There has been a lot of discussion in the previous weeks about the way in which diasporas use social media as a means to maintaining a connection to their homeland. However, Panagakos and Horst ask a very interesting question: Do ICTs allow migrants to remain in contact with friends and family at long distances while sacrificing the potential to create proximate relationships? While I understand the logic behind this question, I believe that in a globalized world it is indeed possible to live a transnational life, where migrants can create proximate relationships and immerse themselves in communities within their host country while at the same time maintaining a connection with those from their homeland.
Over a decade ago, the New York Times published an article about the way in which immigrants are able to immerse themselves in two societies economically, culturally and politically. While this article discusses numerous immigrants and their transnational experiences, the experience that stood out most to me was that of Jesus Galvis, a man who immigrated from Columbia to the United States. Galvis was elected to the City Council of Hackensack, New Jersey and eventually ran for a senate seat in the Columbian Congress. This really exemplifies how an immigrant can partake in a community in their homeland while living in their host country.
While the story of Galvis may seem somewhat extreme, it is still common for anyone to live a transnational life. For example, going back to your family’s place of origin for the summer or returning to participate in a specific festival are other ways that people live transnational lives. I think social media has increased the possibility for migrants to engage with two communities in different parts of the world simultaneously, without necessarily sacrificing one for the other.
Over a decade ago, the New York Times published an article about the way in which immigrants are able to immerse themselves in two societies economically, culturally and politically. While this article discusses numerous immigrants and their transnational experiences, the experience that stood out most to me was that of Jesus Galvis, a man who immigrated from Columbia to the United States. Galvis was elected to the City Council of Hackensack, New Jersey and eventually ran for a senate seat in the Columbian Congress. This really exemplifies how an immigrant can partake in a community in their homeland while living in their host country.
While the story of Galvis may seem somewhat extreme, it is still common for anyone to live a transnational life. For example, going back to your family’s place of origin for the summer or returning to participate in a specific festival are other ways that people live transnational lives. I think social media has increased the possibility for migrants to engage with two communities in different parts of the world simultaneously, without necessarily sacrificing one for the other.
I agree with you Sonia, I believe that social media through the internet has created a new way of thinking about how we all connect. I think we can no longer use old systems of understanding of how people connect through media to understand the way we interact with the internet. There is simply nothing that can be compared to this in the past and thus we need new terms, new ideas, and new ways to look at a new systems.
ReplyDeleteAmanda keeps stealing my comments! I also think the Internet and social media have helped facilitate an environment in which immigrants and others alike can be transnational and become involved in different communities - both online and offline. I think the issue arises when there is no balance; I think it would be cause for concern if someone were spending all of their time online versus engaging with people in person. However, as long as there is a balance, I think using the Internet as a means to conduct ourselves transnationally is perfectly acceptable.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSonia, I have struggled with the topic discussed in your post for a long time :)
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that transnational life is possible, especially economically. And thanks to transnational media and the newly developed ICTs, people could live a life that is culturally transnational. But politically, I doubt...
I always think there might be some difficulties to live a transnational political life, but your example gives me some hope. However, ICT does not seem to have brought about any change to this...
In addition, I noticed that not everyone can lead a transnational life. Like Morley said, mobility is a form of cultural capital that only belongs to a few. This is another aspect to look at this problem.