Melancholic Migrants > Forum Home

Discussion post excused via extra credit I did. I emailed you about it

pass excused via extra credit I did. I emailed you about it

Excused via email you sent on October 1st

discussion post excused via email you sent me on October 1st

Excused via email you sent October 1st

Thangaraj discusses cultural blackness in the context of the Black American culture that is often commodified for the purposes of imagining hyper-masculinity among non-white racialized people, specifically black American men. Proximity to blackness among South Asian men in America, has been, in a way, used as a tool for creating an American South Asian masculine identity. The ways in which cultural blackness has been commodified by white America to create the image of a hyper-masculine Black American man who plays sports, who is apolitical, whose labour is useful, and whose identity is considered “embraceable” and palatable for White Americans. South Asian men, who alone, are often excluded from Americanness, and by American ideas of masculinity, use their proximity to Black men as non-white racialized people in America to participate in forms of cultural blackness, that to the white American, is more authentic than if a white American man were to participate in them due to the racialization of South Asians and their proximity to blackness.

In the West, Muslims are already surveilled and seen as a security threat. Security Shuffle goes even further, however, saying that the act of covering, either with a turban or a hijab, makes racialized people even further surveilled, as they are assumed to be hiding something. When people believe that Muslims, or anyone racialized as a Muslim to be dangerous, and on top of that, they cover, thus not exposing everything that people think they should expose, they must be hiding something that surely, is a security threat.

The outcome of the Bouchard Taylor commission made it so that accountability to less obvious forms of racism were not addressed and created a superiority complex among French Quebecois who believed themselves to be tolerant, accepting and secular compared to the closeminded, conservative, extreme Muslim immigrants coming to Quebec who threaten Quebec secularism. The Catholic history in Quebec though, makes it so that any act of secularism in Quebec, will always be engrained with Catholicism. If one cannot practice their non-Christian religion for the sake of secularism in public, they will automatically be confided to practicing the Christian norms engrained in Quebec society, thus making it not truly secularism but rather anti-Muslim, and anti-immigrant, while at the same time, framing Quebecois as accepting and advanced and the immigrants as backwards.

Bannerji as stated by Thobani states that not only is multiculturalism used as a way to manage cultural differences in Canadian society, it also creates a Canadian identity in the international community as somehow being distinctly, and uniquely different from other western nations in their nationally-defining policies of multiculturalism, and actually defines itself as a nation through their differences from other Western countries with policies of assimilation. As we have discussed in this class time and time again, a pattern continues of monetary transactions between Western nations and immigrants. Immigrants, and Canada's policies of multiculturalism, are not for the sole purpose of allowing immigrant communities to prosper but are also for the purpose of Canada to help promote themselves in the international community, especially to distinguish themselves from the melting pot of the US.

According to Thobani, multiculturalism as implemented by the government in Canada has been a tool to continue to disenfranchise Indigenous people of Northern Turtle Island. Instead of upwardly mobilizing Indigenous people and providing them with equitable resources and opportunities in education and employment, the government of Canada has favoured immigration from outside, as not only economic tools, but also to allow resources to flow away from Indigenous people, who, if strong enough, can effectively mobilize for their self-determination, and acknowledgment as the original inhabitants of the land, and towards immigrants who can supply cheap labour, be coopted by political parties and ideologies, and who can be the scapegoats for when the economy is not doing well.

Martin’s interviewees are forever foreigners in that they forever feel that they are outsiders from the French, French, whereas they are only foreigner French. They could be born here or have been living in France for most of their lives, there is still something in their heads leading them to feel as though they will never “achieve” the goal of being French, like the French from France. It is an inferiority complex, like Karim, at least before he begins making the steps towards fixing his confidence, where he believes that if only, he can prove himself to be worthy, and abandon his maternal culture, religion and language, that he can achieve the goal of being French. At one point, though, one understands that the people who you were trying to prove your worth to, will never see you as French and it is in this context that many of Martin’s interviewees feel like “forever foreigners”.

According to Martin, the superiority complex of French people towards black people manifests itself in the form of anti-Blackness. This anti-Blackness is a result of France’s colonial past in Africa, recounting history through the eyes of the winners; France. In historical recounts, Africa, Black people, and other colonial subjects are demonized, Orientalized, and fetishized, partly to justify their brutality, but also to paint France as having a victorious colonial legacy in the places that it colonized, furthering French superiority, and immigrant inferiority complexes. This is especially true when recounts of history of this manner are taught in French schools. In fact, as stated by Abbas according to Martin, he says this is intentional of French institutions. When people are taught a history, painting the colonial era as something good, and painting the French as the rightful victors against “barbarism”, it allows French people to avoid accepting or admitting the brutality of their colonial past, and in fact, not only ignores it, but goes further to glamourize it and paint it to be something good. This in turn, manifests into a French superiority complex, and anti-Blackness.

In comparison to Europe, the Maghrebis interviewed by Mandin such as Leila describe their experiences in Europe as feeling stuck socio-economically, with no prospects for moving up. This is in part due to the clear unequal rates of unemployment among immigrants and descendants of immigrants compared to their white counterparts, with the same exact qualifications.

In the case of Nadir, his experiences between life in Europe and life in Montreal differ in the way that he is grouped. In Europe, Arabs are seen as Arabs. They are seen as being one collective unit, and people make assumptions about where they come from, their associations, their socio-economic class, and their lifestyle. In Montreal, however, at least in the way I understood it, Nadir feels more anonymous, and thus feels more like an individual. Although Maghrebis have significant history in Montreal, I feel like it is not to the same level as in France or other European countries with big Maghrebi populations. In Montreal, they are less known, and thus people make less assumptions about them. This might also be because in France, communities are way more densely populated, and thus more assumptions are made about where people come from, who their friends are, what their neighborhood is, etc. I feel like this is what Nadir was saying; although people can probably tell he is an Arab, and surely do direct racism towards him in Montreal, he can act as an individual, and he is not just seen as an Arab, but an individual, with many layers to him, who is of Arab origin.

The point system, a system of ranking candidates of immigrants attempting to come into Canada based on categories such as age, education, knowledge in English and French, occupational skills, the personal assessment of the individual agent, as well as many other aspects. At the end of this ranking, the candidate would be given a numerical score, and those with a score of 50 or higher were admitted into the country. In my opinion, this system was discriminatory for many reasons, but most importantly because many of the categories checked off by the agent in regard to the immigrant, were skills that were often inaccessible to many people in the developing world, especially lower-income individuals. Knowledge of English or French, in many countries in the developing world depends on the income of a person. Usually, English and French are taught uniquely in international institutions. International schools/institutions are usually only available to those who are rich, making this aspect of the point system discriminatory to those who are lower income. The same thing goes with education. In the developing world, though many people may be educated, even at a higher education level, many times, foreign education, especially from countries in the developing world, is discounted in the West. I believe that agents can often discount the education level of immigrants coming from the developing world, and devalue their experience, possibly tainting their results and wrongfully deciding the fate of a candidate due to the point system. I also believe that in general, the category of “personal assessment made by immigration officer” is problematic, given the fact that everyone has underlying biases, and can easily make a decision based on some discriminatory belief they hold, either consciously or subconsciously.

The Canadian public’s opposition to Ugandan Asian immigrants continued the trend of Canadian white supremacy, though this time, without the cover-up of Canada’s story of being an accepting, polite and multicultural-loving society. I believe that prior to the Ugandan Asian immigration influx, Canadian society was very accepting of immigration due to the flourishing of the economy, and thus the benefit working Canadians would gain due to the influx of immigrants ready to work. At this time Canada was seen as a haven for multiculturalism, especially compared to its southern neighbour. Canadians, especially liberals, were able to milk on this and present themselves as good, accepting, humanitarian, multi-cultural-loving people. I believe that after the decline of the economy, and the expulsion of Ugandan Asians, and the great, clear humanitarian problem that this was, Canadians could no longer hide under their humanitarian cover story now they could no longer economically benefit from these people. The humanitarian mask was pulled off and what was revealed was white supremacy.

Oftentimes, many of the debates about the racial classification of Iranians, happened without them present. Maghbouleh recounts how many discussions of the racial categories of different immigrant groups claiming whiteness for naturalization used their proximity or lack thereof, to Iranians in order to win their case. In the case of Armenians, they claimed whiteness by molding historical events, presenting themselves as the white Christian victims of foreign Iranian invasion from the east in front of American courts, involving Iranian racial discussions in an American context, before any Iranians had even arrived on Turtle Island. Similarly, though contrastingly, Indians would claim Parsi ancestry, a group linked to Persians, thus claiming whiteness due to their proximity to Iranians.

Muslim attire and garb is associated with foreignness. It is neither white nor black, but foreign. It is because of this that white people who wear hijab, or other Muslim clothing are seen as foreign. It is not that people now see them as brown necessarily, but that they are from a foreign place. An example of this is Allison as recounted by Husain, a white revert who began wearing hijab and suddenly started getting assumptions that she “came from” from a different country, that she doesn’t speak English, and that she is unfamiliar with “western hygiene practices”.

The legal rulings of citizenship and naturalization of off-white immigrants affected their attraction to whiteness, especially in the case of Syrian immigrants in the US. According to US law, non-native people applying for citizenship who were not of white or black descent were not eligible for naturalization in the US. It is for this reason that many people, including Syrians, were insistent in proving their whiteness in order to be naturalized in the US. Another component of this attraction to whiteness is the fact of anti-black racism in the US, not wanting to be associated with blackness, claim blackness and deal with the added burden of being classified as black. When given the choice to fight to identify as either black or white in hopes of naturalization, Syrians chose whiteness, not out of logic or factually being any closer to whiteness than blackness, but because of the added privilege whiteness brought on turtle Island, in addition to the right to naturalize. The granting of whiteness to Syrians and the fight put up by other off-white immigrants to identify as white led to these communities celebrating whiteness and glorifying it even further. This glorification and celebration of whiteness by off-white communities also contributes to their anti-black racism on turtle island. As a result of the strict binary of black and white in turtle island at this time, as highlighted by Husain, for off-white communities to glorify and celebrate whiteness, meant to demonize and look down on blackness. This can explain (though never justify) the anti-black racism perpetuated by these off-white communities. In addition to this, in wanting to prove their proximity to whiteness, they simultaneously tried to prove their distance to blackness, which also took on forms of anti-black racism in these communities that today, are often still normalized.

In terms of religion, much like Husain highlights that the Muslim religion is associated with foreignness, and thus Muslim attire, and anyone who wears it, (or even something that reassembles it) is seen as foreign. Christianity on the other hand, is often seen as Islam’s opposite, thus local, familiar. To mediate the difference between Syrians and white Americans, the case was made that Syrians come from the Phoenicians, and the land of Jesus Christ and birthplace of Christianity. It is not necessarily that because Syrians practice the same religion as the white southerners that they were granted white status, in fact, eastern Christian practices are very different from American Christian practices and, many Syrians at the time were not even Christian. Rather this was an attempt to bridge what the southerners saw as the huge civilizational and genetic difference between them and the Syrians. If the Syrians could prove that they descend from the same people of Jesus, who they saw as the backbone to their Western civilization (and who they saw as a white man), they could successfully bridge this perceived difference.

The ADF responds with frustration to the impunity of fascists and their crimes against racialised people in the UK. They criticize the fact that there was “not even a fine for the Tower Hamlets Nine”. Where British police respond with impunity for the fascists, they disproportionately target Brown people with police violence, some, defending their rights at riots, and others, being targeted for doing nothing other than simply existing. Brown people defending themselves and their rights to live safely is seen by the state as an “infection” as the ADF sing: “Youth Connection, stop this infection, defending, defending, defending, the community”. Their defending of rights is seen as something negative and something that the UK needs to be rid of. The level of impunity that the fascists are granted compared to brown people is seen in the lyrics: “One rule for black, another for white” suggesting that the law is different in based on whether your skin is white or not. White people, even the violent fascists, can live with impunity from the crimes they commit against racialized people, and it is this what the ADF are criticizing in this song.

Dog-Tribe was seen as controversial not only for its vivid violent imagery, but also because it challenged the status quo. The status quo of Britain is that racism is bad, and people shouldn't do it. Dog Tribe not only criticizes race related murder (which is the governments limit in addressing this issue), but it also blames and seeks revenge against the white people committing these crimes. Dog Tribe seeks more than a “slap on the hand” for racists, but rather punishment and consequences. Yes, many Brits think racism is bad, but an anti-racist framework challenges the status quo and targets racists for their crimes and call them what they are: racist crimes that merit punishment. Of course, any targeting of white people challenges the status quo and is therefore controversial. “The labour argued this amendment but abstained from voting on the passage of the bill as a whole, suggests that they were more concerned with being seen to support anti-racist legislative tinkering than to defend the rights of the general population or specific communities.” (Hutnyck, 61).

Buettner describes the increasing British taste for so-called Indian food among white British youth in many ways. Firstly, it was seen as a rebellious action among British youth who had so-called “Anti-curry” parents. Many British youth of the new generation had parents who resented the smell of curry, many of whom worked in the British army in colonial India, believing curry to be a way of cooking used mask rotten or bad meats used in the food. These young Britons would go for curries for the same reason most other youth take part in the things their parents don’t like; to rebel. In another sense, Buettner describes this increasing change in taste as a way for British youth to get away from their parents’ bland and boring British food. At some point, British youth grew tired of their parents’ bland food, especially when they were exposed to the flavours of the increasingly multicultural cities they resided in. Although their parents resented the smell of curries, these smells enticed the youth because it showed them that there was a possibility that they could eat things they actually enjoyed, not just the sufficient meat and boiled potatoes. In a third sense, young British men used Indian restaurants as a place to display their masculinity, both to push their limits in what level of spice they could handle, and in another sense, to abuse the servility of the waiters at these restaurants and treat them with the utmost disrespect, thus displaying their masculinity. Young British men would push their limits and compete with their peers to eat the spiciest curry, thus displaying their strength. Despite this however, these displays of masculinity did not stop at spicy curries. Many of these young men mistreated the waiters at these restaurants who were often already servile to the customers, (probably because of the theme of oriental fantasies the early Indian restaurants were putting on the appeal the Briton customers). Their aggressive, sometimes violent treatment towards the waiters reflected a sense of masculinity of these young Briton men in front of their peers.

Food and eateries among diaspora communities have played a huge role in the lives of immigrants. Firstly, we have learned that they can act as a sort of security system for immigrants in areas that are not necessarily safe for them. This, we have seen in our readings about South Asian hotdog vendors in Harlem and New York creating a chain of protection from one cart to another, keeping young children accounted for as they make their way around the neighbourhood. Additionally, restaurants can be used as places of meeting for melancholic migrants missing home, missing their native food and longing for a place to discuss topics concerning their homeland with others in their native language. Additionally, restaurants and food can serve as a potential ground for assimilation. Although this is not liberation, and oftentimes acceptance of the immigrant culture is on the terms of the colonizer, increasing popularity for foreign foods, just like curries in Britain, can serve as an aspect of immigrant culture that is increasingly tolerated by the colonizer. Although the significance of this is not related to liberation or anti-racism at all, it is an aspect of the possible effects of eateries and restaurants among diasporic communities, specifically in the case of South Asians in Britain, as highlighted by Buettner.

In British Columbia, many Punjabi workers were excluded from the work force by white workers and business owners under the claim that they were cheap labourers coming to replace the white workers for cheaper prices, thus impoverishing the white families of the working class. This claim was also made on the basis of these Sikh men coming as single men, without wives, coming for primarily the purpose of working. There was a claim that Indian labour would lead to the impoverishing of the white working class and thus lead to the decline of British Columbian society and that white workers were essential for a prosperous society. The racist sentiment against these Indian workers took on a mix of many different stereotypes and histories of western racist tropes against Asians, as well as created a new, uniquely anti-Hindoo sentiment in the west coast. On the one hand, anti-Hindoo racism was related to the earlier anti-Chinese and Japanese racism in Canada. In a way, the Indians entering British Columbia in the early 1900s were depicted in the same light as the other Asian immigrants who had previously arrived before them and dealt with the white anger against Chinese immigrants destroying the white Canada they wanted. The incoming Indians were seen as continuing and reinforcing the foreign invasion against the white struggle for racial homogeneity in British Columbia. In another way, anti-Hindoo racism at this time was also connected to orientalist stereotypes about the orient being a place of overpopulation, disease and uncleanliness.
Canadian immigration policies heavily catered to the white voices in their cries for racial homogeneity. In 1906, W.D Scott, a federal super intendant sympathized with the white claims that declared Indians unfit for Canadian climate, and that those coming from a tropical climate were physically at risk of illness and physical harm if they thought to immigrate to Canada. This, although an unofficial statement, shaped the common opinion of Indian immigration to Canada and sought to discourage any more Indians from coming in. Immigration policies at one point overtly barred Indians from coming into Canada in 1908, the Continuous Passage Rule. This was a result of continuous anti-Indian protests on the part of white Canadians, as well as a continuous public expression of anti-Indian sentiments on the part of government officials in Canada declaring Indians unfit for Canadian climate, society and health standards.
In the early 20th century Punjabis entered California in a very segregated society. The lines between coloured and white people were very dividing, but at the same time, what it meant to be coloured was also blurry. In America at this time, black people were still the most demonized and oppressed group, and Punjabis entering this climate were also discriminated against. For the Punjabis during this time, a sense of survival instincts against the dangers of anti-brown racism was essential, and because of this, they found tools of survival in marriages with Mexican women. It provided things like upward mobility, being able to have children with the right to own properties in their name, and additionally, it was an alternative to marrying American women, with whom they were not allowed to get married.

The official legal framework through which these Bengali peddlers were entering the United States was a framework of exclusionary immigration laws against Asian immigrants, including Bengalis. Many of them entered legally, but under the status of labourers. Of course, they were there to sell their merchandise, textiles and carpets, however they were also seeking to create a transnational community, reconnect with kin and fellow villagers. Despite this, though, simply as immigrants, they were not accepted into the US. Exclusionary acts such as the Asiatic Barred Zone Act prohibited them from entering the US as immigrants, or even travelers. Given this, many men got jobs on steamships, working the ships and eventually ending up in the US. As labourers they were accepted but as simply immigrants seeking a better life than the one their homeland could provide, they were not accepted. According to Bald, their entrance into the United States was contingent on the openings of the US labour market demands and shifting migrant labour policies given the economy of the time.

Despite these exclusionary acts against immigration, though, Bengali Muslims were determined to make it to America nonetheless. They played on American fads of oriental fashion and culture to promote their merchandise brought from their village back-home. Bengalis used these fads to their advantage. Mysterious, exotic portrayals of the Eastern Orient were something the Bengalis played into, for example, in America, women used Oriental goods in the interiors of their homes to create a sense of worldliness and sophistication with their other-wordly commodities. In addition to this, the “New American Woman” would display oriental goods as a way to escape the traditional expectations of Victorian women who shall not seek knowledge apart from what is given to them, and so to possess eastern commodities is to possess knowledge (by western portrayals) of a world unknown to most. Americans, for many different reasons, were “entranced” by oriental (vibes) and aesthetics. Thus in turn created great demand for Oriental textiles such as the ones brought by the Chikondars.

According to Bald in his fifth chapter of Bengali Harlem, East Harlem might have been attractive to Indians because it allowed them to disappear amongst the densely populated demographics of immigrants. In these neighbourhoods, they were able to hide, not only physically in such a dense area but also hide their Indian identity. In their residences in East Harlem, they were surrounded by Peurto Ricans, Cubans and Dominicans which allowed them to pass as the ethnicities of their residential counterparts. Sometimes, they would marry them and create mixed identities and in some cases legally change their identities. Where Indians were mere labourers, working for the economy of the United States, barred from becoming official US nationals, East Harlem allowed them to shift/change/hide their identity and in a way, ease their hardship.

In the context of food, many Indian Muslims appreciated New York for its Jewish communities and Kosher food. In the absence of Halal Muslim restaurants, butchers and food, Indian Muslims found ways to uphold their customs while also interacting with other groups of immigrants, especially in the Lower East Side. Additionally, the restaurant industry among Indian immigrants in New York helped upwardly mobilize members of the Indian community, especially the ex-seamen. The Bengal Garden, led by Habib Ullah and his wife Victoria, although open for only a few years, created a path that other Indians looking to open restaurants could take in order to succeed in the restaurant business. Indian ex-seamen trusted Habib and knew that his advice could be uniquely catered to Indians looking to open Indian restaurants with Indian flavours, and oftentimes, deal with anglo-american palates that were unwilling to try Indian food. The Bengal Garden, and specifically Habib Ullah, was a trail blazer that opened doors for the rest of the ex-seamen/Indian community in the restaurant business, which in turn, provided the community with more money (given that their restaurants were successful), resources and thus upward financial mobilization. Restaurants were also places of communal gathering for South Asians where people could speak a familiar language and eat familiar foods.

In Cook’s “These Hidden Heretics” he recounts the history and experiences of Moriscos, (previously/ancestrally Muslim people who are now Catholic) in New Spain. According to Cook, Moriscos were often repressed in their outward expressions of belief and practice in Islam. As a result, many of them could not recite Arabic prayers, and as a result, there grew many populations of Moriscos who could not speak Arabic. Both because of their own pursuits of safety as well as their parents fear for their children being exposed as Moriscos or accused of being heretics and Muslims, they did not teach their children Arabic or taught them very little Arabic such as reciting a few prayers here and there. In fact, according to Cook, many Moriscos were considered by many north African Muslims to be ignorant because they could not speak Arabic, even if it was for their own safety. There is a parallel that can be drawn between the experiences of Moriscos in Spain and New Spain, and the experiences of Muslims in the west. Oftentimes, for our own safety, we hide stereotypical Muslim characteristics about ourselves such as speaking Arabic (or any other language associated with Islam) out loud or we hesitate to admit to our dietary restrictions (such as not eating pork) in order to assimilate and not be recognized as being different. Similarly, in last week's reading, Yasmin’s father encouraged her to respond to her mother in English, not Urdu in hopes that she would focus on assimilating into the English culture to ensure her safety and happiness and to avoid being considered different and therefore a threat. A similar thing is seen happening in Cook’s recount of Moriscos hiding their Muslim identity or, if they were truly no longer Muslim, hiding anything that may be even slightly considered Muslim such as not speaking Arabic for their own safety.

In “U.S Latina/o Muslims Since 1920: From “Moors” to “Latino Muslims” Patrick Bowen provides a relationship between Latino/a Muslims and Spanish Islamic history in a US context. He describes the argument against the word “Moor” to mean “N” according to Irving and the discontent it created among his audience of African American Muslims. He disagrees with this meaning of the word Moor because he claims that this is a word to mean Muslim Spaniards, many of whom with North and West African origins who came to Iberia as a part of Muslim conquest of Andalusia. He disagrees with the African American use of the word to mean black Muslims who were not enslaved, or who were free. For African Americans, they use this word to mean a black person who is independent from white slavery, and is a symbol associated with upward mobility and black pride. In general, rather than an image of enslaved black African, “Moor” is a term associated with a strong, independent, proud and freed African Muslim. It is this use of the word that Irving disagrees with and rather than associate the term “Moor” with black Muslims, places the term back in a Spanish context, exploring its roots in Andalusia and applying it to a modern day context for American Latino/a Muslims.