A Theory of Middleman Minorities - Speech or Presentation Example

? A Theory of Middleman Minorities: Part 2 Stage 2: Voice Over PowerPoint Presentation al Affiliation A Theory of Middleman Minorities: Project 2 Stage 2: Voice Over PowerPoint Presentation Slide 1 The article that was extensively and comprehensively reviewed is entitled “A Theory of Middleman Minorities” which was written by Edna Bonacich and published in the American Sociological Review in October of 1973. One is currently complying with the second stage of Project 2 that requires the provision a narrative description and detailed commentary of the PowerPoint Presentation of the mentioned article. Slide 2 The ‘middleman minorities’ theories were allegedly coined by Hubert Blalock (1967) in his book entitled Toward a Theory of Minority Group Relations; where, he allegedly asserted that the term ‘middleman minorities’ refers to minority entrepreneurs who allegedly mediate between the dominant and subordinate groups: specifically between the producer and consumer, employer and employee, owner and renter, as well as elite and masses. Likewise, as traders, middleman minorities’ customers are deemed members of marginalized racial or ethnic groups which allegedly are segregated from the majority group. As specifically noted by Bonacich (1973) the term was likewise synonymous with other terms coined by different authors in various researches, to include terminologies such as “middle- man trading peoples," (from ) Becker (1956, pp. 225-237), "migrant intermediation," from Schermerhor (1970, pp. 74-76), "marginal trading peoples," and "permanent minorities," from the study written by Stryker in 1959 (p. 583). Slide 3 The examples provided by Bonacich (1973) in the article for a group of people appropriately representing ‘middleman minorities’ include: the Jews in Europe, the Chinese in Southeast Asia, Asians in East Africa, Armenians in Turkey, Syrians in West Africa, Parsis in India, as well as Japanese and Greeks in the United States (p. 583). It could therefore be noted that these groups of people come from diverse ethnic, racial and cultural orientations and migrate to a foreign land which is different from their native homeland. Slide 4 The aim of the study therefore, or what the author wants to answer is to develop an alternative framework/model which explains the evolution and sustained presence of middleman minorities. From one’s evaluation and review, the author wants to answer this to serve three objectives: (1) to rationalize the presence of noted host hostilities, which would be presented and discussed in greater detail later; (2) to determine the reasons for apparent abandonment of the minority groups’ desire to return to their native land or country of origin; and (3) to finally confirm the status of ‘middleman minorities’ in the host countries through their experiences, challenges, and attempts for economic and social integration in the host countries. Slide 5 To enable Bonacich (1973) to achieve the defined aim, she developed a schematic representation of the development and perpetuation of the middleman minority position through Figure 1 in the article. The visual presentation was elaborated and expounded by Nestorowicz (2011) to clearly identify relevant relationships and variables presented in Bonacich’s (1973) theory. From the visual illustration, it could be determined that the most relevant variables are those contained in the boxes, such as economic position, solidarity, host hostility, ambivalence towards place of residence (for being considered and perceived as a stranger), the desire to return to home country (described as sojourning), and the desire to remain in the host country. Slide 6 The key characteristics of the ‘middleman minorities’, as depicted from the model, include: (1) middleman minorities (MM) begin as sojourners ( immigrants who do not plan to settle permanently) (p. 584); (2) MM manifesting thriftiness to enhance economic position and select portable occupations, such as “truck farming specializing in crops that have a rapid turnover; various skilled trades, such as barbers, shoemakers, goldsmiths, jewellers, restaurant-owners, tailors, launderer” (Bonacich, 1973, p. 585), to name a few; (3) exhibiting high degree of internal solidarity due to sharing similarities in experiencing in a foreign country; (4) possessing communal solidarity’s role in economic status; and (5) exhibiting propensities to encounter conflicts with host country due to economic pursuits and solidarity issues. Slide 7 As previously noted, Bonacich (1973) affirmed that there are apparent conflicts with ‘middleman minorities’ mainly due to incompatibility of goals, and specifically due to the following: (1) their economic pursuits; and (2) their manifested solidarity issues. In its simplified explanation, the three economic conflicts encountered by ‘middleman minorities’ include: (1) conflict with clientele where the following kinds could be expected: (a) conflicts between buyer and seller, (b) conflicts between renter and landlord, and (c) conflicts between the client and professional organizations or agencies. The second economic conflict is conflict with business apparently due to the ability of middleman minorities’ firms to offer low prices and due to theie alleged monopoly on a chosen endeavor. Finally, the third economc conflict that was explained by Bonacich (1973) was the conflict with labor that apparently ensued from cheap versus high priced labor. As explained, middleman minorities exemplify “employers (who) are paternalistic, (and) employees willing to work long hours at low pay. The result is a cheap and loyal workforce, which threatens to disrupt the relationship between business and labor in the host society” (Bonacich, 1973, p. 591). Slide 8 A continuation of the discussion on host hostility concerns solidarity issues two major situations were noted: (1) disloyalty to host countries since it was apparently disclosed that middleman minorities allegedly possess dual loyalties (one from their homeland and the other from the host country) and their reported resistance to become citizens of host countries; and (2) the observed drain of host countries’ resources, which was reported to be due to any of the following reasons: (a) remitting money to their homeland, (b) “land mining, (c) not engaging in productive industry, (d) not contributing to local industries by importing necessities from the homeland” (Bonacich, 1973 p. 591). Slide 9 As revealed by Bonacich (1973), the effects of the host hostility, as previously explained, include: (1) solidification of the host and isolation of the ‘middleman minorities’; (2) manifestation of love for homeland and therefore there could be tendencies for ‘middleman minorities’ to exhibit desire to return to homeland; (3) there could be reinforcements of communal bonding through establishment of cultural institutions, such as schools and the continued use of the nature language; and (4) the host allegedly restricts the ‘middleman minorities’ entrenchment through regulations and defining scope of occupational concentration. From these effects, readers are made to understand that there evidently exists a barrier and gap between the host and the middleman minorities due to the conflicts that were explained and the solidarity issues. The author took the point of view of the host country to emphasize that since the host is threatened by the middleman minorities’ economic success and their unity as a group, which enables them to offer lower prices and therefore gain greater financial success, the host applies various regulations to prevent them from apparently draining the resources of the host country. Slide 10 After all the conflicts and the retaliatory measures reportedly instigated by the host country, the middleman minorities either: (1) return to their homeland (as is their original plan); or (2) remain in the host country. According to Bonacich (1973), some ‘middleman minorities’ return to their respective homeland after saving enough financial resources to make them comfortably successful; while some remain as permanent residents. From among the noted reasons for not returning, the following were presented: (1) adverse political conditions in home country; (2) sustained economic success in host country, which makes them apprehensive to leave and try to establish the same level of success in their homeland; (3) the eventual disappearance of middleman minorities form through economic and social integration; where it was noted that some intermarry, join other ethnic or inter-racial organizations and groups, or opt to be employed; and (4) some, while deciding not to return to their homeland, still allegedly remain steadfast in the desire to return to their native countries. Slide 10 In conclusion, the author explained a model that defined characteristics of the middleman minorities which expounded their personal and professional goals in the host country; as well as the factors that led them to either remain or return to their home land. Bonacich (1973) described the rationale for host hostility where the end results were noted as: (1) the middleman minorities allegedly disppearing to due economic or social integration; and (2) their becoming permanent minority in the country where they chose to live. Slide 12 References Bonacich, E. (1973). A theory of middleman majorities. American Sociological Review 38(5), 583-594. Nestorowicz, J. (2011) “Known Knowns and Known Unkowns of Immigrant Self Employment”. University of Warsaw. Retrieved from Read More