Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘immigrant

Pretty late Mama, good evening.

A long time immigrant, bewildered how to erect a State in his country

A couple of poems that I wrote in Arabic in January 1991 and that I didn’t recall writing them in a letter to my parents.

Although I cannot claim that I was in love with my parents, I still recognized their dedication and care as they could master with their little education. I cannot recall, my brother, sister and I had any conversation with our parents. We were Not allowed to join visitors and share in the discussions.

Before 6 years of age, we were all shipped to a boarding school in Lebanon to save us from the deadly African diseases. They were strangers to us as they visited us one summer out of two.

Actually, I was the one who stayed with them till they passed away at very old ages, through mightily hard extended and debilitating illnesses.

Mother, late pretty mama, good evening.

I get furious when people just recall you as a chic woman

A great eye for fashion and designer fingers.

Mother, the cornerstone and guiding rod to father

In all his risky adventures, and later hopeless states of mind.

I know better,

You were afraid for me of people, of this harsh world

A world of no mercy.

Where to go and flee?

Mother, you freed me twice as I decided to immigrate.

Thank you.

I had far more hard days in foreign lands than relaxing ones.

I was one day away from joining the homeless, and feeling the cramps of hunger.

How I survived is the miracle.

The miracle of hundreds of people who felt pity on my conditions.

Free me once again mother.

I am Not complaining: I decided to liberate myself by my own volition

An immigrant who fled the civil war,

And bewildered how to erect a State in his country.

Twenty years out of his home country

In a welcoming country that refuses to be my second home.

A country that decided to liberate Kuwait and restitute it to its tribal Sheikhs.

Children born and Not recognized as citizens

So that oil money remain for its tribal Sheikhs and their descendent,

Their women and their colonial Masters.

Father, the good hearted husband

Who could never refuse to lend, even when he didn’t have any in his older years.

At the instigations of mother when they were in a well-to -do condition relative to the extended families.

But it is father who is remembered as the good Samaritan.

A father who helped generations of physicians, engineers, teachers

Who appreciated him for as long as their feathers grew into powerful wings.

Yes, father passed away, destitute and barely visited.

The same with mother who cried for being left isolated and ignored.

You will Not be ignored anymore.

Rest in peace.

Note: Julie https://adonis49.wordpress.com/2009/05/02/julia/

 

 

 

“I feel ashamed of being a European” the way immigrants are treated

Le maire de Palerme :

« J’ai honte d’être européen, quand on voit le sort qui est fait aux migrants »

Entretien (interview) avec Leoluca Orlando, maire de Palerme, dont la ville est l’une des principales portes d’entrée de l’Europe pour les migrants africains.

Leoluca Orlando, membre du parti Rivoluzione civile (centre-gauche), maire de Palerme à trois reprises (1980-1985, 1993-2000 et depuis 2013), est l’un des principaux personnages de la sphère politique sicilienne.

Député à plusieurs reprises au Parlement italien, puis européen, il s’est fait remarquer dans les années 2000 pour son engagement dans la lutte contre la mafia.

Aujourd’hui, alors que la Sicile est l’une des principales portes d’entrée des migrants en Europe, il a fait de leur cause son nouveau cheval de bataille. Il sera à paris, mercredi 12 octobre, pour participer au colloque de rentrée du Collège de France sur le thème « Migrations, réfugiés, exil ».

Lire aussi :   Medhanie l’Erythréen est-il un redoutable passeur ou un migrant pris dans une erreur judiciaire ?

Quel regard portez-vous sur l’intégration des migrants à la société palermitaine ?

Leoluca Orlando J’estime et j’affirme que tous les résidents de la ville de Palerme sont Palermitains. Il n’y a pas de différence entre les Palermitains qui sont nés à Palerme et ceux qui y arrivent, et c’est pour ça qu’il faudrait abolir le permis de séjour. Ce permis de séjour est la peine de mort de notre temps, c’est une nouvelle forme d’esclavage pour les gens qui arrivent.

Je suis convaincu que la mobilité internationale est un droit humain. Une personne ne peut pas mourir car un pays refuse de l’accueillir. C’est pour cette raison que nous avons adopté la Charte de Palerme et que nous avons créé le Conseil de la culture, qui est le seul dans le monde à représenter les migrants politiquement. Les membres de ce conseil sont démocratiquement élus par les migrants, ils sont 21 membres, dont 9 femmes. Je ne crois pas qu’on puisse parler de ces proportions au Parlement français, ni au Parlement italien !

Estimez-vous que l’Europe en fait assez pour les migrants ?

Non. Nous n’avons pas d’autre alternative que d’accueillir les migrants. Les gens qui me disent « Vous êtes fou ! », je leur réponds : « Non, je ne suis pas fou, je pense au futur ! »

Beaucoup de Palermitains vous reprochent votre engagement vis-à-vis des migrants et réclament des actions concrètes contre le fort taux de chômage de la ville. Que leur répondez-vous ?

Il n’y a pas d’intolérance et de racisme à Palerme, et vous ne me le ferez pas dire. Nous avons un problème économique, certes, mais comme partout. C’est un problème pour les Palermitains comme pour les gens qui viennent d’ailleurs. Je crois que la grande puissance de l’expérience palermitaine est que tout le monde a le même problème, tout le monde est logé à la même enseigne.

Ballaro, un quartier de Palerme, est souvent montré comme un exemple de cette mixité sociale dont la ville se réclame.

Ballaro, c’est l’endroit où des marchands issus de l’immigration ont fait arrêter des mafiosi palermitains. Voilà. (Rires). Est-il possible ensuite de parler contre les migrants ? Je ne crois pas. C’est un bon exemple, cela signifie que les personnes migrantes qui vivent à Palerme pensent que cette ville est leur ville. Et quand on fait partie d’une ville, on va la défendre. L’accueil est la plus puissante arme pour la sécurité. Par exemple, je dialogue avec la communauté musulmane pour intégrer au mieux les plus radicaux qui arrivent dans la ville.

Les musulmans qui vivent en banlieue parisienne parlent-ils avec leur maire ? Est-ce qu’il les intègre dans une représentation politique ? C’est la marginalisation, l’ostracisme, qui sont un problème. Chaque fois que les gens sont tentés de faire une distinction entre les migrants et les Palermitains, je leur réponds qu’il faut garder à l’esprit que les migrants ne votent pas. Nous sommes dans une dimension utilitariste de ces gens, il faut que la politique européenne comprenne que cet utilitarisme est en contradiction totale avec le respect des droits humains.

Vous pensez que les migrants devraient voter ?

Ce n’est pas encore possible aujourd’hui. Mais oui, j’ai espoir qu’un jour, toutes les personnes qui vivent en Italie, de nationalité italienne ou non, puissent voter et participer à la vie démocratique de ce pays. Mon premier acte en tant que maire a été de déclarer citoyens honoraires tous les habitants de Palerme. Tous, pas seulement le dalaï-lama, pas seulement le roi Juan Carlos… mais tous les résidents, italiens ou non.

Mais Ballaro, par exemple, c’est aussi le repaire d’une nouvelle mafia nigériane…

Oui, et c’est la preuve qu’il n’y a pas de différence entre les Palermitains et les Nigérians ! Il y a des Nigérians mafiosi, il y a des Nigérians bons citoyens. C’est pareil pour les Palermitains. Il ne serait pas normal de n’avoir que des Nigérians bons citoyens, et que des Palermitains criminels (rires). La grande chance de Palerme est sa normalité. Palerme est devenue une ville normale, sans sa mesquinerie politique d’autrefois.

Qu’est-ce qui manque pour que l’accueil des migrants soit efficace ?

Il manque la normalité des migrations, partout. Palerme est une ville migrante : il est possible d’y voir des monuments arabes, français, baroques, espagnols… Il y a quelque temps, des journaux anglais et allemand ont écrit : « En pensant à Palerme, l’Europe devrait avoir honte. »

Aujourd’hui, je dis que j’ai honte d’être européen, quand on voit le sort qui est fait aux migrants. Je suis européen mais, dans les valeurs migratoires, je suis surtout palermitain. Nous sommes responsables d’un génocide en mer Méditerranée. Nos petits-fils nous diront qu’on a tué des milliers de personnes. Et nous ne pourrons pas dire que l’on ne savait pas.

Vous sentez-vous plus palermitain qu’européen ?

C’est parce que je suis fier d’être européen que je me permets de mal parler de l’Europe quand elle fait des erreurs. Mon premier ennemi est celui qui a la même identité que moi. Mon ennemi, ce n’est pas l’imam rigoriste qui soutient les terroristes, mon ennemi, avant lui, c’est le cardinal catholique qui soutient les mafiosi.

Quel regard portez-vous sur l’accueil des migrants en France ?

Aujourd’hui, en France, les migrants ne pensent pas avoir trouvé leur nouvelle maison. Il y a un vrai problème, car, si je ne pense pas être chez moi, pourquoi me lèverai-je pour défendre une maison qui n’est pas la mienne ?

Je ne défends pas la maison où je pense qu’il ne m’est pas possible de vivre, je ne défends pas la maison de mon ennemi. Je pense que c’est la situation dans laquelle est bloquée la France. Je ne comprends pas pourquoi la France a changé.

Parlez mal de Palerme, de sa mafia, mais en même temps, s’il vous plaît, parlez mal de la France ! Une Europe des droits ne peut pas exister sans la France, il faut que la France change de position sur les migrants.

Nous vivons dans un temps qu’on appelle la globalisation, avec une mobilité financière, une mobilité industrielle, une mobilité économique…

Mais comment peut-on penser pouvoir vivre dans un monde qu’on dit globalisé sans une mobilité des êtres humains ?

Les migrants ont donné un visage à la globalisation, parfois tristes, parfois heureux, mais ils ont donné un visage. Avant, la globalisation était égoïste, financière. Aujourd’hui, il faut remercier les migrants pour avoir donné un visage à cette globalisation.

Beaucoup de personnalités appellent à une coopération plus importante entre les pays européens d’accueil des migrants et les pays d’Afrique d’où ils partent. Qu’en pensez-vous ?

En tant que maire de Palerme, j’ai beaucoup de relations avec les maires africains. Fin septembre, j’ai signé un nouveau jumelage avec Grand-Bassam, en Côte d’Ivoire. Nous avons des relations avec des maires libyens, des maires tunisiens, marocains…

Je crois qu’il est nécessaire d’aider ces maires et ces pays, de les aider pour permettre à leurs habitants de participer au développement de leur pays sans avoir besoin de venir en Europe.

Les migrations ne sont pas un problème sicilien, il est tragique qu’on pense comme cela aujourd’hui. C’est un problème européen, c’est un problème mondial.

Comment voyez-vous la Sicile dans dix ans ?

Est-ce que cela sera un problème s’il y a plus d’Italiens d’origine africaine que de natifs italiens ? Non. Est-ce que cela sera un problème si quelqu’un peut dire un jour : « La majorité des Palermitains ne sont pas nés à Palerme » ? Non. Palerme est une ville migrante. Nous sommes une ville multiculturelle, comme Beyrouth, comme Istanbul.

Migration is a fundamental human right:

Mankind basic acquired law since his inception

I believe in a human right to migration, as fundamental as the right to freedom of expression, or freedom from discrimination on the grounds of gender, race, religion or sexuality.

I have come by this belief by migrating myself. (I’m inclined to prefer the terms migrant and migration to immigrant and immigration: the latter two seem to privilege the country of arrival; every immigrant is also an emigrant, and migrant encompasses both.)

Mohsin Hamid:

why migration is a fundamental human right

Born in Pakistan and educated in the US, Mohsin Hamid has made a home in the UK. He explains why he longs for a world without borders

Mohsin Hamid

Mohsin Hamid in Lahore, Pakistan.

I was born in Pakistan. And I live in Pakistan. But when I was three I moved with my parents to Silicon Valley in California. I returned to Pakistan when I was nine for a decade, then spent most of my 20s on America’s east coast and most of my 30s in London.

I possess a British passport and once possessed an American green card.

My life has come full circle, geographically speaking. Twice.

Most of my education has been in the American system. I suspect this has contributed to my discomfort with a great deal of what I see practised around me in Pakistan.

I have friends who are non-Muslim; non-Muslims are legally persecuted here.

I have friends who are gay; homosexuality is legally proscribed here.

An African friend once told me after visiting that Pakistan was among the most blatantly racist places he had ever been.

Pakistani laws discriminate against women.

Pakistani courts fail to deliver any semblance of due process. Pakistani presidents are frequently unelected generals. My largely American-educated self is continually brimming with disappointment.

Yet my largely American-educated self is profoundly disappointed by America, too.

This is partly because the US’s bellicose excesses in foreign policy become more visible the closer you are to where American bombs are hitting the ground. But it is also because I studied American history with American teachers and American law with American professors.

From them I learned about manifest destiny, the notion that Americans were destined to migrate west until they had settled the entire continent; about the melting pot, uniting people of all races, ethnicities and creeds into one nation; about a country of immigrants, with this poem by Emma Lazarus inscribed at the base of its Statue of Liberty:

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon- hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest- tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Migration and equality are intertwined at the heart of the US’s story of itself.

As the vast migration to America continued, this story goes, the equality offered by America grew. So it was that the US Declaration of Independence could declare only “that all men are created equal”, but a century and a half later, women too would be granted the vote.

So it was that the US Constitution could openly tolerate slavery, but within one century slavery would be outlawed – and within a second some of slavery’s most toxic residues would be partially mitigated by the famed civil rights movement of the 1960s, the decade before my birth.

And yet, in my lifetime, as someone who has often lived in America, I could see, more and more, a new category of person there, neither slave nor free.

They were everywhere and they numbered in their millions: illegal immigrants.

How, I wondered, was such a thing possible? Surely all Americans were immigrants. Yet legally, it now seemed, not all immigrants were Americans, and as the caste of “illegals” swelled in the closing years of the 20th century and initial years of the 21st, the overall inequality of American society began to grow, too.

If the US distances itself from the human right of migration, the tenor of the dominant story of America changes.

For America’s story is also, frighteningly, a story about the genocide of the pre-Columbian population, a story about the importation of disenfranchised underclasses, initially from Africa and more recently from Latin America, and a story about the quest for unrivalled economic and military dominance around the world.

Such a revised story sits uncomfortably with those equality aspiring institutions that America already has.

This has inevitably led to a crisis. And this crisis helps explain why America is flailing today: America has become incoherent.

An America that denies the human right of migration can no longer be the America it imagines itself to be, because it can no longer champion equality. It can no longer claim to be exceptional. It can no longer believe in being its own best self.

America’s greatest hope lies where it always has: with the homeless, tempest-tossed to that golden door.

And migration is the half-forgotten core of Britishness as well. I migrated to the UK 13 years ago, not expecting to remain long. I thought I would experience London for a year, then return to New York.

But I found London remarkably open to migrants, to dissent, to creativity. I stayed for the better part of a decade, becoming a naturalised citizen in the process. I made a home for myself in Britain, wrote a novel there, worked in business there, got married there, had a child there.

Anti-migrant sentiment was always present, but for a while in the early noughties it seemed it was waning, that a new, more cosmopolitan Britain was being born.

Alas, times have changed.

Sovereignty seems to be the rage in Britain these days. But this sovereignty, at its heart, is imagined not merely as more rights for people in Britain, but as more rights for those whose ancestors have been in Britain longer.

In nativist-sovereign Britain, the plumber of Bulgarian citizenship is a plausible candidate for expulsion. In nativist-sovereign Britain, the British woman with Bangladeshi parents is a problem to be solved.

Surely the dangers of such an outlook are self-evident.

What becomes of Northern Ireland under such a concept of sovereignty?

What becomes of Scotland, which has been ruled from London for less time than England has?

What of the migrant-peopled dominions of Gibraltar and the Falklands?

Treating nativist sovereignty as a virtue, and migration as a crime, threatens to make the United Kingdom dysfunctional.

For Britain, too, is a land of migration, indeed of extreme migration. Without migration, the human population of these and all other islands would be zero.

Without migration, the English language would not exist.

There would be no Commonwealth without migration – no Canada, no Australia, no New Zealand – for without migration there would have been no empire.

And without the British empire there would be precious little of the accumulated wealth and knowledge underpinning the industries on which the British economy is now based.

But as a British person who reads the press of my own (British) country, I encounter a sadly predictable narrative. It sums up the last couple centuries of world history as follows. When a Briton goes abroad, he or she is a hero. When someone else tries to come to Britain, he or she is a villain.

It is not a take on history that suggests future greatness. It suggests instead a retreat into fear and insularity. It deserves more robust challenges than it has received thus far.

The deepest threat Britain faces comes not from migration. It comes from the relentless transfer of wealth and opportunity from the poor and middle class to the wealthy, a transfer masked and rendered temporarily palatable by the chest-thumping of resurgent nationalism and the paper gains of credit-fuelled property prices.

Britain and America are by no means unique in denying the human right to migration. All wealthy democracies do much the same. China and some other countries even restrict the migration of their citizens within their own borders.

This problem must be addressed. The scale of migration we will see in the coming centuries is likely to dwarf what has come before. Climate change, disease, state failure, wars: all these will push hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, to leave one country for another.

If we do not recognise their right to move, we will be attempting to build an apartheid planet where our passports will be our castes, and where obedience will be enforceable only through ever-increasing uses of force.

There is another way. We can recognise the human right to migration. We can recognise that we are ourselves, all of us, doubly migrants. We are migrants historically: our ancestors came from somewhere else, and originated, long ago, in the same spot in Africa.

And we are migrants personally: life is the experience of moving through time, of abandoning each present moment for the next, of temporal migration.

Acknowledging this, we can accept that we have no right to forbid or stigmatise migration. We have only the power to try to do so. And we ought to endeavour to use that power as little as we can manage, less and less over time, for we are using it to deny the human rights of others.

It is we, those who stop migration, who are the criminals, not those who are migrants.

And slowly, at a pace that does not terrify us, but whose direction is clear, we must gradually let go, and allow things to change. Only in doing so can we hope to build a world in accordance with the values we claim to believe in – liberty, equality, democracy – and wash clean the taste of hypocrisy that burns so bitter in so many of our mouths.

I imagine that centuries hence, when people are finally free to move as they please around the planet Earth, they will look back at this moment and wonder, just as we wonder about those who kept slaves, how people who seemed so modern could do such things to their fellow human beings, caging them like animals – merely for wanting to wander, as our species always has and always will.

Mohsin Hamid’s Discontent and Its Civilizations: Dispatches from Lahore, New York and London is published by Hamish Hamilton on Thursday at £16.99.

And you complain your neighbor is an immigrant?

Dave Lim shared Howard Farran DDS, MBA‘s photo. this May 10, 2014
 
Your car is German. Your vodka is Russian. Your pizza is Italian. Your kebab is Turkish. Your democracy is Greek. Your coffee is Brazilian. Your movies are American. Your tea is Tamil. Your shirt is Indian. Your oil is Saudi Arabian. Your electronics are Chinese. Your numbers Arabic, your letters Latin. And you complain that your neighbor is an immigrant? Pull yourself together.
Your tea is Tamil. Your shirt is Indian. Your oil is Saudi Arabian. Your electronics are Chinese. Your numbers Arabic, your letters Latin.
And you complain that your neighbor is an immigrant?
Pull yourself together.

A Way out of History? (May 7, 2009)

            The citizens of the developed Nations, within their own boundaries, feel that they have no longer any need to learn history especially, their own history.  History to the citizens of the developed nations is a drag, a waste of time, of no use, totally irrelevant. They are mostly correct in their feeling and appreciation of the uselessness of history relevant to their nation. Why is this feeling?

First, they have reached a level of social cohesion, awareness, appreciation of human dignity and human rights that reduce historical accounts of injustices to redundant stories.

Second, they are more concerned about their present state of affairs such as maintaining their current level of comfort, consumerism choices, creating diverse opportunities, future availabilities for their desires and wishes.  These modern citizens have institutions to continue the good work; institutions to analyze whatever history is appropriate for the nation, institutions for research, for legitimacy, for governance, for economy, for finance, for strategic studies, for learning, for art, for marketing, and for studying the under-developed States and minorities.

History for the citizens of the developed nation is plainly relegated to the under-developed States. The Third World and Fourth World “citizens”, (we should create another term for citizenship for the under-developed world because it is frankly too pompous and inappropriate any which way you define a citizen), have nothing left but “history” for amusement and to give them reference to an illusory identity.

History for the “history citizens” has been written by the vanquisher and then translated and interpreted by the colonial powers. The archeological sites in the land of the “amused archaic citizens” were dug out and investigated by the colonial powers and the artifacts were dusted off, cleaned, and conserved in secured museums that the traveling tourists and immigrants never visit. 

The chasm between the developed and the “non-developed” States is huge and growing larger by the day.  History is still being taught in the developed nations simply because more immigrants are flocking in and some sort of integration in commendable.

More likely, a citizen would visit an immigrant friend to filling him in on current news and occasionally, getting a good laugh on stories of their respective ancestors.  Yes, the immigrant might know more details on the developed citizen’s ancestors and the history of this citizen’s country.  In fact, hard copy dailies are published to satisfy the voracious curiosities of the immigrants. Storytelling is a cultural trademark among immigrants; usually, getting together is worthless and devoid of any interest if no bickering accompanies the assembly of immigrants.

If there are rival “civilizations” it must be in the mind of the immigrants. They are attuned to any gesture, tone of voice, slang, or posturing that remind them of their “indignity”, their frequent humiliations, their total dependence on the host nation for understanding, leniency, forgiveness, compassion, and equal treatments under the laws. The immigrants are overachiever, hard-working, on constant alert of changes in behavior and special laws, on foreign policies regarding their “homeland”, on unequal measures doled in foreign policies and moral values.

“Civilization clash” is in the mind of the immigrant: the “developed” citizen doesn’t care about the agony and tribulation of his immigrant friend.  The immigrant is a sponge for all kinds of curiosities in art, theater, intellectual life, and any association that invites him to participate.  The immigrant is most likely polyglot and can converse in many languages and he has to suffer being mocked for his accent in the local slang; he has to be corrected frequently because accent is the main avenue for integration and acceptance as a civilized individual.

Discrimination is in the mind of the immigrant.  A citizen would immediately recognize an immigrant for miles if he cared to focus a second on the individual.  The citizen in an administrative position has to call upon the cleric, the community leader, or the father of the immigrant before taking any decision for any kinds of permit application; the immigrant is supposed to be looked after as an immature kid no matter how old he is. Equal treatments are the domain of the citizens and interpretations of the law and customs are appropriate when dealing with an immigrant. 

The whole gamut of the UN laws for human rights were targeted for the under-developed States that are shaming human kinds in their state of affairs.  Yet, many “non-citizens” would like to experience a new era when embargoes on military hardware, military trainers, and military experts are imposed on dictators, juntas, and oligarchies who are flaunting the UN human rights declarations in their under developed States.

Learning seriously the language of your immigrant friend is the first sign of real friendship. Blatantly observing the differences in culture and customs is an excellent sign of friendship. Vigorously and unabashedly critiquing divergence in opinions is sign of friendship. 

Make no mistake:  Any behavior that smack of covert apartheid is quickly sensed by your immigrant “friend”.  Make no mistake: the next generation of your immigrant friend will be exactly you, when you were younger. If you are serious for integration of your immigrant friend then behave as if you are dealing with the next generation, on a par.

In Want of Labors? (May 25, 2009)

You barely hear any politician discussing the entrepreneurial activities of immigrants and their real contributions to the global economy of their States.  In general, academic and social studies of immigrants tend to classify immigrants in relational database for rational general comprehension though researchers know that these are easy and dirty shortcuts and could exacerbate communication and strengthen covert apartheid tendencies. One simple way to study differences among immigrants could be by using one binary trading factors and one binary identity conservation factor. 

The economic factor can be stated as “Is it important to establish and maintain relationships in your business with other dominant groups in your new society?” The other factor can be stated as “Is it important to conserve your identity and its cultural characteristics when dealing with dominant groups?”  From these two questions (of yes or no) it is possible to have four major groups among entrepreneurial immigrants.

 

The first group of immigrants expands its business ventures toward the autochthones while hanging on to its roots in culture and customs.  These families are labeled the integrated new comers because they are dealing with their new citizens and still are feeling very much morally stable and balanced within the new environment. There are statistics that tend to the 60% ratio among immigrant enterprises.

 

The second group of immigrants opens its enterprises to the citizens but decided to burn ships with its original identity and cultural characteristics in order to feel completely assimilated in the new environment. This group is going to fight hard to have this fictitious feeling of being assimilated believable and might exercise pressures on its offspring to staying clear of its “own kind”.

 

The third group of immigrants can neither interact with the citizens and are disgusted of mingling with the community of origin that remind it of its failure and blame it on its current miseries. This group is labeled the marginal immigrants and they could be potential threats for laws enforcers when neglect, biases, and brutality become common perception among the immigrants..

 

The fourth group of immigrants separates from the citizens and transact within a fictitious ghetto that they constructed and walled its life within it.  Within this group of “separatists” many came with a mind fix of temporary stay until political or economic conditions in their home States change; conditions that usually drag on and the parents reluctantly hope that their offspring will have varieties of opportunities to finally integrate their new Nation.  Many had no choice because ghettos are definitely cheaper and easier on the nerves for the starting phase toward integration.  In general, ghettos are readily available pools for cheaper labors than autochthones when projects on large scales are contemplated such as the Chinese when laying train tracks crossing the Atlantic to the Pacific or building gigantic dams.

 

After the Second World War, Germany welcomed the Kurdish workforce arriving by trains with fanfare and official bands: badly ruined Germany needed to reconstruct the country.  Currently, Germany thinks that it finished reconstruction and has no idea how to repatriate the Kurds of Turkey.  Germany is offering to finance private enterprises in the Kurdish regions for any Kurdish family willing to return.  The catch is: would anyone not feeling secure and safe in his homeland return to experience the same calamities?  Would Germany re-welcome any Kurds if political conditions deteriorate in “Kurdistan”?

 

Sarkosy of France advocated during his campaign for Presidency that immigrants are economically beneficial when they are well selected. It turned out that Sarkosy meant those human with functional thumbs and trained since childhood to suffer in the fields and construction projects.  Sarkosy is ready to welcome domesticated human beast of burden or maybe those who are highly educated with very rich parents.

 

Construction workers have been erecting a large building next to our home for 6 months. Rain or shine, they are at it from 7 a.m. till pouring concrete is finished, even if they have to work 14 hours.  They are not stronger than average people but they were trained since childhood to suffer and sustain aches and pains. Most probably their fathers were also in construction and they were tempted by quick cash disbursement above average wage rates. Unless they were not injured at the job site, the fathers tend to refuse admitting that it was the nature of the job that is crippling the flexibility of their joints by the age of 40 and experiencing constant pains and aches in their cartilage and spine.

A Way out of History (May 7, 2009)

 

            The citizens of the developed Nations, within their own boundaries, feel that they have no longer any need to learn history or their own history.  History to the citizens of the developed nations is a drag, a waste of time, of no use, totally irrelevant. They are mostly correct in their feeling and appreciation of the uselessness of history relevant to their nation: first, they have reached as a society a level of social cohesion, awareness, appreciation of human dignity and human rights; and second, they are more concerned about their present state of affairs, maintaining their current level of comfort, consumerism choices, creating diverse opportunities, future availabilities for their desires and wishes.  These modern citizens have institutions to continue the good work; institutions to analyze whatever history is appropriate for the nation, institutions for research, for legitimacy, for governance, for economy, for finance, for strategic studies, for learning, for art, for marketing, and for studying the under-developed States and minorities.

History for the citizens of the developed nation is plainly relegated to the under-developed States. The Third World and Fourth World “citizens”, (we should create another term for citizenship for the under-developed world because it is frankly too pompous and inappropriate any which way you define a citizen), have nothing left but “history” for amusement and to give them reference to an illusory identity. History for the “history citizens” has been written by the vanquishers and then translated and interpreted by the colonial powers. The archeological sites in the land of the “amused archaic citizens” were dug out and investigated by the colonial powers and the artifacts were dusted off, cleaned, and conserved in secured museums that the traveling tourists and immigrants never visit.  The chasm between the developed and the “non-developed” States is huge and growing larger by the day.  History is still being taught in the developed nations simply because more immigrants are flocking in and some sort of integration in commendable.

More likely, a citizen would visit an immigrant friend to fill him in on current news and occasionally get a good laugh on stories of their respective ancestors; yes, the immigrant might know more details on the citizen’s ancestors and the history of the citizen’s country.  In fact, hard copy dailies are published to satisfy the voracious curiosities of the immigrants. Storytelling is a cultural trademark among immigrants and getting together is worthless and devoid of any interest if no bickering accompanies the assembly.

If there are rival “civilizations” it must be in the mind of the immigrants. They are attuned to any gesture, tone of voice, slang, or posturing that remind them of their “indignity”, their frequent humiliations, their total dependence on the host nation for understanding, leniency, forgiveness, compassion, and equal treatments under the laws. The immigrants are overachievers, hard working, on constant alert of changes in behavior and special laws, on foreign policies regarding their “homeland”, on unequal measures doled in foreign policies and moral values.

“Civilization clash” is in the mind of the immigrant: the citizen doesn’t care about the agony and tribulation of his immigrant friend.  The immigrant is a sponge for all kinds of curiosities in art, theater, intellectual life, and any association that invites him to participate.  The immigrant is most likely polyglot and can converse in many languages and he has to suffer being mocked for his accent in the local slang; he has to be corrected frequently because accent is the main avenue for integration and acceptance as a civilized individual.

Discrimination is in the mind of the immigrant.  A citizen would immediately recognize an immigrant for miles if he cared to focus a second on the individual.  The citizen in an administrative position has to call upon the cleric, the community leader, or the father of the immigrant before taking any decision for any kinds of permit application; the immigrant is supposed to be looked after as an immature kid no matter how old he is. Equal treatments are the domain of the citizens and interpretations of the law and customs are appropriate when dealing with an immigrant.  The whole gamut of the UN laws for human rights were targeted for the under-developed States that are shaming human kinds in their state of affairs.  Yet, many “non-citizens” would like to experience a new era when embargoes on military hardware, military trainers, and military experts are imposed on dictators, juntas, and oligarchies who are flaunting the UN human rights declarations in their under developed States.

Seriously learning the language of your immigrant friend is the first sign of real friendship. Blatantly observing the differences in culture and customs is an excellent sign of friendship. Vigorously and unabashedly critiquing divergence in opinions is sign of friendship. Make no mistake: any behavior that smack of covert apartheid is quickly sensed by your immigrant “friend”.  Make no mistake: the next generation of your immigrant friend will be exactly you, when you were younger. If you are serious for integration of your immigrant friend then behave as if you are dealing with the next generation, on a par.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

October 2020
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Blog Stats

  • 1,427,995 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 775 other followers

%d bloggers like this: