This dissertation casts a wide net in order to explain the recent emergence and proliferation of the contemporary anti-immigration movement in the United States. Anti-immigration activism is an understudied but not entirely overlooked phenomenon. Yet, we know incredibly little about an important set of macro- and micro- questions related to contemporary anti-immigration activism. This dissertation addresses big-picture mobilization questions, such as: What large-scale, historical preconditions set the stage for the emergence and proliferation of contemporary anti-immigration activism in the United States? And how--and through what general processes--has pro-migrant countermobilization influenced the anti-immigration movement and, perhaps, unintentionally spurred its growth? Finally, I address micro-level questions focused around the mechanics of micromobilization: How and why do individuals support anti-immigration activism? How and why do individuals become motivated to engage in anti-immigration activity? and How and why do individuals ultimately participate in anti-immigration-related activism? In sum, both big-picture and small-scale questions anchor this dissertation. By answering these I not only shed light on this specific case but also make a number of more general contributions to social movement literature.

No description available.

The Minuteman Project is a national civilian border patrol group, founded in 2005 to defend the U.S.-Mexico border from "invasion" by illegal immigrants and protest the "blatant disregard of the rule of law" exhibited by government and politicians. This study explores one state chapter of this organization: the Utah Minuteman Project (UMP). The research questions I seek to address are: Who are the Minutemen? What motivates them? How do the Minutemen define what it means to be an American? Using a grounded theory approach, I explore the construction of American identity among the members of the UMP using a range of qualitative data sources: in-depth interviews with 24 individuals, fieldnotes, and primary documents. My findings suggest that what problematizes illegal immigration in the minds of the Minutemen is their view that illegal immigration is a threat to American identity. While illegal immigration and its perceived consequences are the focus of much attention within the UMP, the central motivating factor in the movement relates to the question of who is an American. My findings suggest that American identity, as defined by the Minutemen, can be understood in terms of four main concepts: assimilation, respect for law, work ethic, and patriotism. In many ways, the Minutemen have defined American identity by answering the question of who is not an American. It is against the backdrop of illegal immigration that anti-illegal immigrant movements like the Minutemen have defined themselves, defined America, and defined who is an American. By emphasizing the elements of American identity that stand in most striking contrast to illegal immigration, they exclude undocumented immigrants from American identity. Amidst all the voices seeking to define what it means to be an American, this study contributes another voice and provides a better understanding of how the Minutemen see the world. It is important to that as our country confronts the challenges of immigration reform and answers the question of who is an American, that all voices are heard, including the voices of the Minutemen.

Ce mémoire s'intéresse à l'émergence des Minutemen, un mouvement de patrouilles civiles frontalières qui surveillent la frontière américano-mexicaine dans le but de contrer « l'invasion des immigrants illégaux », d'attirer l'attention des médias et d'influencer les décideurs politiques sur les enjeux de l'immigration et de la sécurité frontalière. L'objectif de ce mémoire consiste à expliquer pourquoi le mouvement contemporain des Minutemen a émergé en 2005 et comment il tente de devenir un acteur influent sur les politiques d'immigration et de sécurité frontalière aux États-Unis. Ce mémoire démontre que le mouvement des Minutemen ne serait rien sans l'apport déterminant de Jim Gilchrist et Chris Simcox, respectivement président du Minuteman Project et du Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. Concrètement, il vise à pousser plus loin la réflexion sur les patrouilles civiles frontalières en ne considérant plus ce mouvement comme étant homogène, mais en privilégiant un niveau d'analyse individuel. Cet angle d'analyse permet de se pencher sur la dynamique interne des Minutemen et de démontrer qu'au-delà du symbole et du mythe qu'ils représentent, leur force de frappe dépend en grande partie des présidents Jim Gilchrist et Chris Simcox. Cette analyse développe un nouveau concept théorique, les entrepreneurs sécuritaires, qui s'inspire principalement du cadre d'analyse des « entrepreneurs politiques » de Carter et Scott (2006; 2009) ainsi que du processus de sécurisation de l'École de Copenhague (Buzan, Waever et De Wilde, 1998). L'entrepreneur sécuritaire se définit comme un individu qui fait preuve d'entrepreneuriat et d'initiative en changeant, innovant et cherchant à orienter les débats nationaux afin de mettre en œuvre son propre programme sécuritaire. Dans un premier temps, ce mémoire explique les facteurs contextuels (contextes international, politique et sociétal) ayant donné une opportunité sans précédent à Gilchrist et Simcox de lancer le mouvement contemporain des Minutemen. En outre, il met en relief les facteurs individuels (personnalité, expériences et aptitudes), qui ont poussé ces deux hommes à s'engager personnellement dans le débat sur cet enjeu. Dans un second temps, il présente les différentes stratégies d'influence (discursive, sécuritaire, médiatique et politique) adoptées par Gilchrist et Simcox pour tenter de devenir des entrepreneurs influents sur les politiques d'immigration. ______________________________________________________________________________ MOTS-CLÉS DE L’AUTEUR : États-Unis, immigration, sécurité, Minutemen, patrouilles civiles frontalières, frontière, Mexique, entrepreneurs sécuritaires.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work / Robert K. Schaeffer / In a 2005 op-ed piece, Wall St. Journal columnist Peggy Noonan queried, "What does it mean that your first act on entering a country is breaking its laws?" Unauthorized noncitizen populations have increased rapidly, from 3 million in 1990 to over 11 million in 2009. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, the Minuteman Project and the Tea Party generated renewed interest in restrictionist social movements (RSMs). Sociological social movement theories focused primarily on oppressed populations rather than privileged groups, leaving significant gaps in our understanding of right-wing movements. This dissertation‘s main question is: how did contemporary restrictionists frame their anti-immigrant principles, practices, and policies in the post-9/11 period? In turn, what comprise the social and political consequences of such strategies? This study argues that the "new" restrictionists successfully framed issues relating to unauthorized noncitizens concerning the cultural, economic, and security risks they posed to the United States. Fifty members from a diverse set of voluntary organizations were interviewed, including the Minuteman Project, the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), and the American GI Forum (AGIF). Grounded theory methodology was used to create initial codes, which were then connected with themes derived from the literature. This study finds that grassroots, right-wing RSMs brought attention to contentious noncitizen issues that spurred debate and action within both Democratic and Republicans parties, public discourse, and social policy from after 9/11 to 2012. The success of the 2005 Minuteman Project border patrol demonstrated that the federal government lacked the political will to control the U.S.–Mexico border. This dissertation adds to the social movement literature demonstrating that both classical and solidarity theories of social movements help explain how restrictionists framed unauthorized noncitizen issues. Ultimately, this study finds RSMs represent a right-wing mobilization (rather than conservative) because of their singling out of Mexican unauthorized noncitizens, extra-institutional action on the border, the use of inflammatory rhetoric, and anti-Catholic sentiment, which contributed in pushing the Republican Party further to the right.

Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Auburn University, 2006. / Abstract. Vita. Includes bibliographic references.

No description available.