From Systemic Racism to Self-Rejection
-
In the beginning of the twentieth century, in Australia, Afghan Muslims would allegedly buy and sell their wives (Khatun, 143). They were depicted as being barbaric toward their wives, not allowing them basic human rights (Khatun, 144). Samia Khatun counters this narrative by stating that marriage did not transform women into property (Khatun, 149). She also cites stories in which women had power during the negotiations taking place while the marriage was being prepared (Khatun, 150). In 1901, six separated British colonies became ‘‘White Australia’’, a state that was independent from British rule. The goal was mainly to restrict commerce and importations coming from South Asia. This state restricted movement of Asian merchants. It also restricted the movement of Asian workers and their capital (Khatun, 152). Racialist discourses did not only govern commerce, but they also governed the marriage of Aboriginal women. In fact, the ‘‘White Australian’’ government sought to control Aboriginal people’s intimate relations. Aboriginal children whose fathers were not Aboriginal were considered as ‘‘half-caste’’. ‘‘Half-caste’’ women were systematically forced to marry White men, in order to have White children. Ultimately, the goal was to make people forget about the Aboriginal identity in Australia (Khatun, 158). Thus, it was illegal for ‘‘half-caste’’ women to have relationships with racialized men, which was the case of Lallie Matbar and Akbar Khan (Khatun, 159). From a racialist point of view, Aboriginal women could acquire the privilege of being white, through marriage with White men. ‘‘White Australia’’ would be turning Aboriginals into White Australians. Using the same logic, what did White men gain from these marriages?
In his book Antiman, Rajiv Mohabir describes the melancholia he felt, in relation to his Indo-Guyanese roots. Rajiv illustrates the different ways by which he attempted to reclaim his lost culture. He describes wanting to learn Hindi. He also mentions that learning about Guyanese and Indian traditions could help him learn where he comes from (Mohabir, 19). He also mentions wanting to learn about the Bhojpuri language, folk singing, and astrology (Mohabir, 23). However, he faced many challenges. For example, his father would encourage him to learn a ‘‘useful’’ language instead of Hindi (Mohabir, 19). This shows that his father somewhat rejected his original culture. Similarly, he claims that his father did not want him to ‘‘become Hindu’’ (Mohabir, 20). Moreover, Rajiv was shocked when he noticed that White people were more interested in Indian culture than his own family members. He claims that the grandchildren of the people who told Indians that their culture was backward were the ones studying it (Mohabir, 38). In relation to learning standardised Hindi, he mentions that although he spoke it quite fluently, he was forced to take beginner level classes because he could not write properly. He gives the example of mixing up long and short vowels in writing (Mohabir, 29).
In relation to loss of culture, which I personally think is the biggest cause of migrant melancholia, it is interesting to note that governments were the first entities to try to kill people’s cultures. They even used laws to attempt to make Indigenous people across the world ‘‘disappear’’. However, through time, racialized people have also tried erasing their own culture, within themselves. Rajiv Mohabir’s father is a good example of this. Why do certain parents feel disdain toward their own cultures? Why do they encourage their children to abandon their practices, languages, and values?