Frye Jacobson argues that the multiculturalist approach of post-1965 nativism has shaped the rhetoric of both the Left and the Right in discussions of U.S. immigration policy and affirmative action. Claiming that the United States is naturally an immigrant society, the Left has supported increased immigration quotas. On the other hand, the Right, arguing that the United States emerged as a society composed mainly of European immigrants, has sought to curtail immigration from Latin America, Asia and Africa. Regarding affirmative action and diversity, the Left has adopted the multiculturalist approach to promote equal opportunity and representation in employment, culture, etc., while the Right, adopting the same approach but with a Eurocentric twist, has favored the equal representation of the many different European ethnicities in those same areas.
In this way, Frye Jacobson argues that both the Left and the Right embrace the multiculturalist discourse to project their take on diversity politics. Indeed, nationhood is a malleable (and amorphous) concept that can be shaped by any ideology or political objective.
Multiculturalist Struggle: The Liberal Right vs. the Conservative Right--Commentary
Frye Jacobson's work embraces diversity as the characteristic that defines American society. While post-1965 nativism revived different ethnic backgrounds and identities, its downside (Frye Jacobson tells us) is that it was Eurocentric, and it reacted against the Civil Rights movement by emphasizing the descendants of European immigrants over African-Americans. And as a result, the multiculturalism at the root of post-1965 nativism partially legitimized the opposition to affirmative action as the support of this diversity policy. In this picture, it is only natural that the 'Left' adopted the multiculturalist approach to support