Europeanisation, National Identities and Migration ... - europeanization

224 Judit Tóth and Endre Sik
• cherishes a strong nostalgia for and/or active ties with its country of origin;
• constantly prepares to return, but never actually does.
Our analysis of the sociological characteristics of Diaspora is grounded in the work
of Bonacich (and its ‘corollaries,’ Bonacich and Turner 1980; Light and Bonacich
1988). The most profitable aspect of this approach for our analysis is that in
explaining the sojourner mentality of the migrant entrepreneur, it describes a
sociological behaviour highly characteristic of a Diasporic existence. This pattern
is sustained by three factors:
(a)
(b)
(c)
an ambivalent but powerful emotional relationship with the country of origin
(migrants maintain their connections, they keep planning to return while being
aware that they will never in fact do so, an awareness which they hide from
themselves and in part (over)compensate, but which makes their sojourn in the
host country emotionally conceivable only as something temporary);
an ambivalent relationship with the host country and its majority population
(the loyalty of alien settlers is conditional, something that is economically
advantageous for migrant and majority population alike and yet continually
reproduces mutual suspicions, etc.);
the intrinsic traits of the migrant existence (a strong and often introverted
community in which personal ties are maintained, an (over)developed
awareness of ‘us’, economic isolation, cultural (religious, ethnic, economic) selfdefence
and the dominance of highly liquid investments, etc.).
The applicability of this model has its obvious limitations as Diasporas are not
exclusively made up of small entrepreneurs; further, Bonacich’s approach does not
consider every feature of a Diasporic existence (for example its political dimension),
and ignores factors that may, on occasion, be relevant to a sociological analysis of
Diasporas (such as segregation in housing or the historical, political and cultural
relations between the sending and the host countries).
It is therefore appropriate to consider – using Bonacich’s model as our basis – the
inclusion among the characteristics of Diasporic existence (and of the relationship
of the Diaspora with the sending and the host countries) the following: 1
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
the majority population of the host country regard the Diaspora as an alien or,
assuming a dual loyalty on the part of the Diaspora, even a hostile (scapegoat)
community;
a Diaspora has its life cycles much as an individual has, and the sociological
features characterising emergent, strengthened and disintegrating Diasporas
greatly differ from each other;
the nature of the relationship of a Diaspora with the host country may vary
according to the relative size and sociological make-up of the former and the
cultural, historical and political characteristics of the latter;
the same country of origin may send out more than one Diasporas, which
may communicate with each other, and this communication may result in
the emergence of a ‘world-wide’ community of economic, cultural, and