Patterson, SF, 2006, Transnationalism

8/9/2019 Patterson, SF, 2006, Transnationalism

1/18

Transnationalism: Diaspora-Homeland DevelopmentAuthor(s): Rubin PattersonSource: Social Forces, Vol. 84, No. 4 (Jun., 2006), pp. 1891-1907Published by: University of North Carolina PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3844481

Accessed: 22/10/2010 11:11

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpress.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of North Carolina Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpresshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3844481?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpresshttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpresshttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3844481?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uncpress


2/18

Transnationalism:

Diaspora-Homeland

Development

Rubin

Patterson,

University

f

Toledo

Abstract

Basedon detected orrelations etween he

strategic

ollaboration

f

U.S.-based

diasporas

and their

respective

ncestralhomelandson the

one

hand and the socioeconomicand

technological

evelopment

f

those homelandson

the

other,

his

paper,

which

provides

a

conceptual

oundation of

the

correlation,

attempts

to

ignite

a new

area

of

research

on

transnationalismand

development

n

the

global

South. The

conceptual

oundation

suggesting

uch

an

important

correlation

s

ensconced

n

the theoretical ontexts

of

world

systems

and

racialformation

heories.The

hierarchically

anked tatus

of

a nation in

some

ways

reflects

he

hierarchically

anked

tatus

of

its

diaspora

n

the United

States.

Strategic

collaboration nd brain

circulation

between

he

diaspora

nd the

homeland

can

avorably

affect hestatusof transnational ommunities,both within the UnitedStatesand within

the

wider

globalsystem.

Introduction

Transnationalism1s an

emergent

ieldof

study

with

a focus on citizens

who,

thoughmigrating

from

poor

o rich

ountries,

manage

o construct nd

nurture

ocial ields

hat

ntimately

ink

their

respective

homelandsand

theirnew

diasporic

ocations.Whencitizens

of the

global

South,

with

advancedhuman

apital,

migrate

o a richWestern

ociety

such as the United

States and

they

maintain

trategic

dialectical

nterplay

etween the old and new

locations,

brain

irculationccurs.

Conversely,

hen

such talented itizens

migrate

o

a rich

ociety

and

are

permanently

prooted

rom he

homeland,

without uture nvolvement

n its

affairs,

he

latter uffersa

brain

rain.

Those

Southern ations nd

regions

hat

support

he

emigration

f

large

numbers

f

theirnationalso

the

UnitedStates

-

and

those

diasporans

who

engage

in

the

building

of

institutions,

onducting

ransactions

and

generally nfluencing

ocal and

national

vents

in

their

respective

homelands have

a

huge comparative

dvantage

over

those Southern

nationsand

regions

hatfail o

send

theirnationals

o

the UnitedStates or

those

diasporans

who fail o nurtureransnational

ocial

ieldswith he homeland.

Transnationalismnd brain

irculation

ccurwith

several

Asian

nations,

ncreasingly

ith

some

Latin

nations,

and not much at all with

Sub-Saharan

fricannations.

In

addition o

developing

conceptual

oundation f

strategically-oriented

ransnationalismnd

suggesting

that t can accelerate ndextend ocioeconomic nd

echnological evelopment

nthe

South,

this

paper

explores

reasons that

partially

ccount

for

the relative ack

of such

strategic

transnationalism

n

Sub-Saharan

frica.

otential

dvantagestemming

romAfrican

migration

to

developed

countriesare so

great

that African

overnments

hould aid

and abet

such

emigration.

his

proposition

houldnot

be

considered

gainst

n idealworld

wherein llAfrican

nationals

anfind

productive

ork

n

their

ountry

f

birth

s

they

labor

ollectively

ith

ellow

citizens o build

prosperous

ociety.2 ather,

he

proposition

houldbe

considered

gainst

he

realworld

in

which African

itizens

are inhibited

rom

freely contributing

o

national nd

professional evelopment

ue

to

economicand

political

onstraints.

Direct ll

correspondence

o:Rubin

atterson,

niversityf

Toledo,

ociology

Anthropology,

oledo,

Ohio 3606.E-mail:

[email protected].

Social

Forces,

Volume

84,

Number

4,

June 2006

The

University

of NorthCarolinaPress


3/18


4/18


5/18

1894

*

Social

ForcesVolume

84,

Number

4

*

June

2006

in

the near

uture,

otally

ssiEmilated

hite

Latinos...,

ighter-skinned

ultiracials...,

nd

other

sub-groups;

he intermediateacial

roup

or

honorary

hites

will

comprise

most

light-skinned

Latinos...,

Japanese

Americans,

Korean

Americans,

Asian

Indians,

Chinese

Americans,

Filippinos,

nd

most

MiddleEastern

Americans;

nd

inally,

hat

he

collective lack

roup

will

includeblacks,dark-skinnedatinos, ietnamese,CambodiansndLaotians. pp.932-3)

World

ystems

theory

contends

that

nations

possess changing

evels

of

upward

nd

downward

mobility

n

the world

economy.

According

o Wallerstein

1979),

nations

can

advance rom

he

periphery

o

the

semiperiphery

y

(1)

seizingopportunities,

2)

accepting

invitations

rom core

nations,

or

(3)

devising

self-reliance.

Periphery

nd

semiperiphery

nations,

ndividually

nd

collectively,

ace

a

cacophany

f

constraining

ynamics

perating

o

keep

them in checkandto

serve

the interest

of

core nations.

As Oliver

C.

Cox

1964)

argued

in

the

classic

Capitalism

s

A

System, although

he social

processes

of

the

capitalist

ystem

may encourage

mitation f the

practices

of the

leading

core]

ocieties,

the

system

itself

cannot

accommodate

ndiscriminatedvancement f

peoples.

p.

171)

Notwithstanding

he

constrainingorcesagainstperipheraleoplesinthe narrow nterestsof core nations,he

status

of a

given periphery

r

semiperiphery

ation

s

not

immutable.

hus,

all nations

have

agency, though

it is

more

developed

and mobilized

in

some relative

to

others.

Transnationalism

s

one

agentic

strategy

of

advancing

nation's tatus

from he

periphery

(Patterson 005b).

Development hrough

trategic

ransnationalisms bidirectional.

irst,

Southern-based

racial-ethnic

roups

n

the United tates hatareof the

honorary

hite

status endto

possess

greater

human,

ocial and

economic

capital,

which

means

they may

have

a

greater

means

of

assisting

he homeland.

econd,

approaching

he

transnational

ommunity

romSouthern

nations hatare

in

the

semiperiphery,hey

are

in

a better

position

o assist members

of their

ethnic kin n the United

States,

either

through apital

and connectionsor

simply hrough

status

capital.

n

other

words,

American

mmigrants

re bothassimilated nto heir

racial-

ethnic

group

andareaccorded

he

general

tatusof the

group.

States are

central o the

processes

of racial

ormation

nd

hierarchy

Winant

000),

both

intranationally

nd

internationally.

owever,

n

the

postmodern,

Knowledge-Age

f

the 21st

century,

tates

and

regimes

use

race-neutral

anguage

and

policies

hat

recreate

acial nd

national ierarchies

hroughout

he

global

politicoeconomicystem.

Doane

2003)

oncludes

that 'color-blind'

deology

plays

an

important

ole

n

he maintenance

f

white

hegemony.

As

an

organized

et

of

claimsabout

race,

colorblindnessrests

on the

seemingly

unassailable

moral oundations

f

equality,

hich s

the basis

for ts

politicaltrength.

What s

overlooked

-

or

deliberately

masked

is

the

persistence

of racial

tratification

nd the

ongoing

role

of

social nstitutionsn

reproducing

ocial

nequality...

p.

13)

With olor-blind

olicies

nAmerica

today,

school

and residential

egregation

and white-blackwealth

gap

are as

great

as

they

were

during

he

days

when

raw

Jim Crow

aws and

policies

were

conspicuously

ormulated

and

expressly

mplemented. parallel

xists at the internationalevel.Wealth nd

echnology

inequality

etween the West and

the

Southare

greater

oday

than

in

the

early

1960s,

the

period

when

oppressive,

acist olonialism

as

coming

o an

end.

While

being

race-neutral,

international

inancial nd

trade

regimes

that determine

he

globaleconomy

-

such

as the

International

onetary

und,

he World

Bank

nd he World

Trade

Organization

have

erved

to

reproduce

national

hierarchy

or the

global

system.

Due

primarily

o this

parallel,

he

hierarchicaltatus

of

racial-ethnic

roups

n

Americaends

to

correspond

o the hierarchical

statusof nationsnthe global ystem.Onemaynotethe elevated tatusinpastdecadesof

SouthKorea-Korean

mericans

nd

in morerecent

years

the

status elevation f India-Asian

Indian mericans. s Wallerstein

1991)

argues,peoplehood

s

not a

primordial

table

reality,

buta

complex,

lay-like

istorical

roduct

f the

capitalistworld-economy

hrough

which he

antagonistic

orces

struggle

witheach

other.

p.

85)


6/18

Transnationalism:

iaspora-Homeland evelopment

*

1895

History

hows thatthe

Western

ountries' ffective

political

trategy

of

avoiding

ace in

the

principal

nternational

egimes hey

dominatehas

resulted

n

gains

or hese nations.Left

to

their

own

devices,

transnational

ace-neutral conomic

agendas

recreate Western

dominance.

As

critical ace

heory

maysuggest,

non-white

non-Western

t the international

level)peopleswould have to mobilizeheiragencyin partbyavoiding ace-neutralitynd

pursuing gendas

that allow

for

more

equitable

disbursement

f

socially

valuedrewards.

Strategic

ransnationalism

f brain

irculation n

the

part

of

Chinese,Koreans,

ndians nd

more

recently

Mexicans s

a

form

of

politicoeconomicgency

to

stem

the

predominance

f

the West.Theirndividualransnational-level

gency

has been

sufficiently

owerful

nough

o

overcome he

impetus

of

global

conomic

regimesagainst

hem.

African

eoples

are

arguably

t

the bottom

of the

global

hierarchy

notwithstanding

ome

historical

nd

ongoing

agentic

fforts

due to

greater

onstraints

nd

nsufficient

gency

hus

far.

Having

blacks

on the bottom of

the

hierarchy

s not a

product

of

historical ccident.

Instead,

s Joe

Feagin

2000)

argues,

t is the

product

f a

long-running

istoricalndeavor

y

whitesto maintain acismmost intenselyrained gainstblacks.HoraceCampbell1994) s

one of

many

who

havestudied fforts

by

the West o defeat

pan-Africanism,

romU.S.

efforts

in

breaking

he backof the

Garvey

Movement

o

France nd

England's

elentless

work n

derailing

mass-centered

postcolonial

truggles

in

Africa.

After he

African

iaspora

n

the

UnitedStates establishes

a

levelof

strategic

ransnational

rain

irculationommensurate

with

the

constraining

orces of

reigning

Western-dominatedace-neutral

egimes,

African

peoples

oo

will

ikely

ave

upwardmobility

n

the world

ystem

(Patterson 005a).

Method

A

mixed

system

of most

similar

and dissimilar

trategy

s utilized

n

the

study,

which is

regarded

as a

much more

powerfulanalytic

ool

than either

of

the two

independently

(DeFelice

986;

Frendreis

983).

Countries nd ransnational

roups

with

similar utcomesof

homeland ocioeconomic

and

technological

evelopment,

nd

with

comparable

alues of

operative

actors

helping

o

generate

hose

outcomes

(i.e.,

diasporic

nfluence

n

U.S.

public

policy,

both

foreign

and

domestic;

technology

transfer;

and financial

ontributions),

re

compared

conceptually

o cases with

categorically

different outcomes

of

homeland

socioeconomic and

technological

development,

and with

equallycategorically

ifferent

values

of the

same

operative

actors.

The

dea

was to

study

a set of

countries ndassociated

transnationals ith one

levelof

outcome

on a

given

variable

i.e.,

homeland

evelopment)-

those withmere

gradational

ifferences and

compare

hem withanother et of countries

and

associated

transnationals

ith

categorically

ifferent evels

of

outcomes

on the same

dependent

variable,

iven

varyingnputs

o the same

independent

ariables

i.e.,

diaspora-

homeland ollaborative

evelopment).

This

paper

posits,

based

on the

study

of

similar

nd dissimilarrendsover

our

decades,

that

African ationswill

experience

more

rapid

nd

consequential

evelopment

f

therewere

more

uch

strategic

ransnational

rain

irculation.

ominal

omparisons

re

made o inform

us

of what

explanatory

ariables

oughly

matchoutcomes

Mahoney

000).

Additional

tudies

can

move

beyond

the

mere

detection

of

operative

variables

n

relation o outcomes

by

observing

and

measuring

quantitative

ariations f

the

operative

variables

n

relation o

varying utcomes(Lijphart971).While hisstudyhasconducted ome patternmatching

and

process tracing,

learly

detailed

case studies

of

each of the transnational

roups

and

countries,

nd

sub-regions

in

he

case of Sub-Saharan

frica)

overedwill

provide

dditional

insights

ntothe

specific

mechanismsbetween the

operative

actors and outcomes. And

when

enough

of

these

detailed

ase

studies

and

small-N

omparative nalytic

tudies have


7/18

1896

*

Social

ForcesVolume

84,

Number

*

June

2006

been conducted

with

concentrated ttention n these

variables,

nferential

tatistical

nalysis

will

provide

dditionallarification.

The

irstmeasure

of

strategic

diaspora-homeland

ollaborations

the levelof influencehe

diasporic

ommunity

as with

the

host state on

behalf

of the

homeland.Leaders

f

some

diasporicommunitiesworkcollaborativelyith he homeland tateinattempts o affect he

host state's domestic

publicpolicy e.g., immigration)

nd

its

foreign public

policy

e.g.,

foreign

aid)

n

a

manner

erceived

o

be

advantageous

o

the

homeland.Anothermeasure f

this

strategic

collaboration

s

technology

ransfer.The

type

of

technology

ransfer

here

involves

diasporic echnologists

in

rich,

technologically-advanced

ountries

nvesting

n

technology

nterprises,

ontributing

o

research nd

development,

nd

eaching

cienceand

engineering

courses

in

universities,

ll

in

the

homeland.Some homeland

states work

strategically

with their

technologically-talented

ationals

n

rich

counties to facilitate his

technology

ransferwhile other

states

do not. Thefinal

strategic

collaboration

measure

s

financial

contribution.

Aggregate

financial

contributions

an be

of

two

types, namely,

remittances nd nvestment.Remittances refinancial ontributionsromworkersnforeign

countries o relatives

nd

friends;

uch funds

are

mostly

always

romrich o

poor

countries.

Seventypercent

f

the world's

216

billion fficial

nternationalemittances

n

2004were

from

rich o

poor

countries

Ratha 005).

Investments

y diasporans

nto

heirhomelands an be

critical. uch nvestments

elp

o accelerate

rowth

and

upgrade

he homeland

conomy.

Diasporas

Diaspora

n

his

study-

building

nwork

by

Safran

1991)-

refers o a

peopledispersed

rom

heir

originalomeland, peoplepossessing

a collective

memory

nd

mythaboutandsentimental

and/or

material

inks o

that

homeland,

hich

ostersa sense of

sympathy

nd

solidarity

ithco-

ethnic

iasporans

ndwith

putative

rethren

n

he

ancestral

omeland. s

thisdefinition

mplies,

diasporic

ommunitiesan be

as concrete

s

individuals

ispersed

rom,

yet

with

angible,

n-

going

connections

o,

a

given

clan n

a

given illage

na

homeland

r,

onversely,

s

ideological

s

a

construct

r

myth

bouta

homeland

n

which

pecific

ndividuals

r

eventheir

parents

rtheir

grandparents

avenever

isited,

much ess

resided.

he

point

s that

a

member

f

a transnational

community

ho

has

never

ived n

the homeland an havean even

greater

ense

of

obligation

to

support

he

homeland s

another

memberwho

was born here.

Diaspora-homeland

ollaborative

evelopment

s

founded

on

sentimental

nd

material

arguments

or

a

boundedethnic

group,

both within

he

diaspora

and between

it

and its

homeland.The sentimentalbonds

among

co-ethnicsare

supposed

to be a

given

and

emotionally

oercive.

Ineffable

eelings

of

affinity

oward ellow ethnic

group

membersare

frequentlystrong

because

personal

and

collective

identities

are often conflated

in

complicatedways.

Personal

dentity

s also

undoubtedly

inkedwith

other

dentities,

uch as

class,

businessassociations

nd

professional

tanding,

ut

such

linkages

re ess

organically

unified

relative

o the

personal/collective

dentity-conflation.

ersonal

dentity

s,

after

all,

socially

constructed

and

socially

reinforced.Socialization

round

he indelible

quality

of

racially-basedthnicity

ffects the

core of

one's

identity

more

than

transitory

dentities.

Ethnic

group

members are

socialized

around

emotionally

vocative ssues such as their

commonancestral

heritage,

ictiveextended

family

and

mutual

mythological

xperiences.

Conspicuous ifferencesexist betweenethnicgroups ntermsof maintainingoundaries,

burnishing

utual

mythological

xperiences

nd

reinforcing

olidarity;

hose who

do

moreof

these

tend

to be moreunified han hose who

do

less.

Witheach ethnic

group, personal

and

collective

dentity-conflation

s

wrapped

up

in

a

shared

sense

of vulnerabilities

nd anxieties

concerning

he

political,

ocial and economic


8/18

Transnationalism:


?

1897

landscape.

This

mattersbecause individualsre

udged

n

part

on

their

thnicity.

entimental

pride

and

embarrassment

n

conjunction

ith

material

pportunities

nd constraints re all

affected

by

a

person's

group

membership

s

well

as

by

the

ranking

f that

group

n

society

and

indeed

n

the world.

In

a

worldwhere

ethnicity

matters,

here is a material

nterest

n

having ne's ethnicgroupelevated nthe world'shierarchy.

Development

In,

Through

and

By

the

Diaspora

While

global

orces

are

influencing

he size and

political ynamism

f

multiethnic

roups

n

America,

these

groups

are

simultaneously

nfluencing

American

power,

wealth and

technology

storehouse on behalf

of their ancestralhomelands.Esman

2000)

succinctly

explains

he connectionsbetween

diasporas

nd nternationalelations

elow:

Thecontinuinginksbetween diasporasand homelands can be

politicized,

and this

is

their

major

significance

in

the

study

of

internationalelations.

Diaspora

olidarities

an be

mobilizedand

focused

to influence

political

outcomes

in the

home

country

to

provide

economic,

diplomatic

nd even

military

ssistanceto

the

home

country

r

to

seek

protection

nd

help

from

ts

government.

Likewise,

he

government

of the

home

countrymay

call on the

diaspora ommunity

oreconomic or

political upport,

nd the host

country's

overnmentmay

attempt

o

use

the

diaspora ommunity

o

promote

ts interestsvis-a-vis he

home

country

With

heirvariable

capacities, pportunities

nd

propensities

o exert nfluence n

behalf

of theirdomesticor

external

nterests,

iaspora

ommunities an be

regarded

s interest

roups

and as

political

ctors.

p.

318)

A

threefoldclassification

cheme

is

applicable

when the

linkages

of

diaspora

and

development

re examined

Mohann 000):

*

Development

n

the

diaspora

*

Development

hrough

he

diaspora

*

Development

y

the

diaspora

Development

nthe

diaspora

elates o the

pooling

ffinancial

apital,

ntellectual

apital

nd

political

apitalby

membersof an

ethnic

community

orthe

purpose

of

growing

wealthand

providing

or

a

measureof

security

nd

ndependence

n

America.

n

he ancestralhomeland

in

question,

he state

may

end

support

o

members

of the

diaspora

n

the UnitedStates

for

two

reasons:

irst,

o

help

ts nationals r ethnickin ucceed for

heir

own

good,

and

second,

and

probably

more

important

o

the

state,

to

help

its

nationalsbecome

financially

nd

politicallyowerful

nough

o

contribute

ffectively

nd

significantly

o the

development

nd

security

f the homeland.

An

example

wouldbe

how the

South

Koreantate aided ts ethnic

kin,

primarily

n

California

n

the

1960s

and 1970s.

Today,

outh

Koreas the

world's

1

th

argest

exporter,

xporting

verything

rom

automobileso

seafaring

ankers

nd

container

hips

(i.e.,

it is the world's largest shipbuildingnation) o computerchips and countless other

sophisticated

ndustrial

nd

elecommunications

roducts.

However,

ust

a few

short

decades

ago,

a

principal

outh

Korean

xport

product

was

wigs.

TheKorean

xport

ank

KEB)

elped

wig

manufacturesn

South

Korea

nd SouthKorean

mmigrant ig

wholesalesand

retailers

in

the United

States

with

subsidized oans. The almost immediateresultof

this

strategic


9/18

1898

*

SocialForcesVolume

84,

Number

4

*

June

2006

diaspora-homeland

ollaboration as a

jump

nthe

South

Korean

market hare

of

wigs

inthe

United

States,

roma

mere5

percent

n 1965to 89

percent

n 1972.KEB ven

opened

a U.S.

branch

n Los

Angeles

in 1967to

further

ssist with business

lending

o Korean

mmigrants

(Chin,

Yoon nd

Smith

1996).

The

mmigrantsained

n

experience

ndconfidence nthe

wig

andotherhair areandbeauty upplybusinesses hatmade hem moreadeptatpenetrating

numerous

ther

markets,

articularly

n

poorminority

ommunities

nd

beyond.

As

Choi

2003)

points

out,

ethnic

Koreans

avecontributedo the

development

f the South

Korean

conomy by transferring

heir

knowledge

and skills

-

which

they

obtainedand

strengthened

n

he moreadvanced ountries

f

their esidence to theirhomeland.

p.25)

The

South

Koreantate

has

long

maintained network f direct

nd

ndirectmeans

of

influencing

the

diaspora.

learly,

theSouthKorean

overnment

as

sponsored

programs

or

professional

emigrants

eeking

o buildbusinesses

abroad,

with he

expectation

f

direct

inancial enefits

to Korea.

Shain

1999:

170)

The

government

lso

provided

ree

language

education or

professionals,

uch as

computer

cientists,

who

were

preparing

o

immigrate

o the

United

States,Japanandotherhighlyndustrializedountries.Forhose planningo starta business

abroad,

he

government

rovided

oans

up

to

$200,000

Weiner

995).

Studies

how

that,

wherever

Koreans

eside

n

he

diaspora,

radebetween hat

country

nd

South

Korea

s

positively

ffected.

In

other

words,

he

larger

he Korean

iaspora

f a

given

country,

n

general,

he

greater

he

trade

between he host

ountry

ndSouth

Korea

ends o

be

(Choi).

Development

hrough

he

diaspora

efers

o

development

s a

result f

networking

ithin

and between

diasporas

of the same ethnic

group

n

different

parts

of the world.

A

classic

example

of

development hrough

he

diaspora

nvolvesoverseas Chinese.

Mainland

nd

overseas

Chinese s an economicblocconstituteshe third

argest conomy

n

the world.

The

Chinese

conomic

bloc

of

PRC,Taiwan,ingapore

nd

HongKong

lone s the world's

argest

exporter. early

0

percent

of

overseas

Chinese ive

n

SoutheastAsia.Their

roportion

f

the

total

population

n

many

of these

Southeast

Asian

nations,however,

s low.

For

xample,

he

Chinese

share of

the

populations

f

Indonesia,

he

Philippines

nd Thailand

anges

rom3

percent

o 10

percent;

owever,

verseasChinese

ontrolmore han80

percent

f

the business

equity

nthese

countries

Cheong

003).

As for

Singapore

nd

Taiwan,

ome

80

percent

f the

populations

reethnic

Chinese,

nd

hey

also

controlhe

lion's

hareof

the business

equity

n

these two countries.As

for

overseas Chinese

n

the United

States,

they

have

particularly

distinguished

hemselves

in

high-technology

ields,

and

they

have

helped

o

transfer uch

technology

o PRC

nd

Taiwan.

y

1998,

20

percent

f

startup

high-tech

ompanies

n

Silicon

Valley

were

by

ethnicChinese.

The

egion's

Chinese

ngineers

onstructed vibrant

wo-way

bridge

onnecting

he

technology

ommunitiesnSilicon

Valley

ndTaiwan...

Saxenian

999:

53)

Thedialectical

nterplay

n

Chinese ransnationalommunitiess

conspicuously

uccessful.

Since

Deng Xioping

pened up

the

country

n

1978,

overseas Chinese

have been

the

principal

nvestors

n

the

PRC.

Presently,

China

anks econd

behind

he

UnitedStates

in

recipients

f

foreign

direct nvestment.

n

2003,

totalFDI

nto

China

was

$57

billion

UNCTAD

2004).

Thus,

n

1991,

Lee

Kuan

Yew,

he

founding

resident

f

Singapore,

nd

Dengcollectively

presided

ver he first

World

Chinese

Entrepreneurs'

onvention

WCEC)

Cheong). y

he sixth

WCEC,

thnicChinesewere

descending

n

Nanjing,

he location

f

the

gathering,

rom ome

77

diasporic

Chinese ommunities roundhe

world.

Atthat

meeting,

where

Beijing

nvested

more han

$1

billiono

strengthen iaspora-homeland

ollaboration,

t was

resolved hat he

mainland ill ead heglobal conomicblocof overseasChineseCheong).

There

re

mportant

essons

for

Africans

ndothers o

glean

rom hese

diaspora-homeland

collaborative

evelopment

xperiences.

Whereas he mainland s

encouraging

uccessful

overseas

Chinese o

invest,

f

not

repatriate,

or

purposes

f ancestral omeland

evelopment

and

he

pursuit

f

personal

ortune,4

any

African

overnments

ften ook

uspiciously

t their


10/18

Transnationalism:

iaspora-Homeland

evelopment

?

1899

fellow nationals

who have

gone away

and

returned uccessful.

Take,

or

example,

the

Zimbabwean

ational,

trive

Masiyiwa,

hugely

successful

telecommunications

ioneer.

Masiyiwa

s

the

founder

f Econet

Wireless

Communicationsut of

Zimbabwe.

Econetwas

Zimbabwe'sirst

privately

un

elecom

concern

n

the

country,

which

became

an

overnight

success (Patterson001).Despite he fact thatEconetwas on course o provide eliable nd

affordable

elecom ervice o

millions

f citizens

something

he

government

as unable

o do

-

as well as

attractnew

investment nd

technology

nto he

country

nd

provide

dditional

employment,

he

government

ept

he

company

rom

persuing

ts

businessand

servicing

he

population

or

more hanfive

years.

Masiyiwa,

whose wealth s

estimated o exceed

$100

million,

uns

telecommunications

mpire

hat

ncludes ixcellular

usinessesand wo

satellite

companies

hat

pan

a number f

countries

ncluding

reat

Britain,

Morocco,

Nigeria,

otswana

and New Zealand.

Whereas

overseasChinesewho

amass fortunes n

the

diaspora

nd are

encouraged

nd

assisted

in

investing

n

the

future

of

the

homeland,

Masiyiwa,

ho

fearsfor

his

life,

ives

n

self-imposed

xile

n

he

Johannesburg

etroarea

Itano

004).

Development y the diaspora efers o the diasporaworking hiefly f notexclusivelyn

helping

he

homeland

evelop.

srael

rovides

n

instructive

xample

of

this class

of

diaspora

and

development.

For

manyyears

now,

Israelhas

been the annual

ecipient

f more

han

$3

billion f

foreign

conomicand

military

id rom he

US

government's

gency

or

International

Development

USAID).

stensibly,

USAID'smission

s to workwith

and

through

Third

World

governments

nd

nongovernmental

rganizations

o

help

raise he

living

tandards f

some of

the

poorestpeople

on the

planet.

srael, owever,

anks s the world's

6thrichest ation

utof

approximately

00.

The

$3

billion

nnual

isbursemento Israelmakes

he

country

he

number

1

recipient

f

U.S.

oreign

id.The

population

f Israel

oday

s

approximately

ix million.

ince

1962,

Israel

as

receivedmore

oreign

id rom he

United tates han

all

of

Latin

merica,

he

Caribbeannd

Sub-Saharanfrica

ombined

USAID002);

he

combined

population

f

these

threeareas s well

overone billion.

he

complex

rganizational

tructure

f

private onprofit

nd

advocacy

nstitutions

orking

n

behalfof Israel nd

Jewish

Americanss

verysophisticated

and

extremely

ell-run,

otto

mention

xceedingly

ffective.There re

numerous

oteworthy

institutions,

ut

only

wo

of

the

most effective

will

be referencedhere.One

is known

as the

Presidents'

onference,

omprised

f

presidents

f

many

arge

Jewish

organizations

uch

as

the World

ewish

Congress,

B'nai

Brith nd the

World ewish

Committee.The

Presidents'

Conference

ends o workmore

closely

with he

executive ranch f the U.S.

government,

hile

the

second

organization,

he

America-Israelublic

AffairsCommittee

AIPAC),

orks more

closely

with

Congress

(Smith2000).

The

Presidents'Conferenceand AIPAC

ave been

exceptionally

eft at

working

with

he Israeliso

articulatehe needs

of Israel o

Washington,

raising

nd

contributing

unds oelect

Congressional

emberswho

support

srael,nd

helping

defeat those

who do not. While

African

iasporans

will never

nfluenceU.S.

public

policy,

transfer

utting-edgeechnology

r

make inancial

ontributionso their

homelands n

the scale

of Jewish

Americans,

he

point

s

thatmore

progress

an occur

n

these areas.

Latecomers of

Development

In,

Through

and

By

the

Diaspora

India

Indians,

y

far,

havebeen the

largest ecipient

f H-1B

visas,

which

are

a

device used

by

the

federal

government

n

the

interest f

assuring

he

maintenance f a

workforce t the

global

competitive

orefront. he

H-1B

visa

program

llows

oreigners

o

move o the United

States

for

employment

n

designated

ritical reasof the

economy.

The

cap

was

set at

65,000

by

the


11/18

1900

*

Social

ForcesVolume84, Number

4

*

June

2006

1990

Immigration

ct;

it was raised

o

115,000

n

fiscal

year

1999 and to

195,000

between

fiscal

years

2000

and

2002,

whereupon

he

cap

would

revertback o

65,000,

which t did.

Unions,

he U.S.

branch f

the Institute

f

Electrical

nd Electronic

ngineers

IEEE-U.S.)

nd

others

ought

he increase

while

many ndustry

xecutives

andtrade

associations,

uch as

the BusinessSoftwareAllianceBSA),nformationechnology ssociation fAmericaITAA)

and he Electronic

ssociation f America

EAA)

which

represent

ompanies

ncluding

isco

Systems,

Intel,

Motorola,

exas nstruments

nd

Oracle,

irms hat

employ

H-1

Bs

-

wanted

still

higher

umbers

f

H-1

Bs. Here

we havea domestic

public

policy

ight

hat

s

fraught

with

serious

oreign

mplications,

ome that

oom

particularlyarge

or he homelands

f

engaged

U.S.-based

diasporas.

Countries hat

send

large

numbers

of theirnationals

o the United

States on

H-1B visas

have

their

development

agendas

bound

up

in

this debate.

Organized

diasporas

n collaboration

ith

heir

respective

homeland tates

enter nto he

political

ray

n

support

of

EAA,

ITAA,

BSA

and

their member firms.

Key

to the

diaspora-homeland

collaborativeuccesses

of these ethnonationals

s to

align

heir

project

with other

domestic

forces(e.g.,votingblocsand/orobbyingampaign f icons suchas the bluechip echfirms

cited

above)

and/or

ommonly xpressed

Americannterests

and deals.

Once

more,

he

Indian

overnment

like hatof the

South

Korean,

Chinese,Taiwanese,

Singaporean

nd

other

countries

has taken a

proactive,

omprehensive

and

strategic

approach

o its

diaspora-homeland

ollaborative

evelopment

ffort,

hence brain

irculation.

Notethe observations

f

Myron

Weiner

1990):

The

Indian

overnment

has

made a

major

ffort

o reachout to the

Indian

ommunity

n

the

UnitedStates or

support.

thas

sought

to

inducenonresidentndians

NRIs...)

o

deposit

heir

avings

n

Indian

banks,

nvest

n

Indian

ompanies,

andstart heir

own businesses n

India.

The ndian

inance

minister as met with

the New York-based

NRI

Club

f NorthAmerica

o discuss

creating

n

India und o

help

members

nvest

n

India,

nd

there

havebeen

discussions f

pressing

the

IRS to

permit

tax-sheltered

RA accounts to be used for

investments

n

India.The

Indian

Embassy

has

also

encouraged

he

Indian

Community

n the UnitedStates to

actively upport

ndian

foreign

olicyobjectives

n

Washington.

p.

202)

The

Ministry

f

External ffairs f the

Indian

overnment

as establisheda

SpecialHigh

LevelCommittee n

the Indian

Diaspora.

he

committee

was created o

study

he

problems,

aspirations

nd attitudesof the Indian

Diaspora,

ndto

study

the roles that Nonresident

Indians

NRIs)

nd

people

of Indian

rigin

ould

play

nthe

economic,

ocialand

echnological

development

f India

The

Hindu

001).

To his

end,

the Indian

overnment

as

recently

aken

two

concrete,

proactive

teps:

(1)

ruled

o allowdual

citizenship

or

NRIs nd

(2)

established

a

new

ministry

or he

singular urpose

of

serving

he needs

and

eliciting

he

support

f

NRIs.

These two demonstrable

cts show how

India

has

fully

embraced he

strategic

homeland-

diaspora evelopment

model.

Mexico

Sharp

ontrastscan

be drawnbetween

the aboveAsiannations

and

othernations

eeking

to

develop.

Mexico

s one of those nations

hat,

until

ecently,

ailed o

aggressively

ursue

strategic

diaspora-homeland

ollaborative

development agenda.

State

officials,

non-

government

stablishment

igures

andthe

Mexican

iasporic

lite

nthe

United

States ailed


12/18

Transnationalism:

iaspora-Homeland

evelopment

*

1901

to collaborate

ntil he

late 1970s. Prioro

that,

Mexicans

n

the

homeland,

rom

government

officials n down

to

the common

person

n the

street,

regularly

iewed recentmembers

of

the

diaspora

n

the

United

States

essentially

as sellouts.

Matching

hat

castigating

iew,

manydiaspora

members

ooked

despairingly

nd

embarrassingly

t Mexico or ts continued

impoverishmentJones-Correa995-96).Mutually isdainful iews on both sides had the

effect

of

preventing

diaspora-homeland

ollaborative

evelopment

genda.

The

rapprochement

inally

ccurred

n

the late 1970s.

The

government egan

to rethink

Mexico's

elationship

ith

ts

diaspora,

ver98

percent

of

whom reside

n the

United

States

(Gutierrez

999).

The

emigration

f Mexicans o

join

he ranks

f the

U.S.

diaspora

was

being

viewed

by strategic

hinkers

s a resource

ain

rather

hana

resource

drain. n

2002,

at

$9.9

billion,

Mexicowas

the second

largest

recipient

of

remittances

n

the

developing

world

(Solimano 003).

By

2004,

Mexican

emittances,

tanding

at

$13.2

billion,

laced

Mexico

n

the numberone

spot

ahead of India

Thouez2005).

Turning

he

braindrain nto a brain

circulationeflected

both

he

growing

political

loutof Chicanos

ndthe successfuleffort

of

MexicoCityo breatheife nto he transnationalommunity.

PresidentCarlos

alinas

de

Gortari,

Harvard

h.D.

n

political

conomy

and

government,

was

predisposed

well

beforehis election

n 1988 to advance

he collaborative

evelopment

agenda

much

urther

ndfaster.President alinas

hadthe

built-in

ultural

ffinity

or such

an

agenda,

but

even more

mportant

as

his focus on the

political

tility

f the

diaspora

o

the

north s wellas the

indispensable

conomic ontributions

or he

southern

art

f the

country's

efforts o

develop.By

he time he first

Bush

presidency

as

winding

own,

he Mexican tate

and

eading

Mexican

stablishment

hinkers

ere as

eager

or he

swift

passage

of

NAFTAs

U.S.

corporate

dvocates:

During

he NAFTA

ebate,

the Mexican

overnment

lew

entire

delegations

f Mexican-American

eaders o Mexico

City

or

briefings,

reparing

hemfor

heir

roleas advocates orNAFTA.Jones-Correa:9)

As statedearlier

n

the

paper,

U.S.

diasporas

seeking

o

successfully

nfluence

oreign

olicy

o benefit heir

espective

omelands

avorably

attempt

to unite

in common

cause

through,

at the

very

least,

temporarymarriages

f

convenience

with

domestic

politically

ell-established

roups,

and/or

align

he homeland-

interested

ublicpolicy

genda

with

manifestly owerful

merican

nterests nd deals.

TheSalinas

government

was as

strategic

as it

was determined

n

eliciting

he

support

of

the

Mexican

diaspora

orthe

successful

passage

of

fast-track

uthority

or NAFTA.

eading

diasporicigures

were

continually

troked.For

xample,

In

1991,

Antonia

Hernandez f the

human

ights

protection roup

MALDEF

Mexican-American

egal

Defense

and Educational

Fund)

was awarded he

Order f the Aztec

Eagle,

Mexico's

highest

honor

given

o a

foreign

citizen

orhis or hercontribution

o the advancement

f Mexico r

o the better

understanding

of Mexicoabroad. n

1993,

an Aztec

Eagle

medalwent to Raul

Yaguirre, resident

of the

NationalCouncil f

La

Raza.

Shain1999:189)

While hese

recognitions

o not

necessarily

imply

a

quid-pro-quo

or

supporting

he fast-track

eal,

they

do

illustrate ow a

homeland

state can

reachout to

its

diaspora

n the UnitedStates as

part

of a

strategic

collaborative

development genda.

Moreover,

Mexico

City's

nfluence,

ombined

with

leading

Mexican-

American

rganizations

n

conjunction

with

major

U.S.

manufacturing,rucking,

extile

and

other

ndustries,

ressured

he

Congressional

ispanic

Caucus

o

effectively

hat

allbutone

of the Caucus

members

votedfor

NAFTA

Shain

1999-2000).

TheAfrican Diaspora

The schism between the

two

groups

of the

African

diaspora

n the United States

-

descendantsof enslaved

Africans nd

newer,

voluntary

mmigrants

is

knotty

nd hitherto

largely

politically

ebilitating,

relationship

xperiencedby

no

other

U.S.-based

diaspora.


13/18

1902

*

SocialForces

Volume

84,

Number

4

*

June

2006

Stereotypes

often

prevent

African

mmigrants

nd

descendants

from

pursuing

ommon

ancestral

homeland

developmentagendas. Many

African

mmigrants

ften see African

Americans

s too fixated

on

race,

unwilling

o

accept

their

hortcomings

egarding

acrifice

and

hard

work,

and

having

quandered

remendous

pportunities

or

success

in

the United

States.Conversely,manyAfrican escendents requentlyee Africanmmigrantss socially

and

culturally

ackwards,

aughty,

nd

unappreciative

f the benefits

hey

enjoy

as a result f

theirancestors' acrifices

n

this

country

Authur

002).

Three

black

nstitutions

urported

o

have ome

political

lout

are

the

Congressional

lack

Caucus,

he NAACPndthe Urban

League.5

ecause he lives

of

large

ections of the

black

community

re

encumbered

by

issues of institutional

acism,

poorly

performing

chools,

inadequate

ffordable

ousing,

urban iolenceand other

domestic

social

lls,

he lion's hare

of the attention nd

these institutions'oncerted

campaigns

have

focused on issues within

the UnitedStates.

Conversely,

ew

African

mmigrants

end

to

be

organized

n

mutual

id

societies,

which

span

from

acilitating

cculturation

nto he

American

ociety

o

contributing

to capitalormationorentrepreneurialctivitiesnthe UnitedStatesand/orback nspecific

African ountries.Political

rganizations

un

by

and

chiefly

concernedwith descendants'

domestic

ssues

regularly

ngage

the leversof state

power

whereas

new

immigrant

fricans,

while

significantly

oncerned about

problems

and

prospects

back

in

their

respective

homelands,

refar

ess

likely

o

engage

the state or be

party

o

elite

mobilization

n

America

aboutmatters

oncerning

hem.

Episodically,

here

have been issues aroundwhich the two black

communities f the

African

iaspora

n

the United

States

unite.The

Congressional

lack

Caucus

merged

n

1971

to

provide platform

or blacks o

engage

the state

on the issue

of

putting

ts

might

behind

ending

white

minority

dictatorship

n

Southern

Africa.

Representatives

Charles

Diggs,

cofounder

f

the

Congressional

lack

Caucus,

nd

Randall

obinson,

ounder f

TransAfrica,

used the

forceof

their nstitutions

o

help

support

evolutions

n

SouthernAfrica.Ron

Walters

(1987)

renchantly ritiqued

he

politically-loaded

hetorical

uestion

posed

by

MartinWeil

back

n 1974:

Canhe

BlacksDofor

Africa

What he Jews Did orIsrael?

owever,

Weilwas

correct

by

noting

hat,

To id the revolution

broad,

blacksmust irst

oin

he

establishment

at

home.

(p.86)

This

paper

argues

that some

other U.S.-based

diasporic

groups

have

successfully

pplied

Weil'sdictum

o

provide

heir

homelandswitha

comparative

dvantage

in

development gendas.

Beyond

he

descendant-immigrant

chism,

a

major mpediment

or an

African-American

diaspora-homeland

ollaborative

evelopment

roject,

unlike uccessful

diaspora-homeland

projects,

s that he

African

iaspora

as lacked

trategicbacking

f a

major

tate or

states

in

Africa o

generate

enthusiasm,

focus and resourcebases for some

specific

homeland

development

whichhad

been the case withSouthKorea nd

China

or

ourdecadesand or

two decades with India nd

Mexico.

These

may

simply

be manifestations f the newest

historical orms of more

intense efforts

to

keep

blacks at the bottom of

the

hierarchy

discussed

by

Golberg

2002),

Feagin

2000)

and

Campbell

1994),

among

others.

History,

f

course,

s not

fate; herefore,

t is indeed

possible

orAfrican

eoples

o

mobilizeheir

gency

in

the formof

strategic

ransnational

rain

irculationike

other ransnational

roups, hough

in

theirown

syncretistic

mannerand

at the

commensurate

evel

to

overcome he race-

neutral

oliticoeconomic

orces

presently

onstraining

hem.

Sub-Saharan

Africa

In

no

way

does this

paper

mply

hat

Africas

completely

evoidof

progress

on

the frontsof

strategic

vision,

specific programs

nd concrete

practices

o enhance

country-specific

r


14/18

Transnationalism:


*

1903

continent-general

iasporic-homeland

ollaborative

evelopment gendas.

There

are clear

examples

nAfricao

whichone can

point

or llustration.n

his

study,Apraku

1991),

orone

example,

has

foundevidence

of African

overnments'

fforts o lure heir

espective

echnical

nationals

nto

repatriation

ith

subsidies or

homes,

cars,

and

professional quipment

n

the

homelandcountry.Nevertheless, here is a chasm between state officialsand strategic

thinking

stablishment

igures

nAfricanocieties

in

comparison

ithother

countries

rofiled

in

this

study

when

it comes

to

mobilizing

ts U.S.-based

iasporas.

One of the most

significant

ecent U.S.

foreignpolicy

debates toward

Africawas the

proposed

AfricanGrowth nd

Opportunity

ct

(AGOA).

GOA

ffectively plit

members

of

the

Congressional

lack

Caucus,

4

ultimately

oted

n

support

nd

12

against

Walters

004).

The

assenting

ide saw it as a

feeble

yet

important

tartof new

investment nto

Africa nd new

market

pportunities

n

AmericaorAfrican

xporters eyond

primaryroducts.

hus,

hey

saw

AGOA s a belatedemulation

f U.S. nvestment

nd

market

penings

decades

earlier hat

contributedo EastAsia's

tarting

ut

in

owlyapparel

nd extile

production

nd

subsequently

going through apidndustrialization.onversely,he dissenterssaw it as destructive or a

continent

already

broken

economically.

n

short,

the dissenters

largely agreed

with

Representative

essie

Jackson,

Jr.'s

haracterizationf

it when he saidthat he

initiative as

so

inimicalo Africannterestsuntil t

may

as well be

labeled s the

Africaecolonizationct.

Some have

thought

of

AGOA s the African AFTA.

owever,

here was

inadequate

coordinationetweenAfrican

apitals

r

with

he former

Organization

orAfrican

Unity

OAU)

and black

political

nd

Africa-focusedeaders

n

the United

States.

Walters

2004)

notes

that,

althoughgroups

like

the

Constituency

or Africa

and the African

Diplomatic

Corps

in

Washington

id worksome

with

AfricanAmerican

eaders,

heircollective

effortsat issue

framing

nd collaborative

genda

etting

appear

not

to havebeen on the levelof

the Mexican

NAFTA

ffort. The Mexican

governmentregularly rought arge delegationsof Mexican

Americaneaders o

Mexico

City

or consultation nd coordinationo both

help

shape

the

drafting

nd

passage

of NAFTA.

uch issue

framing

nd collaborative

evelopment

genda

setting

were not emulated

by diasporic

eaders

and

leadersof African

tates,

commercial

enterprises

nd civil

ociety

organizations.

Conclusion

Using

he

approach

f

comparative nalysis,

his

paper

has

investigated

he

importance

f

transnationalisms a

means of

advancingpeoples,

which

comes

in

the form

of homeland

states

working ollaboratively

ith heir

respective

diasporas

nthe UnitedStates to benefit

the homeland.

The

significant

inding

s thatwhen

science and

echnology

alentednationals

froma Southern

ountry

migrate

o the United

States,

such

emigration

an be

identified s

either

a braindrain an

adverse

mpact

on the

homeland or a case of brain

irculation

a

socioeconomic

and

technologygain

orthe

homeland.The actor hat most

determines he

outcome s the nature f

collaborationetweenthe

homeland ndthe

U.S.-based

iaspora.

At

one end of the

spectrum

there is no

substantivecoordination etween

sanctioned

government

fficesor

quasi-government

nstitutions

nd eadersof

organizationsomprised

chiefly

f their

diasporans.

or hat

matter,

here

may

even be a hostile

relationship

etween

the

two. At

the

otherend

of the

spectrum

s

institutionalized

trategic

ollaborationetween

the two sides, resultingroma combination f a heightened ense of sympathy, olidarity,

obligation

nd

profit

o be

made.

This

tudy

ookedat

homeland

evelopment

s the

outcome

with

strategic

ollaborative

development

etween

diasporic

eadersand he

homeland

s the

operative

actor.Homeland

development

as

conceptualized

s

technological

nd

socioeconomic

evelopmentincluding


15/18

1904

*

SocialForcesVolume

84,

Number

4 *

June

2006

life

expectancy,

ducationalttainment

nd

average

ncome).

trategic

ollaborationetween

the

diaspora

nd he homeland

was takenas a measureof a

diasporic ommunity's

avorable

affect

on the U.S.

state;

technology

ransfer;

and financial

ontributions,

ncluding

oth

remittances

nd nvestments.

UnlikeIsrael,China,Indiaand South Korea,Mexico had to overcome the mutually

disparaging

entimentsbetween

the two sides. Sincethe

rapprochement

n

the late

1970s,

progress

tarted

lowly,

hen

picked

up

steam

during

he

period

f the

NAFTA

ebate,

and

s

now

gaining

more

ground

round

ssues of

permanent esidency,

mnesty

and

guest-worker

programs.

African nations are

further behind

in

institutionalizing iaspora-homeland

collaborative

evelopment

agendas.

In

the

past

few

decades,

African

diasporas

and

homelands

have

worked

onlyepisodically

o

promotedevelopment

n

the

latter, ut,

again,

such

collaborative

development agendas

in Sub-SaharanAfrica have never

been

institutionalized

s

in

other nations.

The

challenge

o

institutionalizing

iaspora-homeland

collaborative

evelopment

s

exponentially

more difficultbecause

of the

multiple

tates

involved and the fact that Sub-SaharanAfricancountrieswould be attempting his

institutionalization

n

the

early

1st

entury

atherhan

n

he mid- o late-20th

entury

when

the

single-case

states launched heir

collaborative

ampaigns

and a

historicalmoment

perhaps

moreamenable o such

development trategies

xisted.

Notes

1. Fordiscussionson

transnationalism,

ee Schiller nd Basch

1995);

Schiller,

asch

and

Blanc-Szanton

992;

Portes

1999;

Kivisto 001.

2.

Homing

n

on the nature of

Africancoordination f its

diasporized

and domestic

homeland-based

eoples

around

echnologicaldevelopment

s not to

ignore

he

AIDS

pandemic, ripplinglliteracy,rinding

overty,

ampant orruption

nd othersocial

ills

across

the

continent.At the

same

time,

solving

those ills

without

promoting

and

strengthening

he collaboration

f

technically-orientediasporized

nd homeland-based

Africans

will

also

likely

onfound

ocialand economic

development.

n

other

words,

his

paper

n

no

way

privileges

he

diaspora-homeland

ollaboration

ver other

challenges.

Instead,

his

papermerely

eeks

to drawattention o and

conceptually larify

ne

huge

challenge

as well as

opportunity

hat s

typically

gnored

r

glossed

over

n

development

scholarship.

China, Israel,

South

Korea and India have

witnessed considerable

development

n the

past

few decades; eliminate he U.S.-based

diaspora-homeland

collaborative

development

agenda

and their socioeconomic

and

technological

development

would

have

been

stymied

or worse.

3.

Diaspora-homelandevelopment

n

the case

of

Israelhas

been

and continues o be

uniquely

crucial o its

security

and sheer

survival,

not

just

to socioeconomic and

technological evelopment.

Without

U.S.directand ndirect

upport

f

economic,

military

and

intelligence

ssistance

to Israel

ver ts

54-year

history,

he

nationwouldhave

ong

ceased

to exist. Without he

diasporic ommunity's

mobilization

ffortsand economic

successes,

U.S. tate

support

nd

American ealthwouldnot

havebeen

forthcoming

o

Israel.Moreover,o otherdiasporic ommunitynthe UnitedStatesis likelyo emulate

this

success due in

part

o

Jewish

Americans'

nrivaled readth

nd

depth

of influence

in

positions

of

power

n

American

ociety,

relativeo ThirdWorld

iasporas.

Nonetheless,

the

non-emulativeewishmodel

providesnsight egarding

ossible

collaborative

rojects

for

other

ransnational

roups.


16/18

Transnationalism:

iaspora-Homeland

evelopment

*

1905

4.

China,

of

course,

also

regularly

urveils and

in

some cases detains

some ethnic

Chinese,

especially

those from the United

States,

for fear of seditious

activity.

Nevertheless,

such

fear

may

be more

prevalent

with African

governments.

5. Thereare real imits o this so-calledpolitical loutbyblackpolitical rganizationsnthe United

States.

One evident illustration f this limitation s President

Bush's refusal o

meet with the

Congressional

BlackCaucus

and

to address the annual

meeting

of the

NAACP

n

the

past

five

years.

A

president's

failure o

provide

such an audience and address

Jewish

political

and

advocacy

leaders

is

almost unthinkable.While

meetings

can be

construed as

merely

symbolic,

these

meetings

are

nonetheless

reflectionsof the

gravity

of

the seriousness with

which

issues

and

concerns of ethno-national

roups

are taken

by

the

government.

References

Apraku,

ofi.

991.African

migres

n

the United tates:

A

Missing

Link

n

Africa's

ocialand

Economic

Development. raeger.

Arthur,

ohn.

2002.

Invisible

ojourners:

frican

mmigrant

iaspora

n the United

tates.

Praeger.

Bergsten,

C.

Fred,

ndInbo

Choi,

ditors. 003.TheKorean

iaspora

n he

World

conomy.

nstituteor

International

conomics.

Bonilla-Silva,

duardo.

004. From i-Racialo Tri-Racial:owards New

System

of Racial tratification

n

the

USA. thnic ndRacial tudies 7:931-50.

Campbell,

orace.

1994.

Pan-Africanism

nd

African iberation.

p.

285-307.

magining

Home:

Class,

CulturendNationalismntheAfrican iaspora.idneyLemellendRobinKelley,ditors.Verso.

Cheong,

Young

Rok. 003. Chinese usinessNetworks ndTheir

mplications

orSouthKorea.

p.

31-

59.The

Korean

iaspora

n heWorld

conomy.

C.

Fred

Bergsten

ndInbor

Choi,

ditors. nstitute

forInternational

conomics.

Choi,

nbor.

2003. Korean

iaspora

n

he

Making:

tsCurrent

tatus nd

Impact

n

TheKorean

conomy.

Pp.

9-27.

TheKorean

iaspora

n

theWorld

conomy.

C.

Fred

Bergsten

ndInbom

Choi,

ditors.

Institute

or

Internationalconomics.

Chin,

Ku-Sup,

n-JinYoon

and

David

Am Smith.1996.

Immigrant

mallBusiness

and

International

Economic

Linkage:

Case

of

the Korean

Wig

Business

n

Los

Angeles,

1968-1977.

nternational

Migrationeview30:485-510.

Cox,

Oliver . 1964.

Capitalism

s

A

System.

Monthly

eview

Press.

Dash, ulekha,

nd

Patrickhibodeau.000. Electionolitics tall

H-1 Hike: f

Cap

Not

Raised,

Work

May

Move Offshore.

Computer

World.Accessed

Aug.

21,

2004,

at:

www.computerworld.com/

careertopics/careers/recruiting/story/

,10801, 2130,00.html.

DeFelice,

E.

Gene.

1986. Causal nference nd

Comparative

Methods.

Comparative

olitical tudies

19:415-37.

Diamond,

ared.

1998.

Guns,Germs,

nd Steel:

A

Short

History

f

Everybody

or

the

Last

1,300

Years.

Vintage.

Doane,

Ashley.

003.

Rethinking

hiteness

tudies.

p.

3-20.

WhiteOut:The

Continuingignificance

f

Racism.

Ashley

DoaneandEduardo

onilla-Silva,

ditors.

Routledge.

Esman,

Milton.

000.

Diasporas

nd

Internationalelations.

p.

316-20.

Ethnicity.

ohn

Hutchinsonnd

Anthony

.

Smith,

ditors.Oxford

niversity

ress.


17/18

1906

*

SocialForces

Volume84, Number

*

June

2006

Faegin,

oe. 2000.RacistAmerica.

outledge.

Frendreis,

ohn.1983.

Explanation

f

Variationnd

Detection f Covariation:

he

Purpose

nd

Logic

f

Comparativenalysis.

omparative

oliticaltudies 6:255-72.

Goldberg, avid heo.2002.TheRacial tate.Blackwell.

Gutierrez,

arlosGonzalez. 999.

Fostering

dentities:Mexico'sRelations

ith Its

Diaspora.

ournal

f

American

istory.

ccessed

Aug.

4,

2004

at:

http://www.indiana.edu/-jah/mexico/cgutierrez.html.

Henry,

heila

E. 1999.

Ethnic

dentity,

ational,

nd

International

tratification:he

Case

of

the

African

American. ournal

f

Black

tudies

9:438-54.

Hewitt,

Cynthia

ucas.

002. Racial ccumulation

n

a World-Scale:

acial

nequality

nd

Employment.

Review:

A Journal f

the Fernand raudel enter

XXV:

37-71.

Hindu,

The.

2001.

Dispersing

Diasporal

cience.

Accessed

Aug.

16,

2004 at:

www.hindu.com/

thehindu/2001/09/13/stories/08130005.htm.

Itano,

Nicole. 004. TheMaverick ehind TelecomDeal. ew

York

imes.

Pp.

W1,

W7.

Jan.15.

Jones-Correa,

Michael. 995-96. NewDirectionsor Latinos s an

Ethnic

Lobby

n

U.S.

Foreign

olicy.

Harvardournal

f

Hispanic olicy

:47-85.

Kivisto,

eter.

001.

Theorizing

ransnational

mmigration:

Critical

eview f

Currentactors. thnic

nd

Racial tudies 4:549-77.

Lieberson,

tanley.

991.

Small-N's

nd

Big

Conclusions:

n

Examination

f the

Reasoning

n

Comparative

StudiesBased

on a

SmallNumber

f Cases.

ocialForces 0:307-20.

Lijphart,rend.1971. Comparativeolitics nd the Comparative ethod. merican olitical cience

Review65:682-93.

Lipset,

eymour

Martin.

996.American

xceptionalism:

Double-Edged

word.Norton.

Mahoney,

ames. 2000.

Strategies

f Causal nferencen

Small-N

Analysis.

Sociological

Methods

&

Research 8:387-424.

Mohann,

Giles.

2002.

Diaspora

nd

Development. p.

7-140.

Development

nd

Displacement.

enny

Robinson,

ditor.

OpenUniversity

ress.

New

York imes. 004.

Africa'sealth-Care

rainDrain. 22.

Aug.

13.

Patterson,

ubin. 001.

Strategic

olicy

Benchmarking

or

Technological

evelopment:

he

IT

Cases

of

ZimbabwendBotswana. nternationalournal

f

Comparativeociology

2:275-300.

.2005a.

African

conomic

Development

ia

Transnational

inkages:

he

Propositions,

he

Evidence,

and

the

Contradictions.

aper resented

t the Association

or

the

Study

of Worldwide frican

Diaspora.

io

de

Janeiro,

Brazil.

ctober.

. 2005b.

Comparative

nalysis

f US

Diasporas

ndTheirContributionso Homeland

evelopment

in

the Global outh.

aper

resented

t the American

ociological

ssociation,

hiladelphia,

A.

August.

Portes,

Alejandro.

999.

Conclusion:owards

New World:The

Origins

nd Effects

of Transnational

Activities. thnic ndRacial tudies 2:463-77.

Ratha,

Dilip.

2005.

Workers' emittance:

n

Important

nd StableSource of External

evelopment

Finance.

hapter

.

Remittances:

evelopment

mpactand

uture

rospects.

amuelMaimbond

Dilip

Ratha,

ditors.WorldBank.


18/18

Transnationalism:

iaspora-Homeland evelopment ?

1907

Safran,

William.

991.

Diasporas

n

Modern

ocieties:

Myths

of

Homeland nd Return.

iaspora:

Journal f Transnationaltudies :83-99.

Saxenian,

AnnaLee.

999.

Silicon

Valley's

ew

Immigrant

ntrepreneurs.

an

Francisco: ublic

Policy

Institutef California.

Schiller,

Nina

Glick,

nd Linda

Basch.1995. From

mmigrant

o

Transmigrant:heorizing

ransnational

Migration. nthropological

uarterly

8:48-63.

Schiller,

ina

Glick,

inda asch

andCristina

lanc-Szanton.992.

Towards Transnational

erspective

n

Migration:

ace,

Class,Ethnicity,

nd Nationalism

econsidered.

The New York

Academy

of

Sciences.

Shain,

Yossi.

1999.

Marketing

he

AmericanCreedAbroad:

Diasporas

n

the US. and Their

Homelands.

Cambridge

niversity

ress.

1999-2000.

The

Mexican-American

iaspora's

mpact

On Mexico. olitical cience

Quarterly

114:661-91.

Sheffer,

Gabriel.

996. Israel

Diaspora

Relations

n

Comparative

erspective. p.

53-85. Israel

n

Comparative

erspective: hallenging

he Conventional isdom.Michael

N.

Barnett,

ditor. UNY

Press.

Smith,

Tony.

000.

Foreign

ttachments.

hePowerof Ethnic

Groups

n

the

Making

f

American

oreign

Pollicy.

Harvard

niversity

ress.

Solimano,

ndres.

003.Remittances

yEmigrants:

ssuesandEvidence.

United

Nations.

Song,

Miri.004.

Introduction:

ho'sAt

he Bottom?

xamining

laims

boutRacial

Hierarchy.

thnic

nd

Racial

tudies 7:859-77.

Thouez,

Colleen.

005.

The

mpact

f

Remittancesn

Development.

p.

41-54. nternational

igration

nd

theMillennium

evelopment

oals.

New

York,

.Y:United

Nations

Population

und.

UNCTAD.

004. GlobalFDIDecline

Bottoms

Out

in

2003. UNDR

Accessed

Aug.

21,

2005 at:

www.unctad.org/Templates/webflyer.asp?

ocid=4387&intltemlD=

634&lang=1.

USAID.002.US

Overseas

oans ndGrants

Greenbook).

ashington,

C:USAID. ccessed

Oct.

8,

2004

at:

http://qesdb.cdie.org/gbk/index.html.

Wallerstein,

mmanuel.

979.

Dependence

n

an

Interdependent

World:The Limited

Possibility

f

Transformation

ithinhe

CapitalistWorld-Economy.p.

86-94.The

Capitalist

World

conomy.

ImmanuelWallerstein,ditor.Cambridgeniversityress.

1991. TheConstruction

f

Peoplehood:

Racism,

Nationalism,

thnicy. p.

71-85.

Race,Nation,

Class:

Ambiguous

dentities. tienne

Balibarnd

Immanuel

Wallerstein,

ditors.Verso.

Walters,

Ronald.

987.

African-Americannfluencen U.S.

Foreign

olicy

oward

South

Africa.

Pp.

65-82.Ethnic

Groups

nd

US.

Foreign olicy.

Mohammed

.

Ahrari,

ditor.Greenwood ress.

.

2004. The

African

rowth nd

Opportunity

ct:

Changing

oreign olicy

riorities

oward frican

a Conservativeolitical ulture.

p.

288-306.

Diversity

nd

US.

Foreign

olicy:

Reader.Ernest

.

Wilson,

II,

di

Patterson, SF, 2006, Transnationalism

Documents

Transcript of Patterson, SF, 2006, Transnationalism