Global Journeys: From Transnationalism to Diaspora

Abstract

The emerging interest in diasporic studies has recently begun to permeate various academic disciplines, none more so than cultural studies. Today, there are numerous articles, books, and journals that have begun to engage in heated discussions on the importance of recognizing and understanding diaspora communities as collective transnational organizations and movements. However, sociology, the discipline out of which traditional migration theory emerged, has seemingly been more reluctant to embrace the concept of diaspora. In this article, I initiate a much needed conversation between traditional sociological migration theory and theories of diaspora emerging out of cultural studies. I look at the commonalities that exist between the two fields of study as well as points of divergence. Finally, I suggest ways in which the two fields can work together to help us gain a more nuanced understanding and appreciation of what happens when persons migrate. Journal of International and Global Studies 42 Global Journeys: From Transnationalism to Diaspora Advances in information technology, increased accessibility to communication via the internet, and more affordable modes of transportation have facilitated the rapid mobility of information, capital, people, and power to nontraditional spheres. In the twenty first century, such nontraditional spheres include diasporas—groups of migrants originating from the same homeland who have formed transnational movements. “Diaspora—as both concept and social practice—is in vogue” (Dufoix, 2003). This quote by Stephane Dufoix can be contrasted to popular sentiment in previous years when scholars like when William Saffran (1991) observed that scholarship on ethnicity and immigration paid “little if any attention....to diasporas” (as cited in Brubaker, 2005). The concept of “diaspora” has indeed become a “hot topic,” the relevance, and significance, and negotiation of which are actively debated not only in academia (beginning especially in 1991 with the publication of the academic journal Diaspora) but also in real life, where governments, politicians, and economists all reference the term “disapora.” The political importance of diasporas across the globe is evident in the recent surge in discussions about their geo-political influence. The 2010-2011 Arab Spring (the revolutionary political demonstrations and protests in the Middle East) gained tremendous global coverage for the way in which residents were displaying levels of frustration and intolerance of injustice, but the uprising also was a platform from which diasporas connected to these countries were able to become directly involved in socio-political change. The important role of migrants in the Arab Spring resulted in political analysts, academics, and intellectuals developing renewed interest in the impact of diasporas. One online commentary, The National, published an article discussing the important role of diasporas not just in the revolutionary process of change but also in the future reconstruction of the countries affected by the Arab Spring. Specifically, the article highlighted the World Bank’s appeal that these nations call on their diasporas to help them rebuild; the article’s author quotes the organization’s economist, Dilip Ratha, as saying, “The diaspora can be a friend in foul weather. If things are not going well in your country, and foreign investors aren’t there, the diaspora will still be there” (Arnold, 2011). These kinds of discussions about diasporas are not unique to the Arab Spring or to countries experiencing political upheaval. For example, in 2012, the U.S. State Department hosted its second annual Global Diaspora Forum under the theme “Moving Forward by Giving Back.” This conference took place in the nation’s capital on July 25-26, 2012. According to the website for the forum, The Global Diaspora Forum is an annual celebration of America’s diaspora communities. The gathering challenges diaspora communities to forge partnerships with the private sector, civil society, and public institutions in order to make their engagements with their countries of origin or ancestry effective, scalable, and sustainable. Such examples of journalists, intellectuals, and political leaders hosting conferences and forums and making public attempts to facilitate the influence of diasporas on their home countries shows just how timely this research is. This interest in diasporas is not limited to the developing world or to the host countries where migrants reside. Leaders in developing countries such as in Africa, the Caribbean, and South America are also are having conversations and reconsidering nontraditional resources that could help them become competitive. Noticeably, diasporas are frequently mentioned in these Global Journeys: From Transnationalism to Diaspora 43 conversations, often cited as invaluable assets to aid in the country’s development and, therefore, a major part of the solutions they seek. In this paper, I review and discuss the rise of “diasporic studies” over the past two decades. These contemporary studies, utilizing renewed and recreated definitions of diaspora and the role of diaspora communities, reflect the theoretical shift and current trends in migration studies. In particular, I am interested in trying to determine when and how the term “diaspora” (in its current form) came to play such an important role in academia. The paper is also ambitious in the sense that while trying to assess the rise of diaspora studies, I start what I believe to be a much needed dialogue between the sociological literature on migration and the literature on diasporic studies. To date, the two have often been discussed in different camps (sociology and cultural studies, respectively), giving the impression that neither camp of scholars has anything in common. However, this paper seeks to show what connections, if any, exist between theories of migration in sociology, specifically theories of transnational migration and theories of diaspora studies. I begin with a brief explanation of the title of this paper and an interpretation of how I believe ‘the migrant’ has evolved in academia. Because diaspora is the central aspect of this paper, I then provide a discussion of the understanding and definition of diaspora, as presented by some of the pioneering scholars. I choose to start with a discussion of diasporas because I believe that obtaining an understanding of diasporas will be helpful in understanding the connections and diversions between theories of transnational migration and diasporas, which are discussed in the subsequent sections. (A thorough discussion and review of transnational migration theory is beyond the scope of this paper, although an overview of the theory can be obtained throughout the paper.) The Journey of the ‘Migrant’ At the risk of resorting to a fixed, linear progression of the conceptualization of the movement of people across borders, I assert that what we have seen in studies on migration is an “academic evolution” from the notion of ‘migrants’ to that of ‘diasporas’ and then, ultimately, to that of ‘transnational social movements.’ That said, the greatest overlap between studies on diasporas (originating out of the cultural studies discipline) and sociology of migration theories lies in the area of transnational migration. However, where I believe that diaspora studies move beyond theories of transnational migration can by summarized in two points: (1) diaspora studies’ focus on how members of diasporas self-identify as belonging to the diaspora communities and eventually formulate a new movement based on this identity and (2) the ways in which members of diasporas connect not only with the host country and the home country but also the ways in which they connect with each other. These distinguishing points seem to be problematic for scholars who intend to reserve the right to categorize people who move across borders and define them as “migrants” or “transmigrants.” Although academics have utilized the concept of diaspora widely, I argue that diaspora studies differentiates itself from studies of migration based on the premise that the members of diasporas are self-identified; they do not quite fit nicely into theoretical typologies or defining characteristics—they define themselves and operate accordingly. In short, diaspora is more than just another concept being introduced to group and categorize persons; it is also a social process. It is a process in which some migrants actively engage—a process that possibly shares qualities of a movement. Furthermore, I suggest that missing from theories of Journal of International and Global Studies 44 transnational migration is the deep connection members of diaspora communities share with each other, another somewhat difficult reality for social scientists concerned with quantifiable phenomena to study. This is not to say, therefore, that migration scholars need not try to understand diasporas or the role diasporas play in the current global era. Regardless of whether or not they do, however, I believe that it is crucial to realize that whatever social scholars have to say about the reality of diasporas, diasporas are very real to those who participate in them. Despite the fact that diaspora communities are often real for those who participate in them, some scholars assert that diaspora studies is just a passing fad in academia. As Butler (2001) put it, many scholars are keen to capitalize on the “sexiness of the discourse of diaspora studies in academia” without putting much effort into forming a methodological and theoretical conceptualization of the term. This may be partly true, as scholars are often seeking ways to make their work innovative and important by somehow incorporating the latest “hot topic.” However, I challenge the notion that such studies are a fad or that they are “passing” in any way. Instead, the challenge facing academ