The statistics of "Immigration and passenger movement" are included in the report on foreign commerce to 1895, and for 1893-1894 are also published separately.

In the twentieth century, Americans thought of the United States as a land of opportunity and equality. To what extent and for whom this was true was, of course, a matter of debate, however especially during the Cold War, many Americans clung to the patriotic conviction that America was the land of the free. At the same time, another national ideal emerged that was far less contentious, that arguably came to subsume the ideals of freedom, opportunity, and equality, and that eventually embodied an unspoken consensus about what constitutes the good society in a postmodern setting. This was the ideal of choice, broadly understood as the proposition that the good society provides individuals with the power to shape the contours of their lives in ways that suit their personal interests, idiosyncrasies, and tastes. By the closing decades of the century, Americans were widely agreed that theirs was—or at least should be—the land of choice. In A Destiny of Choice?, David Blanke and David Steigerwald bring together important scholarship on the tension between two leading interpretations of modern American consumer culture. That modern consumerism reflects the social, cultural, economic, and political changes that accompanied the country’s transition from a local, producer economy dominated by limited choices and restricted credit to a national consumer marketplace based on the individual selection of mass-produced, mass-advertised, and mass-distributed goods. This debate is central to the economic difficulties seen in the United States today.

The decades separating our new century from the Armenian Genocide, the prototype of modern-day nation-killings, have fundamentally changed the political composition of the region. Virtually no Armenians remain on their historic territories in what is today eastern Turkey. The Armenian people have been scattered about the world. And a small independent republic has come to replace the Armenian Soviet Socialist Republic, which was all that was left of the homeland as the result of Turkish invasion and Bolshevik collusion in 1920. One element has remained constant. Notwithstanding the eloquent, compelling evidence housed in the United States National Archives and repositories around the world, successive Turkish governments have denied that the predecessor Young Turk regime committed genocide, and, like the Nazis who followed their example, sought aggressively to deflect blame by accusing the victims themselves. This volume argues that the time has come for Turkey to reassess the propriety of its approach, and to begin the process that will allow it move into a post-genocide era. The work includes “Genocide: An Agenda for Action,” Gijs M. de Vries; “Determinants of the Armenian Genocide,” Donald Bloxham; “Looking Backward and Forward,” Joyce Apsel; “The United States Response to the Armenian Genocide,” Simon Payaslian; “The League of Nations and the Reclamation of Armenian Genocide Survivors,” Vahram L. Shemmassian; “Raphael Lemkin and the Armenian Genocide,” Steven L. Jacobs; “Reconstructing Turkish Historiography of the Armenian Massacres and Deaths of 1915,” Fatma Müge Göçek; “Bitter-Sweet Memories; “The Armenian Genocide and International Law,” Joe Verhoeven; “New Directions in Literary Response to the Armenian Genocide,” Rubina Peroomian; “Denial and Free Speech,” Henry C. Theriau