The Politics of Race and Diaspora - Literature review Example

The Politics of Race and Diaspora, Critically evaluate the analytical use of the term Diaspora in the journal articles by Safran and Anthias October 09, 2014 1. Introduction Diaspora refers to segments of people with a common origin, who have moved from their homeland to another place (Turne & Kleist, 2013). Also called emigrants, Diaspora is seen from the biblical ages, when Jews moved from Egypt to Israel, and the term refers to mass movement of people, who relocate to escape persecution, or to find a better life. Other instances of Diaspora are seen in the African slave trade when thousands of Africans were captured and sold to plantations in the Caribbeans and in the Americas (McLoughlin et al. 2014). During the 1700s, a large number of Europeans, particularly from UK, Ireland, Germany, France, Denmark and other countries, immigrated to America. The 21st century, saw the movement of Asians into America and other parts of the world (Nkongolo-Bakenda & Chrysostome, 2013). It is interesting to note that diasporas includes a number of associated factors such as culture, religion, language, trade, labour, and the communities that migrate often form strong bonds with each other, besides retaining links, and communication with their counterparts in their native land. Scholars have interpreted Diasporas in different ways, and this paper examines the works of Anthias (1998) and Safran (1991) and discusses their views and interpretations. The arguments about the willingness of diasporas willingness to return to their country of origins is mixed, and much depends on the individuals performance, and status in the host county. Generally, people who have emigrated to western countries for a better life, do not want to return, and these includes Nigerians, Asians, and others, who have immigrated to the west. On the other hand, people, who are persecuted, and driven from their homeland, often losing their wealth, lands, and other property, would consider returning, if their wealth and safety is assured (Tejada et al. 2013). The paper then examines the relevance of diasporas of the communities of Nigerians and Jews. 2. Literature Review Anthias (1998) regards Diasporas as an alternative method of construct for transnational migration, and the development of ethnic relations, which rely on the concept of race and ethnicity. She regards it more as a descriptive typological tool, that examines diasporas from two approaches, social condition and the societal process. The author examines the heuristically aspect of diasporas and considers it important, since it is an alternative to the concept of race and gives importance to the concept of identity, while discussing the ethnic and cultural identities. She brings attention on the transactional and dynamic processes, and common features of ethnicities, while accepting diversity. This is affected by using the idea of ethnicity, and the point of origin while creating identity and solidarity. Anthias considers that the concept of diasporas is possible as a heuristic advance, if it can overcome the problems of ethnicity, hence it must be constructed as a paradigm of social divisions and identities. This in turn means that one should treat it as a collective and solidarity bond, that is emergent and acknowledges the political dynamics of these processes (Anthias, 1998). The advantage of the arguments of Anthias is that they present a structured, and clear case of diasporas, with deep cultural and ethnic identities. It considers that diasporas from a community arrange themselves as per their origins, work nature, and status, in their host country, and this construct helps in easier analysis of the social groups. The disadvantage of the arguements is that it does not consider trans-ethnic commonalities and relations, and does not consider differences of gender and class. These last two differentiators become very important since in the modern globalised context, a certain class of people take up mass immigration. Examples are the brain drain that Asian nations face when bright and highly educated people move to western nations, to seek a better future. Other examples are poor refugees from African nations who swarm on refugee ships, and land illegally in the west. This lacuna in the argument reduces the use of diasporas as an enabling concept to understand the diverse, and differentiated forms of transnational movement and settlement (Tejada et al. 2013). Safran (1991) on the other hand, examines diasporas as minority communities whose ancestors were dispersed from their original place. He speaks of the people as ones who retain a collective memory and vision of the original homeland, who feel that they are not accepted fully in their host society and they feel alienated from both places, and regard their original homeland as their true and ideal home, to which they would eventually return. This definition creates a certain amount of imbalance, as people with roots in their homeland, while they actually bloom and live in another place, leading dual lives. Safran (1991) further indicates that the Diasporas long for restoration and reconciliation with their homeland, and express solidarity with their original location. He further discusses at length the behaviour of different communities and people of origin that have settled in different countries. Some of the communities compared and discussed are Armenians, Jews, Poles, Maghrebi and Portuguese people in France, Turkish Gastarbeiter settled in Germany, Magyars of Romania, Palestinians, and many others. The author examines the reasons for their departure, and argues that many of these people were persecuted, and expelled from their lands. He also speaks of Indian and Chinese people, who left their countries of their own violation, to seek a better future (Safran, 1991). The main advantages of Safrans arguments are that, diasporas form distinct patterns of community, that can be identified, based on their culture, and origins. This helps in easier identification of the motives, needs, and requirements of the communities. The main disadvantage of Safran (1991) is that he speaks of Diaspora as communities that are forced to move away from their lands. The work loses relevance in the globalised community, where mobility of people is encouraged, and people move on to other countries in the west for education, jobs, or through marriages. Such people attempt to integrate and become a part of their host country, and may marry people from the host country, to reinforce their legitimacy. In many cases, the Diaspora would not be willing to move back to their homeland, even if they had a chance. Many countries from the Middle East see diverse diasporas of people from India, Egypt, Pakistan, and other places, and these people are well settled in their host country. The movement here is free, of their own desire, and they would stay for as long as possible, in these places. In addition, the author does not speak of the identity, and image that the diasporas develop, and display in their host country. This identity emerges from the collective effort of the community, the contributions they make to the society, and the efforts they take (Esman, 2013). 2.1. Diasporas of Jews and Nigerians The case of Jews and Nigerians is discussed here, and there seem to be some differences in the social needs, behaviour, and reasons for settling aboard. The Jews, until recently, did not have a country of their own, and while Israel is the natural home of Jews from Israel, Jews are found in Russia, Poland, Romania, Germany, UK, USA, and many other places (Waxman, 2013). The Nazis persecuted the Jews in the 1930s, and consequently, some of them left to settle in other nations. These people, developed their own trade, maintained their distinct attire, religion, and other cultural identity, and many of them lead successful business enterprises in the West (Ostrer & Skorecki, 2013). However, the new generation of Jews, tend to copy the lifestyle of the native people, and it is difficult to distinguish them from the people of their host country. The Diaspora of Jews developed an identity of hard work, resourcefulness, and intelligent people, who achieved success through their hard work (Cesari, 2013). The Nigerians on the other hand, are ethnically similar in appearance with the rest of their people from Africa, and African Americans, settled in USA. Nigerians first came to USA as slaves in the 17th century, and their descendents have continued to grow and contribute to the homeland (Ette, 2012). Millions of people have settled down in UK, Australia, Vietnam, Japan, Netherlands, and other nations. Some amount of diversity is evident here since; they are predominantly Christians, or Muslims (Effa, 2013). People of Christian background, integrate with the Christian people of the host country, and the same is the case with people of Islamic background. The Nigerian Diaspora has distinguished itself in the professional, educational and business fields in their host countries (Mirzoeff, 2014). While the Jews have maintained their own distinct style, the Nigerians have integrated fully with the host country, and there is very little to differentiate them from other Africans. 3. Conclusions It is clear from the analysis and discussion, that the old definition of diasporas, as people who moved from their home country, to the host country, needs to be revised. In many cases, as seen in the Nigerian diasporas, the people have fully integrated with their host country, and there is very little to different to differentiate them from other Africans, say in USA, UK, Netherlands, and other countries. Jews on the other hand, are ethnically similar to the white people of their host country, and it is difficult to differentiate the new generation from that of the native population. Thus, it is clear, that while diasporas, have relevance in segregating people by their country of origin, the effectiveness of this term is lost when it comes to understanding, and relating with fourth or fifth generation of people, who have integrated with the locals. References Anthias, F. 1998. Evaluating `Diaspora: Beyond Ethnicity? Sociology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 557-580. Cesari, J., 2013. Religion and diasporas: challenges of the emigration countries. Routledge: London. Effa, L. A., 2013. Releasing the Trigger: The Nigerian Factor in Global Christianity. International Bulletin of Missionary Research, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 214-218. Esman, M. J., 2013. Diasporas in the contemporary world. John Wiley & Sons: London. Ette, E.U., 2012. Nigerian Immigrants in the United States: Race, Identity, and Acculturation. Lexington Books: Lanham. McLoughlin, S., Gould, W., Kabir, A. J., & Tomalin, E. 2014. Writing the City in British Asian Diasporas. Routledge: London. Mirzoeff, N. 2014. Diaspora and visual culture: Representing Africans and Jews. Routledge: London. Nkongolo-Bakenda, J. M., & Chrysostome, E. V., 2013. Engaging diasporas as international entrepreneurs in developing countries: In search of determinants. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 30-64. Ostrer, H., & Skorecki, K., 2013. The population genetics of the Jewish people. Human genetics, vol. 132, no. 2, pp. 119-127. Safran, W., 1991. Diasporas in Modern Societies: Myths of Homeland and Return. A Journal of Transnational Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 83-99. Tejada, G., Varzari, V., & Porcescu, S., 2013. Scientific diasporas, transnationalism and home-country development: evidence from a study of skilled Moldovans abroad. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 157-173. Turner, S., & Kleist, N. 2013. Introduction: Agents of Change? Staging and Governing Diasporas and the African State. African Studies, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 192-206. Waxman, C. I., 2013. Multiculturalism, conversion, and the future of Israel as a modern state. Israel Studies Review, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 33-53. Read More