A lot has been said about migrants on Sulekha in the last few months in the backdrop of what Raj Thackeray is doing and saying. My views regarding Raj Thackeray are quite well known and I do not wish to expound on them further (My views about Amar Singh and Laloo and company are the same and I do not wish to defend their indefensible diatribe). I only wish to talk about migrants and the phenomenon of migration in a broader sense.
In more ways than one, this post is an outcome of what Socrates wrote recently about migrants and what Erad left at my doorstep in profusion sometime back before I blocked him from my site because neither did I like the tone and tenor or his comments nor the contents.
If one reads history even cursorily, a few points come to mind loud and clear. Wherever there is progress, economic and scientific and artistic, people from diverse areas flock almost as if on a cue. These areas can be different countries or different states within the same country. Why does this happen? I do not need to even explain the reasons. People go wherever they find better use for their skills and better prospects of economic upliftment. No place which makes progress can avoid this rush. If you read history, not a single place in all the millennia of known human history has avoided this fate. In the exacavations of places associated with the so called Sindhu Valley civilization you find distinct and material evidence of influence of other civilizations much less developed than it itself was or equally well developed. Down south, with the Cholas and the Pandyas, you find material evidence of Romans having come there. Persia, Macedonia were two different nations and Athen and Sparta were city states. And yet, history is witness that all these people intermingled quite intimately although the states were inimical to each other. Syrian Christians arrived at the Indian shores (Kerala) almost at the date the Christian history begins. When renaissance happened in Florence, and to a lesser extent in Venice, Padua, Rome and virtually the entire Italy, the inhabitants and the contributors were not just Italians. Even otherwise there was no concept of Italy then. Florence and adjoining areas were under the great Medici. It was by all means a different nation. Leonardo did not belong to Florence. Michelangelo did not belong to Florence. Titian, the great painter, did not belong to Florence. Yet these all and countless much less accomplished artisans and poets and laborers found their living here. And in more ways than one, renaissance in Florence could not have been what it became without the migrants. No great civilization has become great without this mixing up of diverse people and through them of diverse ideas, notions, customs and thought patterns.
Come to the modern day. The US is still the economic engine of the world, a space that it has not vacated for almost a century now. It will take some time before China usurps that place; but even that is uncertain and in the womb of the future which is at best always uncertain. What makes the US economy tick? What makes the US retain its supremacy in science and discoveries and inventions as measured by the number of Nobel prizes going to the inhabitants of that great Nation? What makes US win so many Nobel prizes in literature? What makes it produce so many artists? What makes it produce so many theories which then guide thought all over the world? It is not the natives of that Nation that fuel this humongous output. It is the migrants. The Nobel that Hargobind Khorana won went to US and not to India. Same can be said for S. Chandrashekhar. I am recounting typically Indian examples to drive the point home. But when you look at the tally of Nobel prizes, you find that a very high percentage is won for the US by people who migrated to that country because of what it provided to them, what it promised. Martina Navratilova, the Tennis champion is not originally a US national. Ivan Lendl is not a US national born and brought up there. Einstein was a German by origin and immigrated to the US. For that matter, the current management guru, C. K. Prahlad has made it his home. What about Meghnad Desai? Ashish Nandy is back in India today. But ask him how many years of complete creativity he spent in the US and how many as Harvard Professor? Why, even Carl Lewis, the legendary 100 meters sprinter can trace his origin back to some obscure land in Africa. And if you think that high achievers are alright, let me mention that most of these people did not go to US as high achievers. They migrated first and then achieved. And if you do not feel satisfied with this, just find out how many cabbies, waiters, restaurant owners, small business people, factory workers in US are Indians. You will be surprised by the figure. And since this is a question of migration, just find out how many people in the most ordinary walks of life in US are actually migrants from different nations around the world. Also, while you are doing this exercise, find out how many of these migrants are from nation as poor as we used to be for the past many decades. Again you will be surprised at the figure.
There are two ways that US can adapt as far as the immigrants are concerned. One way is to continue on the same path that it has so far adapted. The other is to severely curtail immigration and give preference to its so called natives. The former is the path that will allow the US to remain at the top, to remain the greatest nation on earth. Let me tell you why I say this.
In his seminal work “A Study of History”, Arnold Toynbee describes the process of rise and fall of civilizations. According to him a civilization rises around a few people who have magic. By magic, the meaning is creative magic. Creative magic not only is academic but also fuels economic growth. The majority obeys the magical minority for obvious reasons and works toward the fulfillment of the same goals. Gradually a great civilization is created around this. As the civilization rises, the magical minority starts losing the magic – you cannot be creative all the time or all your generations cannot be similarly creative. So this minority, used to the living aristocratically, now becomes the dominant minority. The majority still obeys but willy nilly, not from its heart. Then starts the revolt because the obedience is not from the heart. And gradually the civilization descends and plummets.
US is one civilization that has allowed the creative minority to go on remaining creative. It sucks in creative people from all other nations and so creativity within that nation remains ever alive. With creative people come other people too who are not creative. But that is alright because the creative minority is the only thing needed to keep the economic and academic engines chugging. Others can simply contribute in their small way and enjoy the fruits of national prosperity.
The day the US starts becoming strict and discouraging immigration actively, the day the US starts talking of discriminating, expelling the immigrants, the fate of that nation will be sealed and it will come crumbling down faster than it was created.
Look at Mumbai. There are too many parallels. It is a creative city. Its creativity is not synonymous with the creativity of the so called natives (I say so called because this island was never ruled by Marathas. The majority is still not Marathi. The only people who have any claim of nativity here are the Kolis). The so called natives are one small part of all those who create. The creativity of Mumbai is replenished by fresh talent that flocks to it, that is sucked in by the vitality of the city.
If you allow people like Raj Thackeray to ensnare your minds into spewing venom against the so called immigrants and expelling them from the city, you will be writing a script for the demise of this great city. And if Marathis are genuinely proud of this creative city, they should do everything to protect it and not make it just another city which has people but does not have creativity.
As for migrants, they will always be there if the city is making great progress. You want to remove the problem of migrants, well, stop progressing. You won’t then have to drive them away. They will leave, all by themselves, in droves. Close
Avinashjee,
Nice article and I find myself agreeing to most of what you have written and quoted.
In the past, climate and geography have also played a part. The rivers and other
water bodies have also played a major role in attracting people. Today, many flock
to Bangalore because the climate is good (cool ten months of the year prompting
Jawahar Lal Nehru to comment that B'lore is an airconditioned city) in addition
to availability of high paying IT jobs.
As for Raj Thackray, he is playing a political game. I think he too realises that the
economic engine of Mumbai is run by mostly non-Marathis.
Nice article...keep it coming.
Subu
Reply | | Report Abuse
Dear Avinashjee,
Well researched and said.the comparison between American migrants who worked as waiters and rose to the top and the Mumbai migrants, is superb.
Do u know Avi, when we migrated from Pakistan, we landed in Mumbai in Ulhasnagar,with nothing.And we worked hard and made something in Mumbai.so basiocally my family too is a migrant since independence.
Wonderfully explained.Regards.kamal
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hi Srinath,
Thanks for such a detailed comment. It is enriching for the readers as a wonderful example of the case I made.
Thank you for this and regards
Avinash
Reply | | Report Abuse
Dear Avinashjee,
certainaly i agree wth u---regards n luv,
kalpita
Reply | | Report Abuse
dear srinath sir please look my blog.
this is my good blog and good money earning plan
my no. 09926633501 for amit suman
www.amitmoneyzone.blogspot.com
Reply | | Report Abuse
Dear Avinashjee,
Sorry for taking so long to read and comment on your blog, I was not well.
Let me add my two bits. I come from Calicut, a city which was once the homing zone for people from all over the world, a long, long time ago. Under the Zamorin Kings, it reached a spectacuar level of fame and prosperity. Gujaratis, Sindhis, Cutchi Memons, Marwaris, Parsis..name them, we had them..and still do. As for foreigners, the Jews, Arabs, Africans and Chinese were here from the beginning. It was the advent of the Portugese that turned fortunes around and led to the kingdom being levelled to a mere vassal of the British Empire.
All religions flourished in Calicut in its heyday. Even today, you find influences of all peoples in everything around town. There is a Dutch settlement area, a French settlement area and also an English one.
The point I am trying to drive in is that if the Zamorin Kings had decided to keep out all external influences, this place would have been nothing. It goes for them too - they were not natives of Calicut, but were migrants from the neighbouring district!
It goes for me too..though I was born and brought up here, my origins are from a place which was inimical to the Zamorin State. If immigration was not permitted, I wonder where on Earth I would have been!
I agree with you - the essence of a civilisation is the extent to which it is able to take external ingredients, add them to its bubbling cauldron and produce an inspiring concoction. The moment it starts excluding all outside spices, the taste goes bland.
I hope I made some sense..I am still not out of my fever, I guess!
Regards,
Girish
Reply | | Report Abuse
Dear avinash jhi,
Wonderful logical economic arguemen ....let me offer a sociological counterpoint....
I some time wonder what i am
a migrant
a native
I am a native of India and a migrant in karnataka. i am not owned up s a naytive in tamilnad where they call us aryans....
US is an assortment of migrants
hispanics, chinese,jews,chinese, indians, italians, spanish , mexicans and .......
they have less identity and territorial integrity problems as a national identity....
but remeber how the migrants decimated th elocal red indians , the natives.
i need an identity which makes me a native...
if any one wants to become equal to a native they need to qaulify for it.
in US unless you are a fourth(may be second . am not sure but theer is a qualification criteria) generation migrant you cant stand for state elections
But we are a wonder .....we have accepted an italian as an indian without any qualifications.
in indian if you have power you can buy nativity
you can also get nativity certificate by proper oayament to proper authorities..
let us Define a native and a migrant for our country...
have ways by which a migrant becomes a native..
otherwise what is the meaning of territorial integrity which is a biological need....
in Usd i can clearly experience the distinction and differetiation between a native and a migrant
couched in diplomatic terms nevertheless very visible..
let us accept this differrentiation as a reality rather than fight it.
Reply | | Report Abuse
Hi Avinashjee
Was a bit tied up but had made a mental deadline of reverting on your post today and I am glad I did
Wonderfully articulated and I just couldnt agree more with you
Here's to more such thought provoking and insightful contributions from you
Cheers
Vinay
Reply | | Report Abuse
Avinashji,
You have said it well...and as far as the Indic civilization goes we have been able to survive because of diversity and assimilation and not exclusion.
Ashis Nandy spent most of his time in India but was a visiting professor at various points in his career and it is a fact that his work is more recognised and he is more revered in the West.
A good analysis..I have been out of circuit for a long time but hope to be more regular..so will not miss out
reffy
reffy
Reply | | Report Abuse
The cosmopolitan spirit of Bombay makes it special ..Changing its name to Mumbai was not in a good taste
I am aware of the pressure and also the menace of migration but then its a different issue altogether
We truly lack the spirit of taking India as one country and focus on petty self interests rather than considering on issues of National importance
Special status given to people of Jammu and Kashmir is an insult to people of other states
.Article 370 has now shown it poisonous effects....It is again an insult when people of Tamilnadu protest when Hindi is made a compulsory language
Unfortunately migration for better oppurtunities is now seen as encroachement because there is nothing common in people of Tamilnadu and people of Maharashtra , no common language ,no common culture and even if they happen to follow the same religion Hinduism , there is so much of divison again
I may have gone off track but i sincerely feel that unless we take the country as a whole , people like Raj Thackrey and his tribe will flourish
Reply | | Report Abuse
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next 7»
Displaying 1 - 10 of 89 Blog Comments