Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Chinese people have been in South East Asia for as long as many settlers have been in the New World, (and Jewish people who immigrated into the United States from Europe, have been living in Europe since the Middle Ages and further back), then these groups can be considered more distantly removed from their "homeland" than many Puritan-descended Americans are from Merrie Olde England. I do wonder, going as far back as that, is it really even useful to call them immigrant communities or diasporas?
Perhaps, one might consider diasporas to really only have ties to a mother country if there are living connections (eg. family living there, visit that country regularly), not just distant echoes of ancestry. Or else, who's counting the generations anyways? We might all call ourselves diasporic, immigrant communities from the prehistoric East African savannahs going back enough.
Good point, but MP was talking about how Italian Americans identify, but yes, most Italians think of them as more American than Italians.
Oh and the identity and culture of groups like Italian-Americans (labelled as ''Italian'' in the US though) often seems bizarre to people in the old country. Either it's largely unrelated, or in some cases is based on the old culture of the source country which has now evolved, and the old culture does not exist there anymore.
Oh and the identity and culture of groups like Italian-Americans (labelled as ''Italian'' in the US though) often seems bizarre to people in the old country. Either it's largely unrelated, or in some cases is based on the old culture of the source country which has now evolved, and the old culture does not exist there anymore.
As discussed in the thread I made about the Italian communities being younger in Australia and Canada, since they are less removed from the source country in generation time and thus has less time to evolve, I wonder if those in the old country would see an Italian Canuck or Aussie as less "bizarre" than an Italian-American?
Or would they simply consider all the Italian-descended folks whose families left for another land, to be equally "outsiders" no matter how many generations they left, as long as they are no longer in touch personally with their families or know them personally?
Ireland does have ties with their diaspora and are very aware of Irish descent people in USA, UK, Australia etc. Ireland and the USA have quite close ties and the Irish Prime Minister has an audience with the US President on every St Patrick's Day. This special privilege that a small country like Ireland has with the US is largely due to Irish-Americans.
The Irish diaspora is even mentioned in the Irish Constitution.
Article 2
It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.
If Chinese people have been in South East Asia for as long as many settlers have been in the New World, (and Jewish people who immigrated into the United States from Europe, have been living in Europe since the Middle Ages and further back), then these groups can be considered more distantly removed from their "homeland" than many Puritan-descended Americans are from Merrie Olde England. I do wonder, going as far back as that, is it really even useful to call them immigrant communities or diasporas?
Perhaps, one might consider diasporas to really only have ties to a mother country if there are living connections (eg. family living there, visit that country regularly), not just distant echoes of ancestry. Or else, who's counting the generations anyways? We might all call ourselves diasporic, immigrant communities from the prehistoric East African savannahs going back enough.
Well you have to understand the differences between Asia and the States. The US is a new country, based on founding principles of 'equality' (not in practice though) where people from everywhere came and adapted. Asia is a land where nationality and 'blood' go back a long time and roots are deep. In SEA, how integrated a diaspora community became, or how connected it was to the original culture (not necessarily the original country) varied a lot with the attitude of the host and them. Therefore you have contrasting examples of Thailand and Malaysia.
I think another reason Chinese identity persisted more in Malaysia and Singapore was because they were semi-immigrant communities, with large waves of migration from China and India in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Aside from a few examples, like the Peranakan, religion proved a large barrier between the three communities. Indian Muslims sometimes consort with Malay Muslims (former PM Mahathir was himself of half Tamil stock, Tamil Muslim).
Oh and the identity and culture of groups like Italian-Americans (labelled as ''Italian'' in the US though) often seems bizarre to people in the old country. Either it's largely unrelated, or in some cases is based on the old culture of the source country which has now evolved, and the old culture does not exist there anymore.
I wouldn't say the old culture does not exist anymore, just in a much reduced or changed form. How much of that culture they cling on to depends also on the person. Some Italian Americans are only such in name and ancestry, others still try to maintain a lot of their 'culture', even if it's quite different to that in the 'Old country.' Plus most Italian Americans are from the South anyway, so they aren't going to have as much affinity with a Venetian. Even a Sicilian today has a lot of differences with a northern Italian.
Certainly not. Finnish-Americans, Finnish-Canadians and Finnish-Australians are just... foreigners. My sister dated a Finnish-Australian and he was just Australian. Didn't speak Finnish either.
I'm presuming that this thread is asking what sort of relationship countries have with their diaspora populations? Anyone born in another country is not going to be viewed exactly the same as someone born and bred there but someone with blood ties to a country is still viewed as having a connection. This is why someone who has parents or in some instances grandparents born in a country can obtain citizenship.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
