac- tices discrimination against the community in one way or another. When correlating discrimination with acculturation (Table 7.4) the results prove that 64 percent of those who have high level of acculturation face a kind of discrimination in one way or another. TO eliminate the effect of self-inferiority which usually accompanies the members of first generation immigrants, 152 who feel that they might not be equal to their counterparts from the host culture, the respondents were dichotomized into first and second generation. The results are shown in Table 7.4. Forty—five percent of the second generation immigrants, who were born in the host society, educated as their American peers and adOpted the American social life feel that they face discrimination from the host society. This proves that discrimination is not only because of a lack of the adopted norms of the society, but as a result of racial and ethnic prejudice. Table 7.4 Discrimination by Generation and Acculturation Discrimination Variable % % Total Yes NO Level of acculturation 1. high 64 36 100 (111) 2. low 70 30 100 (103) Gamma = .09 Generation 1. lst generation 70 30 100 (183) 2. 2nd generation 45 55 100 ( 31) Gamma = .12 We were not able to quantify the reasons which are reported by the reSpondents to the question: "Why would this (discrimination) be?" but we will mention some of the reasons mentioned by five of the reSpondents. 1. "Because of religion and heritage." 2. “Ethnic background, physical appearance, class background." 153 3. "I am an Arab. We are called Syrian niggers." 4. "Skin, religion and culture." 5. "General attitude of non-Arabs toward Arabs throughout United States. Americans are either ignorant of what Arabs are, or are prOpagandized by distorted media representations of Arabs and their culture, general intolerance and prejudice toward Islam." The above paragraphs shed some light on some ethnic and religious hostility by the members of the host culture which restrain and delay the acculturation process. Residential Distribution and Acculturation Our aim is to examine to what degree the factors of spatial patterning are related to the processes of accultur- ation. Previous literature (Jakle and Wheeler, 1968:441-459) shows that residential patterning is directly related to the acculturation mechanism. Where a high acculturation rate exists, the ethnic pOpulation tends toward greater dispersal in residential patterns; conversely, where the acculturation rate is low, increasing residential concentration is the rule, because large influxes Of ethnic immigrants intensify the degree of ethnocentricity, reduce social interaction between the immigrants and host pOpulations and retard the rates of acculturation. In Chapter IV we discussed the evolving patterns of residential distribution and we came to the conclusion that 154 within the three subareas: South End, East Dearborn and South- west Detroit there are two distinctive patterns Of residential distribution: the ghetto or the core area which experienced a growing spatial concentration and the periphery or the area which surrounds the core which showed a dispersed residential pattern. The core area coincides with the South End while the periphery contains East Dearborn and Southwest Detroit. The hypothesis which we are trying to test is that the level Of acculturation in the core area (South End) is lower than the level of acculturation in the surrounding areas (East Dearborn and Southwest Detroit). The acculturation Scale was correlated with the three subareas. The results are shown in Table 7.5. Fifty-two percent of the respondents in the South End have a high level of acculturation, while 61 and 47 percent of the other two areas have high levels of acculturation. The results show that the core area has a higher level Of acculturation than the middle—class area of East Dearborn. Southwest Detroit is the highest on the scale Of acculturation although it was recently inhabited by very recent Arab Muslim immigrants. The results are in the Opposite direction to what we have hypothesized; the relationship is very weak between the two variables. What seems to be puzzling is clarified when we con- trolled for the date of entry to the United States. Recalling that most of the Old immigrants live in the South End we might expect a higher level of acculturation among them. 155 So we correlated the respondents who only came in the last seven years--since l970--by the three subareas which are inhabited by Arab Muslims. The reason for taking only those who migrated in the last seven years is that before that time,the number of Arab Muslims who lived in Southwest Detroit and in East Dearborn was small. The results Show that those who lived in the South End for the last seven years are lower in their level of acculturation than those who lived in either Detroit or East Dearborn. The relationship is strong and significant at the .01 level. The reason is that the South End is a ghetto area inhabited by a homogeneous group with identical ethnic background and distinct social customs. The traditional customs are preserved and maintained to a great extent by the members of the community. One can- not but observe the Arabic atmosphere on Dix Street: here are many coffee houses whose patrons Speak Arabic and drink the same tea and Turkish coffee that they drink in the Old country and play the same games, at home the same Arabic food is served. The Syrian groceries import food from all Arab countries. The Syrian bakeries and pastry shOps provide familiar food, too. The pOpulation outside the core in East Dearborn, Southwest Detroit and other parts of Detroit MetrOpOlitan Area such as Dearborn Heights are randomly distributed throughout the city. The gathering of three or four families in one section does not indicate more than chance. The residential distribution exposes the members of the community to the 156 American culture much more than the residential pattern in the core area. This might justify the higher rate of acculturation among these peOple. Table 7.5 Acculturation by Place of Residence and Mobility Plans Acculturation % % Total low high a) Place Of residence 1. South End 48 52 100 (141) 2. Detroit 39 61 100 ( 28) 3. East Dearborn 53 47 100 ( 45) Gamma .04 b) Place of residence for those who came between 1970-1977 1. South End 60 40 100 ( 64) 2. Detroit 48 52 100 ( 11) 3. East Dearborn 39 61 100 ( 15) Gamma .26 Plan to move Yes 35 65 100 ( 69) NO 59 41 100 (145) Gamma -.l9 Interurban Mobility and Acculturation In the previous chapter we failed to explain mobility plans and mobility aspirations by the preference model. The results showed that dissatisfaction with the area of resi- dence is not followed by moving out of it. We presumed that peOple are under certain constraints such as language barriers, availability of job and lack of contact with American culture, which lead to a kind of self-inferiority and prohibit them 157 from moving out of the community. In this chapter we tried to see if the level of accul- turation has anything to do with plans to move out of the area, assuming that a high level of acculturation breaks the barriers between the community and the host society and encourages members of the community to leave their colony and live wherever they want to live depending upon their rank in the class system of the society. ' Hypothesizing that the level of acculturation is di- rectly related to mobility, we correlated moving plans with level of acculturation. The results are shown in Table 7.5. Sixty-five percent Of those who planned to move have a high level of acculturation, while only 41 percent of those who plan to stay have the same level of acculturation. The relationship is moderate but Significant at .05 level. The above analysis gave us a clue to re-evaluate and view inter-urban mobility in terms Of constraints which the peOple of the community are faced with. As soon as these constraints diminish the peOple have the full choice for intra and inter-urban mobility. In an attempt to test the constraint model a multiple correlation and regression anal- ysis was performed. The variables were mobility plans as the dependent variable, acculturation, discrimination and number of children between 14-18 years of age in the household as the independent variables. The assumption is that acculturation is a good indi- cator for perceiving equality with the host society, lack of 158 self-inferiority, the desirability and acceptance of the norms and behaviors of the host society. On the other hand, discrimination is a measure of the degree of non-acceptance by the host society. Number of children is taken as an accelerating factor for moving out of the community. It brings about pressure for seeking other areas outside the colony. Coefficients of simple correlation showed that moving plans, the dependent variable, is well associated with the three independent variables. Simple correlation r = -.45, .53, .48 for discrimination, acculturation and number of children 14-18 in the family respectively. Discrimination showed an inverse relationship with moving plans, while the other two variables have direct relationship. The three independent variables yielded a coefficient of multiple correlation(R)of .67 and statistically account for almost 45 percent of the total variation in the dependent variable. Thirty-one percent of the total variation is attri- buted to acculturation, while discrimination and number of children added only 15 percent with a level of significance .04, .01 and .02 respectively. Comparing these results with the preference model which explained only eight percent of moving plans, we con- clude that spatial mobility behavior of minority groups is best explained by the constraint model rather than the pre- ference model which assumes freedom of movement. 159 Factor Affecting Acculturation In the preceding discussion we have seen factors which accelerate acculturation and others which work in the reverse direction, that is, restraining the process of acculturation. Ten independent variables were correlated with the accultur- ation index in a stepwise multiple correlation to see how much acculturation can be predicted or explained by these variables. The variables are income, education, occupation, Spouse stock, years lived in the United States, relatives as close neighbors, attachment to Old landl, discrimination, degree of satisfaction with the community and plans of moving out of the community. The results showed that together all the variables yielded a coefficient of multiple (R) of .831 and statistically account for 69 percent of the total variation in the accul— turation variable. Only six variables were retained in the analysis. Tme Other four variables, education, spouse stock, occupation, and satisfaction with the area of residence were deleted by the computer showing no association and no prediction power to the level of acculturation. Out of the six variables retained in the analysis, date of immigration to the United States explained;45 percent of the total variation in the dependent variable. The other five 1This variable is an index Of two variables dealing with visits to the homeland and money sent to the homeland for business purposes. 160 variables, which are income, discrimination, plans of moving out of the area, relatives as close neighbors and attachment to the old land explained only 24 percent of the total vari- ation in the level of acculturation (4, 4, 7, 7, and 2 percent reSpectively). The above analysis revealed that acculturation can be best explained by the duration of residence in the United States rather than any other variable. In fact, everything being equal, the longer the duration of residence in the United States, the more the individual ascends on the econo- mic ladder and the more his social norms and behavior come close to the norms of the host society. Summary The above analysis revealed that there are spatial, generational and national subgroup differences among the Arab-Muslim pOpulation in terms Of their acculturation. The mq‘ Hi “aw—H -1 _v “' "'H m.- -m, ,. T——-——n— ..-__ ~n.¢-—-._.__———-—-—----—r— level of acculturation in the core area (South End) is found (::> to be lOwer than the level Of acculturation in the surround- '.-——-—-—'~__._.‘ ‘fi‘i—H‘_ “‘fiw‘_- “HE“ ..._______ ..._.____._. __,_......_._-__.- .. _-._.. --—-.—.-.—.—.-~_“.____ ing areas (East Dearborn and southwest Detroit) when control—Md ling for the date of arrival in the United States. Among the national subgroups, the Lebanese are higher <:\ 1 on the scale of acculturation than the Palestinians and the y\ /) have wives and families here Show a. higher level Of accul- til; turation than those whose wives are in the homeland. ..,. 161 The analysis confirmed that the higher the number of relatives f/ ’ in the neighborhood, the lower the level of acculturation of (vi; I “mm“. the peOple of that neighborhood. Perceived discrimination from the host society is found to be inversely related to the level of acculturation. On the other hand, time of - .._..-—-.~L ..- -..‘ arrival in the United States and interurban mobility are found to be directly related to the level of acculturation. Dispersed pOpulation are higher in their level of acculturation than concentrated pOpulation. All the hypotheses are supported by the analysis except H:3 which dealt with the rural-urban background of the immi- grants. The analysis showed an Opposite direction to what we have hypothesized, indicating that there are no sharp differences between rural and urban population in terms of their level of acculturation. I). / / CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Dearborn Arab Muslim immigrants began to live perman- ently in the study area in the early twenties. The reasons for their immigration were the bad economic situation in the homeland and the lure of a better life in the United States. The Ford Rouge Plant was the prime reason for their settlement in the area. While the majority of the early immigrants were of Lebanese origin, the early fifties witnessed the arrival of two Arab-Muslim immigrant groups: the Palestinian immigrants who began a large scale migration after the occu- pation of their land by the Israelis; and the Yemeni immi- grants whose primary reason for immigration was the extreme poverty of the land. All these immigrant groups sought employment in Ford Motor Company and other industrial compa- nies in the Detroit MetrOpOlitan Area. The vast majority of the recent pOpulation in the study area were born in the rural areas of the Middle East. In this country they form sub-communities which reflect the social institutions, mores and customs of the regions from which they originally migrated. The nature Of the social organization is characterized by close primary ties, that is with kinsmen, villagers, 162 163 neighbors and friends. For many, these social networks are also economic networks in which peOple depend upon one another for help in obtaining jobs, Sharing of food and engaging in reciprocal relations which provide help and secu- rity in unfavorable times. These close relationships are seen not only as a carry-over from the areas from which they migrated, but also as a mode of adaptation to the new situ- ation in which they usually lack the necessary job skills, education and language to adapt easily at first (Aswad 1974: 61). The previous analysis showed four distinct social groups, based upon differences in the places from which the immigrants were born and reared. The Lebanese, the Palestin- ians, the Yemenis and the Arab-American second and third generations. The profile of the Lebanese for the most part is an Old immigrant, mainly from southern Lebanon or a member of the second, third and probably fourth generation, who is usually better educated and has superior employment skills than his Palestinian or Yemeni counterpart. He is a home-owner with a high level of income due to seniority. Ties are not served strongly with Lebanon compared to other subgroups within the community. The Yemeni profile is a less educated, relatively more recent, single or married to a wife in the homeland, home renter, lives with his friends and relatives in some of the hotels or multiple dwelling units or rent rooms in houses 164 with other Yemenis. His historical association with working On ships has given him the mobility associated with recurrent migratory practices and has allowed him to return home to invest his capital. Thus the Yemeni comes to the U.S. for varying periods of time and then return home. He always sees his work in this country as a temporary one, SO he main— tains close ties with his homeland more than the Lebanese immigrant. \:£> The profile of the Palestinian immigrant bears many similarities and some impOEZSHZIdiffgigngeSdtOflthat of the ' Lebanese and Yemenis. He is better educated than his Lebanese and much better than his Yemeni counterparts. He, like the Yemeni, represents a relatively new immigrant. Among his colleagues we find patterns of family groups and of single men. Unlike the Lebanese and Yemenis who have num- erous relatives from their village, some of the Palestinians do not have many relatives. This may be due to their being scattered as refugees before migration as well as the force- ful nature of their migration. Directing our attention to the social organization within a Spatial context, we have three subareas: East Dearborn, South End and southwest Detroit. No dramatic differences are noticed between the South End and Detroit areas. Both of them act as ports of entry for recent immigrants. They have a high level of unemployment, relatively low level of income compared to East Dearborn. The majority of the population are factory workers. The major 165 difference is that the Detroit area does not have retired people because of recent immigration history. In contrast East Dearborn bears many differences. It is a middle class area, its pOpulation are either of early immigrants who established themselves in the South End then moved to it or of the second generation members who follow the American way of life. Both pOpulationS have high income levels, high or medium levels of occupations and higher levels of education. The evolving patterns of residential distribution in the study area Show three distinct patterns: The initial pattern between 1920 and 1945 which is marked by establishing a core area which acted as a port of entry for new Arab Muslim immigrants. Between 1945 and 1967 the Arab Muslim pOpulation grew rapidly, both in absolute and relative terms. The dominant trend in this period focused upon the Arab core area, which experienced a growing spatial concentration while expanding territorially at the same time. Other parts 0f the study area such as East Dearborn were initially inhabited by Arab Muslim immigrants. Although the spatial impact of the newcomers centered on the core area, this port of entry did not become congested or overcrowded. Furthermore, concentrations did not attain Ghetto prOportions. The reason behind that is the decrease of immigration from the Middle East and the rise of the socio-economic standards of the peOple of the study area--both Arabs and non Arabs-- 166 which accelerated their movement out of the study area to the suburbs and other better parts of Dearborn and Detroit. In the last ten years from 1968 to 1977, the resi- dential distribution pattern showed that two ecological pro- cesses are working interdependently in the study area. While invasion-succession process eXpands the area of resi- dence for the Arab Muslims by extending it out of the core area, the process of segregation tends to exclude non-Arab residents by increasing the degree of concentration of Arab Muslims in the core area. However, the area became a Ghetto which experienced a Spatial concentration of Arab-Muslim population in the core and expanded its boundaries on the periphery. The core area resembles the South End, while the periphery includes East Dearborn and southwest Detroit. A comparison of present findings concerning the evolving patterns of residential distribution with those Of various studies is hampered by the variety of metholologies and pOpulations studkul. Much has been written in past years deal- ing with the problems of continuously growing and expanding racial and ethnic populations in many of the American cities. Two representative studies will be compared with our findings. Darden used quantitative data and statistical analysis to describe the spatial dimensions and the Spatial dynamics of residential segregation in Pittsburgh (Darden, 1973:1-4). On the other hand, Duncan and Duncan gave a comprehensive attempt to distinguish the invasion-succession pattern of the Black pOpulation in Chicago. The authors or this study delineated several stages of the invasion-succession process. 167 For each stage a comparison of pOpulation density, room crowding, educational attainment, unemployment, rent, home- ownership and many other variables were made (Duncan and Duncan, 1957:11, 118—134). Although our aim was to replicate the above two studies the available data hampered this desire. Due to the absence of data on the Arab Muslim community in the census reports our main source for the historiCal development of the com- munity was the city directories. The tedious way of extract- ing the Arab Muslim households from the city directories beside the unavailability of some of those directories for some parts of the study area made it difficult for pursuing this study on the basis of the above two models. This study utilized the rough prOportions of Arab Muslim residents in a particular block or census tract as a criteria for stages of succession. Thnsis a fairly simplified technique compared to the technique used by Duncan and Duncan. Unlike Darden, no statistical analysis, i.e., segregation index, Gini index or Lorenz Curve was made. Although the model is very simple, it gave a clear idea about three residential patterns which Show the initial settlement, the crystalization of the com- munity and the formation of the Arab Muslim Ghetto. The findings of interurban residential mobility Show that the household planning a move in the Arab Muslim sample can best be described as young, single or married whose wife is in the homeland with renter status. In addition, it hap- pens to have the lowest and highest income level and to 168 occupy a small dwelling Space. The household planning to stay can best be described as older with owner status and it tends to occupy a large dwelling space. The income level of the stayer household is medium. There are Spatial variations as well as national variation with respect to Spatial mobility. Members of second generation tend to be movers, with first generation members as generally stayers. Among the national subgroups the Yemeni pOpulation tend to have a higher mobility than the Lebanese or Palestinians. Within the study area residents of East Dearborn are more mobile than those of the South End and Southwest Detroit. The results in some cases did not support the concep- tualization presented for residential mobility. This is true in particular for income, household size and duration of residence in the present house. Contrary to all the studies that have been reviewed, income Showed a weak association with residential mobility. The analysis also failed as did some of the previous studies to prove that household size is a good indicator for measuring residential moves. Look- ing for previous research, the results are more varied. Rossi found that moving plans were more likely among large households (Rossi, 1955). Abu-Lughed, Leslie and Richardson, and Adams found no relationship between household size and mobility (Abu-Lughed, 1950:387-90; Leslie and Richardson, 1961:874-962; Adams, 1970:65). Long found an inverse J~shape 169 relationship between household size and moving plans (Long, 1972:371-82). Chevan states that the presence Of children of itself is not a good indicator for future residential move (Chevan, 1968). Duration of residence in this sample did not have the intended reverse relationship as it was hypothesized. The majority of the previous studies showed a strong inverse relationship between planned residential mobility and duration of residence in the same house. How- ever, Adams with a Mexican American sample found no strong relationship between the two variables (Adams, 1970:54) indi- cating that age is the most important thing to be looked at, because there will be some influence of age in long duration Of residence. Movement outside the area--inter—urban mobility-~15 relatively low among the Arab Muslim sample when compared with the American standards. The preference model which was designed on the basis of neighborhood satisfaction failed to explain why people move out of the area. Only nine percent Of the moving-plans variable were explained by the satis- faction index. Comparing these results with Speare's (1974: 173-83) Bach and Smith's (1977:147-67) and Lansing, Marans and Zehner's (1970:99-133) research we find that in our sample the preference model does not help explain the inter- urban mobility behavior. The reason for the differences between our sample and the other studies might be due to the fact that the previous research applied the model to the general American pOpulation, while we applied it to a minority 170 group in this country. This minority group is under certain constraints which existed among and imposed upon its members such as lack of knowledge of the English language, self-inferi— ority, discrimination outside the area of present residence, and the easy life in a racially mixed pOpulation dominated by the same minority group which has the homeland social atmosphere. The above constraints provide a more realistic viewpoint from which to understand the inter-urban mobility behavior of minority groups. A constraint model rather than the prefer- ence model was designed. This model assumes that minority groups are forced to live in certain areas because of certain constraints which make them immobile. On the other hand, as soon as the peOple are free from these constraints, their mobility will rise up because they have the free choice to live where they want depending upon their class in the society. Unlike the preference model the constraint model explained 45 percent of the total variation in the inter-urban mobility variable. These conclusions support the argument held by many researchers that the spatial mobility behavior Of minor- ity groups is best explained by the constraint model rather than the preference model which assumes free will movement (Duncan, 1975; Rex; and Harvey, 1974). Concerning the level of acculturation of the Arab Muslim community it was found that 42 percent have low scores on the scale that measures the degree of adOpting the American behavior. Fifty-eight percent have a relatively higher level 171 on this acculturation scale. This scale is inversely related to the ghetto-like community, which increases in- group interaction at the expense of social interaction with Americans. The strong relations with the Old country, the continuous flow of the newcomers and discrimination from the host society act as delaying factors for acculturation. On the other hand, acculturation is directly related to social mobility which is characterized by high socio-economic status accompanied by a greater length of time in the United States. It is apprOpriate to compare Gordon's model of assimi- lation with the results of acculturation analysis of this study. Gordon's model assumes that complete assimilation is characterized by large-scale inter-marriage, large scale entrance into host society institutions on a primary group level, absence of prejudice and discrimination and absence of value and power conflict (Gordon, 1964:61,70-71). These characteristics are not found in our community. Inter- marriage accounts for only 13 percent of the total marriages. NO entrance at all into the host society institutions onaa primary level. Sixty-eight percent of the community expect discrimination and prejudice from the host society. So the Arab Muslim community members are far beyond complete assi— milation. They are in the first stage; the stage which Gordon termed the cultural or behavioral assimilation (acculturation). Even in this stage,nearly half of the pOpulation are not acculturated. Before we conclude this study it is important 172 to Show the feelings of the community toward this area, especially the South End, where the majority Of the Arab Muslims live. The vast majority of the respondents have a positive feeling toward the area. Forty-nine percent of the respondents like the area very much. Forty percent like it moderately, while only eleven percent dislike it. When people were asked about moving out of the area, only thirty percent reported that they plan to move out of it. The positive feeling toward the area must be accom- panied by the same feeling from the city officials. In the last twenty years the area declined gradually. NO attention was paid to improving it, instead the city planning com- mission decided tO rezone the area to heavy industry. "This led to much confusion, uncertainty and division in the com- munity (Aswad, l974:72)." There Should be a prOposed policy to improve the area in the near future. A conservation program to improve this area is a must. Community Center, housing rehabilitation assistance, and community services are bitterly needed. A final conclusion concerns the implication for hous- ing policy. The fact that 56 percent of the sample plan to move from their houses indicate that a large proportion of the current housing adjustments are unsatisfactory. There must be also other households with equally unsatisfac— tory adjustments but which see moving plans as unrealistic because of shortage of housing supply in the area. Therefore a need for reasonably priced housing is clearly indicated 173 by the Arab-Muslim community. A housing project to fill these vacant blocks in the area is one of the most important solutions for the problem of the community in this area. This study also suggests that this area, although dilapidated and polluted, is necessary for those new immi- grants to recreate and adapt their old institutions to the new culture. It provides some stability, some comfort and psychic relaxation from the pressures that might be found outside it. It also helps the immigrant to learn the new ways from others who have gone through this process. He can maintain a sense of acceptance, self esteem before going out to the larger society. APPENDIX APPENDIX SURVEY INSTRUMENT I am conducting a survey for my doctoral dissertation in Geography at Michigan State University. Its purpose is to study the mobility, residential distribution and migration history of the Arabs in Dearborn. I am interested in asking you some questions about these things and about you. All information will be held in the strictest confidence. Background Information 1. Name: 2. Address: 3. Date of Birth: 4. Sex: M F 5. Place of Birth: City State Country 6. Marital Status: (1) Single (2) Married (3) Separated (4) Divorced (5) Widowed (If single): 7. Are you planning to marry (1) An Arab girl living here (2) An Arab girl from the homeland (3) American girl (4) NO idea 174 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 175 (If married): Is your wife an Arab or American? (1) Arab (2) American How many peOple are living in this house? ____ Children Relatives Friends What is your religious sect? What is the highest level of education you have completed? (1) 6th grade or less (2) 7th grade to 12th grade (3) College (4) College beyond Bachelor's Degree Are you presently: (1) employed (2) unemployed (3) student (4) retired What is your occupation? What other occupations have you followed? How long did you practice each occupation? Occupation No. Of years (l) (2) 15. In the time being do you work in Dearborn (Detroit) or do 16. you commute to work daily? (1) Work in Dearborn (Detroit) (2) Commute daily What is your family income? (optional) (1) less than $5,000 (3) $10,000 to $15,000 (2) $5,000 to $9,999 (4) $15,000 to $20,000 (5) $20,000 + 176 Mobility l. 10. 11. Do you own your house or are you renting? (1) Owner (2) Renter What is the Size Of your dwelling (how many rooms)? How long have you been living in this house? Are you planning to move from this house eventually, or do you think you will remain here permanently from now on? (1) Plan to move (2) Plan to stay (If you plan to move) When do you plan to move from this house? (1) In the next 12 months (2) l to 2 years (3) More than two years How many times did you change residence in Dearborn? For how long have you been living in Dearborn? What are the addresses of these residences? (l) (2) What cities did you live in before coming to Dearborn? City State (l) (2) Why did you choose to go to these cities? (1) Relatives there (2) Friends there (3) Job Opportunity (4) Education (5) Other reasons DO you plan to leave Dearborn in the near future? (1) Yes (2) NO 177 12. For what reasons do you want to leave? (1) (2) 13. DO you feel that you would be discriminated against in other areas? (1) Yes, strongly (2) Yes, medium (3) Yes, weakly (4) NO 14. Why would this be? (1) (2) (3) Community and Neighborhood 1. Here is a list of some of the things people think about when they are moving to a new neighborhood. When you moved here were any Of these things important to you? Which ones? (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Location close to work Location near Old friends Location near relatives Location convenient to Arabic stores, coffeehouses Mosque nearby Rent is cheap None of these 2. Now I would like to ask you just about your close neighbors-- I mean half a dozen families living nearest to you. 178 How many of these families are of your relatives? (1) All (3) Half of them (5) None of them (2) Nearly all (4) Just a few of them Think of this neighborhood, including your home, as well as the surrounding homes, streets, and parks and the peOple who live here. Rate this neighborhood on the following categories: Physical Appearance (a) Very unattractive (c) Average (e) Very attractive (b) Unattractive (d) Somewhat attractive Noise (a) Very noisy (c) Average (e) Very quiet (b) Somewhat noisy (d) Somewhat quiet Privacy (a) Very little privacy (d) Some privacy (b) Little privacy (e) Great deal of privacy (c) Average Crowdedness (a) Very crowded (c) Average (e) Very uncrowded (b) Somewhat crowded (d) Somewhat uncrowded Safety 1 (a) Very unsafe (c) Average (e) Very safe (b) Somewhat unsafe (d) Somewhat safe 6. 179 People in Neighborhood (a) Very unfriendly (d) Somewhat friendly (b) Somewhat unfriendly (e) Very friendly (c) Average Cleanliness (a) Very unclean (c) Average (e) Very clean (b) Somewhat unclean (d) Somewhat clean Maintenance (a) Very poorly kept (c) Average (e) very well (b) Poorly kept (d) Well kept kept Pollution (a) Very much polluted (c) Average (e) very much unpolluted (b) Somewhat polluted (d) Somewhat unpolluted Taking into consideration physical appearance, safety, privacy, noise, crowdedness and people, Since you have lived here, has this neighborhood: (a) Become much worse (c) Stayed the same (e) Greatly improved (b) Become somewhat worse (d) Improved somewhat In the future do you think your neighborhood will: (a) Become much worse (c) Stay the same (e) Improve a great deal (b) Become somewhat worse (d) Improve somewhat What are the things you like about this neighborhood? . ...— .__,.___,_ f ‘a- l.l)lt¢1’\ll\i‘. I 5455‘...“ 7. 8. 180 What are the things, if any, which you dislike about this neighborhood? All in all, would you say you like this neighborhood (1) very much (2) like it moderately (3) dislike it Arab Traditions 1. In general would you say that you use Arabic in your con- versation at home (1) always (2) Often (3) seldom (4) never How often do you eat Arabic food? (1) always (2) often (3) seldom (4) never How Often do you talk to your Arab neighbors just to chat or for a social visit? (1) everyday (3) few times a month (2) two to three times a week(4) few times a year How often do you go to the coffeehouse? (l) everyday (3) few times a month (2) two to three times a week(4) few times a year In the homeland, dating, drinking and dancing are not social norms, but in this country, dating, drinking and dancing are part of the American social life. DO you date, drink and go to dancing parties? (1) bats: (a) always (b) Often (c) seldom (d) never (2) Bripk: (a) always (b) often (c) seldom (d) never (3) Dance: (a) always (b) Often (c) seldom (d) never 181 Migration History l. 2. When did you migrate to the U.S.A.? In the homeland did you live in a rural area or in an urban area. In other words, did you live in a village or a city? (1) Village (2) City (If in a village) continue Did you work in the city before you came here, or did you come directly from the village? (1) Worked in city (2) Came directly from the village In the homeland, how many villages, cities did you live in for more than a year? What are the purposes for moving to or from these places? (1) Living with family ____ (2) Education (3) Looking for a job (4) Other reasons (Specify): What was the last occupation or occupations you held in the homeland? What was your education in the homeland? (1) Elementary (2) Secondary (3) College Why did you leave your country? (1) Economic conditions (2) One of more members of (3) Personal ambition the family in America (4) Politican reasons (5) Education (6) Other reasons (Specify): Before you came to the United States, did you migrate to other areas? (1) Arab countries (2) Africa (3) Latin America 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 182 The sources of information about the United States were: (1) Mainly through relatives already in the U.S. (2) Parent was a U.S. citizen (3) Reputation through friends (4) Through friends in the U.S. ___ (5) Movies (6) Reading ____ The sources of money for the trip to the United States were: (1) Personal saving (2) Family assistance (Parent, (3) Money from relatives brothers, sisters) in the U.S. (4) Money from relatives and friends from the homeland Where did you first stay when you came to the U.S.? (1) Hotel (2) Rented house (3) Relatives (4) Friends When you arrived to the U.S.A., how Was your English? (1) Did notspeak or read ____ (3) Speak and read (2) Speak only ____ Were you married before you came to the United States or were you Single? (1) Married ____ (2) Single ____ (If married) IS your spouse here or in the homeland? (1) Here ____ (2) Homeland When you first came here, did you come (1) Alone (2) Before Spouse (3) After spouse - —._T 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 183 Did you go to school in the U.S.? (1) Language school ____ (3) College ____ (2) Secondary education ____ (4) College + How many peOple have Since come with your help to the United States? Since you have been in the United States how many times did you visit the homeland? When was the most recent? DO you usually send money to the homeland? (1) Yes ____ (2) No ____ If yes: For what purposes? (1) Help the family (2) Establish business over there (3) Educational purposes for members of the family (4) Build a home there. Abu-Laban, Baha 1969 BIBLIOGRAPHY "The Arab Canadian Community.‘ in HagOpian and Paden (eds). The Arab Americans, Studies in Assimilation. Wilmette: Medina Uni- versity Press International . Abu-Laban, Baha and F. Zeadey (eds.) 1975 Abu-Lughed 1960 Adams, Margaret 1970 Adiseshiah H. 1972 Ahdab-Yehia, May 1974 Ahmed, Ismael 1975 AL-Nouri, Quis N. 1969 Arabs in America: Myths and Realities. Wilmette: The Medina Press University Inte- national, AAUG Monograph Series NO. 5. "Appendix" in Foote (ed.) Housing Choices and Constraints. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Aspects of Intracommunity Residential Mobi- lity Among Mexican Americans in Michigan. Department Of Sociology: Michigan State University: unpublished M.A. thesis. Brain Drain from the Arab World: a signal or a storm, Paris: Unesco, I-88} pp. 30-51. "The Detroit Maronite Community," in Aswad (ed.) Arabic Speaking Communities in American Cities. New York: Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. "Organizing an Arab Workers' Caucus in Detroit" in Abu-Laban and Zeadey, Arabs in America, Wilmette: The Medina University Press International. "Conflict and Persistence in the Iraqi-Chal- dean Acculturation". University of Washing- ton, Seattle: unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. 184 185 AL-Tahir, Abdul 1952 "The Arab Community in Chicago Area: a Comparative Study Of the Christian-Syrians and the Muslim Palestinians.” University of Chicago. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Amen et.al. vs. City of Dearborn et. al. 1973a Plaintiffs Trial Brief ( F. Supp.___), Civil NO. 37242 E.D. Michigan 1973b Opinion of the Court, August 14, 1973. ( F. Supp.___), Civil NO. 37242 E.D. Midnigan. Aswad, Barbara 1974 "The Southeast Dearborn Community Struggles for Survival Against Urban Renewal." in Aswad, B.C. (ed.) Arabic Speaking Communi- ties in American Cities. New York: Center fOr Migration Studies of New York Inc. and Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc. 1974 Arabic Speaking Communities in American Cities. New York: Center for Migration Studies Of New York Inc. and Association of Arab- American University Graduates Inc. Bach, R. and Smith, J. 1977 "Community Satisfaction, Expectation of Moving and Migration." Demography, 143147-57. Bass, Jacquelyn 1970 The Southwest Spanish-Speaking Minority: A Study of Assimilation and Boundary Mainten- ance/'Michigan State University: unpublished M.A. thesis. Benyon, E. D. I 1944 "The Near East in Flint, Michigan." 1 Geographical Review. 34:259-74. Bjorklund, E. M. % 1964 "Idealogy and Culture Exemplified in South- ‘ western Michigan." Annals of the Associa- tion of American Geographers. 54:227-41. FH‘II‘Vl Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. * 1889 "Fifty-Second Annual Report." New York: PubliShed for the Board. I 1892 "FiftyrFifth Annual Report." New York: PubliShed for the Board. 1907 "Seventy-Second Annual Report." New York: Published for the Board. Bresser 1975-1976 186 City of Detroit: Cross-Index and Directory. DetrOit: Walter Bresser and Sons. Brown, L. and Moore, E. 1971 Boyce, Ronald 1971 Burgess, E. W. 1928 Butler, E. 1969 Clark, A. H. 1960 Caudill, W. 1952 Campisi, Paul 1968 Chevan, Albert 1971 1968 Cleef, van E. 1948 "The Inter-urban Migration Process: A Perv Spective.“ in Bourne (ed.) Internal Struc- ture of the City, New York: OxfOrd University Press. "Residential Mobility and Its Implications for Urban Spatial Change." in Larry Bourne, (ed.) Internal Structure of the City, New York: Oxford University Press. "Residential Segregation in American Cities." The Annals of the American Academy of Poli- tical and Social Sciences. 140 (Nov.):105-15. "Demographic and Social Psychological Factors in Residential Mobility." Sociology and Social Research. 48:39-54. "Old World Origins and Religious Adherence in Nova Scotia." Geographical Review. 50:312-44. "Japanese American Personality and Accultur- ation." Genetic Psychology Monographs. 45:3-102. "The Italian Family in the United States," in Winch, Robert and Louis Goodman (eds.) Selected Studies in Marriage and the Family. New York: HOlt, Rinehart and Winston. "Family Growth, Household Density and Moving." "A Longitudinal Approach to the Study of Moving." Paper presented at the Annual Meet- ing of the POpulation Association of America, Boston, Mass., April 18-20. "Finish Settlement in Canada." Review, 42:253-66. Geographical wrw- can "_‘11— 187 Costner . . 1965 "Criteria for Measures Of Assoc1ations," American Sociological Review, 30(June):34l-53. Crowley,W. K. ,// 1974 "The Levantine Arabs: Diaspora in the New World." Proceedings of the Association of American Geographer. 6:I37Fl42i Dadabhay, Y. 1954 "Circuitous Assimilation among Rural Hindu- stanis in California." Social Forces. 332138-41. Darden, Joe 1970 "Environmental Perception by Ghetto Youth in Pittsburgh," The Pennsylvania Geographer. 8 (April): 19-22. 1973 Afro—Americans in Pittsburgh: The Residen- tial Segregation of People. Lexington: D. C. Heath and CO. 1976a "The Residential Segregation of Blacks in Detroit, 1960-1970," International Journal of Comparative Sociology. 22 (March-June).84-9l. 1976b "The Residential Segregation of Blacks in Medium Size Cities of Michigan." Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences. 22.(spring). Davis, D. H. 1935 "The Finland Community, Minnesota." Geographi- cal Review. 25:382-94. Deskins, Donald 1972 Residential Mobility of Negroes in Detroit 1837-1965. Ann ArbOr, Mich: Department of Geography, University of Michigan. Dlin, Norman 1961 "Some Cultural and Geographic Aspects Of the Christian Lebanese in MetrOpOlitan Los Angeles." University of California at LOS Angeles: unpublished M.A. thesis. Doeppers,.D. 1967 "The Globeville Neighborhood in Denver." Geographical Review, 57:546-22. 188 Duncan, S. S. 1975 "Research Direction in Social Geography: Housing Opportunities and Constraints." Institute of British Geographers Trans- actiOns. New Series 1:10-19. Duncan, D. and Duncan, B. 1957 The Negro POpulation of Chicago: A Study Of Residential Succession. Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press. Duncan 0. D. and S. Lieberson 1959 "Ethnic Segregation and Assimilation." American Journal of Sociology, 64:364-74. EL-Kholy, Abdo ///// 1966 The Arab Moslems in the United States: ‘ Religion and ASSimilation. New Haven: College and—UniverSity Press. 1969 "The Arab Americans: Nationalism and Traditional Preservations." in Hagapian and Paden op. cit. pp. 3-17. Erichson, Gordon 1 1954 Urban Behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace. Farrell, Walter 1974 "Intra-urban Mobility and Environmental Perception in a Black Middle Class Ghetto: A Case Study in Flint, Michigan." Michigan State University: unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Fong, S. L. 1965 "Assimilation of Chinese in America: Changes in Orientation and Social Perception." ‘ American Journal of Sociology. 21:265-73- 3 Gasparetti, Eli 1948 “The Maronites: the Origin and Development of a Theocracy." Columbia University, unpublished M.A. thesis. Gans, H. J. . 1965 The Urban Villagers: Group and Class in the Life of ItaIian Americans. New York: The MacMiIlan Co. 189 Goerland, M. E. 1961 "The Spread and Migration Of French Canadians." Tijdschriff Voor Economische en Sociale Geographic, 522141-47. Glazor, N. and D. P. Moynihan L////// 1963 Beyond the Melting Pot. Cambridge, Mass: The M.I.T. Press. Golant, S. M. 1971 "Adjustment Process in a System: A Behavorial Model of Human Movement." Geographical Analysis, 3:203-20. Goldsmith, H. F. and S. Y. Lee 1966 "Socio-Economic Status within the Older and Larger 1960 MetrOpOlitan Areas." Rural Sociology, 32:207-15. Gordon, Leland 1930 "Immigration from Turkey." Sociology and Social Research. 15. (Nov-Dec.);153-55, 1964 Assimilation in American Life. New York: Ford University Press. Gould, J. and William, L. , 1964 Dictionary of the Social Sciences. New York: Theiiiee Press. HagOpian, E. and Ann Paden (eds.) 1969 The Arab Americans: Studies in Assimilation. L//’ Wilmette, Ill.: Medina UniVersity Press (////’”~_—_I“~$nternational. . . 1969 "The Institutional Development of the Arab- (,//’ \\\ American Community of Boston." ‘\\\ii‘pyyyyyipyaagopian and Paden, op.cit. pp. 67-83. Handlen, O. 1957 Race and Nationality in American Life. New York: Doubleday and’Co. Hart, J. "The Changing Distribution of the American Negro." Annnals of the Association of American Geographers,’50:242-66. Harvey, D. 1974 "Class Monopoly Rent, Finance Capital and the Urban Revolution." Regional Studies, 8:239-55. Hitti, Philip 1924 Houghton, L. 1911 Hourani, D. 1945 190 Syrians in America. New YOrk: George Doran. "Syrians in the United States." The Survey. VOl. 26, Part 1; July 1. Part II, Aug. 5; Part III, Sept. 2. Syria and Lebanon. London: Oxford Uni- versity Press. Jakle, J. and J. Wheeler 1969 Jonassen, C. 1949 Jonson, B. 1951 Kassees, Assad 1970 Katibah, Habib I. 1939 1946 Knowlton, Clark 1955 Land, K. 1969 "The Changing Residential Structure Of the Dutch POpulation in Kalamazoo, Michigan." Annals of the Association Of American Geographers, 59:441-60 "Cultural Variables in the Ecology of an Ethnic Group." American Sociological Review, {/// 14:32-41. "The Location of German Immigrants in the Middle West." Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 41:1-41. "The PeOple of Ramallah: A PeOple of L/,» Christian Arab Heritage." Florida State University: unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. "Syrian Americans." in Francis Brown and t//” Josef Roucek (eds.) Our Racial and National Minorities. New York?’ Prentice-Hall, Inc. Arabic §peaking Americans. New York: The L,/” Institute Of Arab American Affairs. "Spatial and Social Mobility of the Syrians and Lebanese in the City of Sao Paula, Brazil." Vanderbilt University: unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. "Duration of Residence and Prospective Migra- tion: Further Evidence," Demographyy 6:133-40. 191 Lansing, J.; Marans, R. and Zehner 1970 Planned Residential Environment. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. League of Women Voters 1976 Dearborn. Dearborn-Dearborn Height: LWV, Fourth Edition. Leslie, G. and A. Richardson 1961 "Life Cycle, Career Pattern and Decision to Move." American Sociological Review, 26:894-902. Lee, S. and Goldsmith 1966 "Socio-Economic Status Within the Older and .+\ Larger 1960 MetrOpOlitan Areas." Rural Sociology. 32:207-15. Lieberson, S. 1961 "The Impact of Residential Segregation on Ethnic Assimilation." Social Forces, 40:52-57. 7” 1963 Ethnic Patterns in American Cities. New York: Free Press of Glencoe. Lieberson, S. and 0. Duncan 1959 "Ethnic Segregation and Assimilation." 9” American Journal Of Sociology, 64:364-74. ger' Long, Larry 1972 "The Influence of Number and Ages of Child- ren on Residential Mobility." Demography, 9:371-82. Lz” Marden, C. and Meyer, G. 1968 Minorities in American Societies. New York: American BOOk Company. McKenzie, R. D. 1925 "The Ecological Approach to the Study of the q\_ Human Community/'in Park, R., Burgess, E. and McKenzie, The Cit . Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Meinig, D. w. 1965 "The Morman Culture Region: Strategies and Patterns in the Geography of the American West, 1847-1946." Annals of the Association Of American Geographers. 55:191-220. Meyer, Douglas 1970 "The Changing Negro Residential Patterns in Lansing, Michigan, 1850-19691' Michigan State University: unpublished Ph.D. dis- sertation. - I'M-“ A Morgan, B. 1973 Moore, Eric 1969 1972 192 "Why Families Move: A re-examination." L/// The Professional Geographer,25:124-29, "The Nature of Intra-urban Migration and Some Relevant Research Strategies." Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers,1{113-l6. Residential Mobility in the City. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Geographers, Commission on College Geography, Resource Paper NO. 13. Moore, E. and Brown, L. 1971 Morrill, R. L. 1965 "The Intra-urban Migration Process: A Per- spective." in Bourne, (ed.), Internal Structure of the City, New York: Oxford UniverSity Press. pp. 200-15. "The Negro Ghetto: Problems and Alternatives." Geographical Review, 55:339-61. Moynihan, P. and W. Glazor 1963 Nelson, H. J. 1955 Novak, R. T. 1956 Beyond the Melting Pot. Cambridge, Mass.: )( T e M.I.T. Press. "Distribution of Negro Population in the United States." Geographical Review,45:82-97. "Distribution of Puerto Ricans on Manhattan Island." Geographical Review, 46:182-86. Paden, A. and Eliane HagOpian 1969 The Arab Americans: Studies in Assimilation. Wilmette, Ill.: Medina University Press International. Polk, R. L. and CO. 1926 1930 Fordson: City Directory and Street Guide. Dearborn, Mich: Dearborn Directory Company. Dearborn Citnyirectory. Dearborn, Mich: Dearborn Press. VOlS. 30, 41. 1950-1951, 1960, 1970, 1976. 1 li’ Powell, A. R. 1966 Rex, John 1971 Rice, Rodger 1962 Richardson, A. 1961 Rose, Harold 1964 1969 1970 1971 Rossi, Peter 1955 Saba, Leila 1971 193 "Differential in the Integration Process of Dutch and Italian Immigrants in Edmonton, Canada." International Migration,4:1oo-15. "The Concept of Housing Class and the Socio- logy of Race Relations." Race. XII:293—315, "An analysis of invasion-succession and areal differentiation as ecological processes Operative in the develOpment of ecological variation within a Negro community. Michigan State University: unpublished M.A. thesis. and G. Leslie "Life Cycle, Career Pattern and Decision to Move." American Sociological Review. 26.394- 902. "MetrOpOlitan Miami's Changing Negro Popu- lation, 1950-1960." Economic Geography,41:221 2' Social Process in the City: Race and Urban Residential Choice. Washington, D. C.: Association of American Geographers, Com— mission on College Geography, Resource Paper No. 6. "The DevelOpment of an Urban Subsystem; The Case of the Negro Ghetto," Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 60:1-17. The Black Ghetto: A Spatial Behavioral Perspective. New York: McGraw-Hill. Why Families Move. Glencoe, Ill.: Free ¢\ Press. "The Social Assimilation of the Ramallah Community Residing in Detroit." Wayne State University: unpublished M.A. thesis. Saba, L. and C. Swan 1974 "The Migration of a M nority." in Aswad, (Ed.) op. cit. pp. 35-110. / 194 Sas, A. 1956 "Some ASpects of Dutch Immigration to Canada Since 1945." Tijgschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geographic. 47:18I588. 1958 "Dutch Concentrations in Rural Southwestern Ontario." Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 48:185-194. Schnore, L. F. 1965 "Social Class Segregation among Non-whites _ in MetrOpOlitan Centers." Demography, 2:126-33.t/” Schnore, L. and J. R. Pinkerton 1966 "Residential Redistribution of Socio-economic Strata in MetrOpOlitan Areas." Demography, 3: L/// ‘ 491-99. Sills, David (Ed.) 1968 International EncyclOpedia of the Social t\ Sciences. New York: Crowell, COIfier and MacMiIlan, VOl. I. Smith, J. and R. Bach 1977 "Community Satisfaction, Expectation Of Moving and Migration." Demography, 14:147-167. t//’ Speare, Alden 1970 "Home Ownership, Life Cycle Stage, and Resi- b/r dential Mobility." Demography, 7:4-16. 1974 "Residential Satisfaction as an Intervening b/// Variable in Residential Mobility." Demography, 9:371-82. ‘ Stein, Edith 1922 "Some Near Eastern Immigrant Groups in Chicago." University of Chicago: unpublished M.A. thesis. Suleiman, Michael W. 1969 "The New Arab American Community." in HagOpian and Paden, op. cit. pp. 37-49. %\ Swan, C. and L. Saba 1974 "The Migration of a Minority." in Aswad (ed.) op. cit. pp. 85-110. Swanson, Jon 1970 "Mate Selection and Intermarriage in an American Arab Moslem Communityl' University L///" of Iowa: unpublished M.A. thesis. Taeuber, K. E. 1964 "Negro Residential Segregation: Trends and Measurement." Social Problems. 12:42-50. 195 Taeuber, K. and A. F. Taeuber 1965 Tannous, A. F. F. 1943 Treudley, M. B. 1949 Negroes in Cities: Residential Segregation and Neighborhood Change. Chicago: Aldine PuinShing CO. «Acculturation of an Arab-Syrian Community L///’ in the Deep South." American SociolOgical Review. 8 (June):264-27l. "Formal Organization and the Americanization Process with Special Reference to the Greeks %\ Of Boston." American Sociological Review. 14:44-53. U. S. Department of Justice 1897-1974 Velikonja, J. 1965 Wakins, Edward 1974 Ward, P. 1968 Wasfi, Afif A. 1964 Wheeler, James 1971a 1971b Annual Reports of the Immigration and Naturalization ServiCe. Vol. 1897-1974. Italian Immigrants in America, their Iden— tity and Functional Relations." Paper presented at the Glst Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Columbus, Ohio, April, 21. The Lebanese and Syrians in America. Chicago: Claretian Publication. L//// "The Emergence of Central Immigrant Ghettos in American Cities: 1840-1920." Annals of L//,- the Association of American Geographers. 58:343-59. "Dearborn Arab-Moslem Community: A Study Of Acculturation." unpublished Ph.D. dis- \/// sertation, East Lansing: Michigan State University. "Social Interaction and Urban Space." Journal of Geography, 70 (April):200-03. "The Spatial Interaction of Blacks in Metropolitan Areas." Southeastern Geographer, ll (November):lOl-12. 196 Wigle, Lauri D. //// 1974 "A Michigan Arab Muslim Community." in Aswad, B.C. (ed.) Arabic Speaking Commu- nities in American Cities. New York: Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. Wittke, Carl 1967 The Germans in America. New York: Teachers COllege Press. Wolpert, Julian 1970 "Behavioral Aspects of the Decision to Migrate." in Demko, Rose and Schnell (eds), Po ulation Geo ra h : A Reader. New York: McGraw H111. Younis, Adele 1961 «The Coming of the Arabic Speaking People éifi7' to the United States." Boston University: unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. 1969 "The Growth Of Arabic Speaking Settlement in the United States." In HagOpian and ‘,,/’ Paden (eds.) op, cit. Zeady, F. and B. Abu-Laban (eds.) 1975 Arabs in America: Myths and Realities. WiImette: The Medina University Press Inter- national, AAUG Monograph Series: NO. 5. Zelditch, Morris 1936 "The Syrians in Pittsburgh." unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Pittsburgh. M . “Ail. - .O'I‘i ll . .J3U.\\~J&.Nv| . \ \fiu....-.. .. .,