U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-13-2014, 04:06 PM
 
Location: East coast
613 posts, read 845,096 times
Reputation: 304

Advertisements

Even though all Asian immigration in general is seen as new compared to European in many Anglo nations and other New World ones, the Chinese and Japanese seem to have a long history compared to the further westward or inland Asian countries of the Indian subcontinent. There are exceptions like the UK, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana etc. but in many of the larger bigger ones besides the UK, like America, Brazil, Australia, Canada, South Asians are newer than East Asians. Is this just a function of geography? The Chinese and Japanese immigrated more than say Indians, simply because of more access to a boat arriving to the US, Canada, Australia and these locations they were most known for immigrating to?

I mean, racial discrimination laws for entering in equally applied to East and South Asians, right? Why didn't you get more (and I know they were there) Punjabi people in west coast USA or Canada alongside the Chinese or Japanese railroad workers and miners? I don't know as much about Australia but it seems like Chinese are still more represented among early immigrants than Indians.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2014, 12:22 AM
 
25,060 posts, read 22,112,973 times
Reputation: 11576
Geography and politics. South Asia was the British Empire, China was not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 12:55 AM
 
Location: Czech Republic
2,385 posts, read 5,570,641 times
Reputation: 788
Filipinos were the first Asians in America. They arrived in California in October 18 1587 on board Spanish galleon during the Manila - Acapulco galleon trade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 05:26 PM
 
Location: East coast
613 posts, read 845,096 times
Reputation: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed View Post
Geography and politics. South Asia was the British Empire, China was not.
Then why did South Asians not become that much more common relative to East Asians during the early days of immigration in Canada or Australia? Both had strong British ties then.

Why were there not more, say Indians who settled northern Queensland to farm their tropical crops or Punjabi railway workers in British Columbia, as well as California. In both Canada and Australia, it feels like the Chinese were represented more. This is despite the fact that China had less ties to Britain than India did then (besides Hong Kong, which I believe wasn't that big of an immigrant sender in the colonial days).

If it were only colonial ties, I'd expect India to send as much immigrants (based on population) as China to those places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 05:34 PM
 
Location: East coast
613 posts, read 845,096 times
Reputation: 304
Did the Chinese, Japanese and Filipinos who immigrated to the New World more able to access boats or come from a more nautical background than those of the Indian subcontinent?

Actually South East Asia seems underrepresented in the US and Canada, now that I think of it. Not much Malaysian, Indonesian, Cambodia or Thai immigration early on either. I don't know how far back SE Asian immigration goes in Australia or NZ but it does seem like the Chinese are still earlier than them there (not counting of course the Maori or Polynesian descendents in NZ).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2014, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,783 posts, read 15,339,870 times
Reputation: 2833
In Australia the Gold Rush was the main impetus for Chinese immigration, which began around the 1850s (with subsequent later gold rushes). Many Chinese who didn't strike it lucky who did not return home went into other things, farming, market gardening, opening jobs, skilled or unskilled labour. There were also those who went there to basically support the growing Chinese communities, which include Melbourne's Chinatown as well as many regional Chinatowns like Bendigo. In rural Victoria today you'll see remnants of the Chinese there like joss houses, temples.etc. Partly due to discrimination and population decline these rural and also the urban Chinatowns started declining until the White Australia Policy was lifted.

Japanese immigration to Australia was pretty limited, there were pearl divers in Broome and some in Darwin and north Queensland, but compared to Chinese they were a tiny trickle.

As for the lack of Indians in Australia - well there was some Indian immigration from the early 19th century, Afghans too who were camel drivers (the 'Ghan' train service is named after them) and introduced Australia's large feral camel population. I'm not sure why Indians were never as prominent in pursuing the Gold Rush, but I suspect the oppressive rule of the Qing dynasty and the tumult of the Taiping rebellion and a series of bad famines was responsible not just for the outward migration of Chinese to the new world but also South-East Asia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2014, 08:57 PM
 
1,100 posts, read 1,320,404 times
Reputation: 492
Might have been the impact of colonial rule in India - I'm not sure how much freedom the typical Indian really had in the 1800s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2014, 03:09 AM
 
334 posts, read 337,896 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by markovian process View Post
Even though all Asian immigration in general is seen as new compared to European in many Anglo nations and other New World ones, the Chinese and Japanese seem to have a long history compared to the further westward or inland Asian countries of the Indian subcontinent. There are exceptions like the UK, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana etc. but in many of the larger bigger ones besides the UK, like America, Brazil, Australia, Canada, South Asians are newer than East Asians. Is this just a function of geography? The Chinese and Japanese immigrated more than say Indians, simply because of more access to a boat arriving to the US, Canada, Australia and these locations they were most known for immigrating to?

I mean, racial discrimination laws for entering in equally applied to East and South Asians, right? Why didn't you get more (and I know they were there) Punjabi people in west coast USA or Canada alongside the Chinese or Japanese railroad workers and miners? I don't know as much about Australia but it seems like Chinese are still more represented among early immigrants than Indians.
Immigration or migration of people from the Asian continent has been going on since the very early colonial period beginnings of the New World. People from all over travelled or came as slaves or merchants to the new world and throughout the Old World. So it's all global.

Here look at this video:


Mexico and The Philippines: History - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2014, 03:12 AM
 
334 posts, read 337,896 times
Reputation: 61
Jean Saint Malo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2014, 03:16 AM
 
334 posts, read 337,896 times
Reputation: 61
Jean Saint Malo is considered earliest or among earliest settlement of Filipinos in what is now the United States dating back to and during the earliest of the Spanish and French colonial periods of the vast region and territory

Saint Malo, Louisiana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top