In light of the overwhelming and ever-increasing anti-immigrant
nonsense that has been inundating newsfeeds, political chatter, and the like, I
thought I’d jump in with something that has been bothering me for a while now –
this weird distinction between being an immigrant or an expat.
Before I get into my rant, perhaps a few definitions:
- Immigrant: “a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country.” (Merriam-Webster…I think)
- Expatriate: “(often shortened to expat) is a person temporarily or permanently residing in a country other than that of their citizenship.” (Wikipedia)
Now let’s, just for a second stop and give those
definitions a moment of consideration. Both describe folks that opt to live in
another country. There is no mention of circumstance or motive. The only
distinction between the two, is that expat
can also mean a temporary move. But with that being said, let’s move this
along…
Outside of these definitions, there is an image we
tend to think of when either of these words are thrown out there. One is
perceptively more positive than the other. This is because the term expat generally refers to a Westerner
moving elsewhere (including, perhaps, another Western country). They also tend
to be thought of as white, and arguably middle-aged men… By social definition,
I, your favourite Orange Canadian, would be considered an expat.
Immigrant, on the other hand, comes with a more…
negative, shall we say, connotation. Nowadays, especially, this term is
associated with Middle Eastern folk, and thanks to the world’s favourite
President of the United States, Donald Trump, Muslim/terrorist/insert your
choice word here. There’s also a perception of poverty, lacking education, and a
number of other rationale for wanting to come to whatever country they’ve moved
to.
To break this down more simply – an expat is someone
with expertise bestowing greatness on their newfound home, while an immigrant
is a burden to society and not necessarily worthy of the country they now call
home*.
But here’s the thing that I can’t quite seem to wrap
my head around – why is there such a distinction? Why is one direction viewed
as better, more dignified than the other?
I’ll be honest – I don’t consider myself an expat.
I’ve very much in the process of immigrating to Uganda at least for the
short-long term. As far as the long-long term, who knows, but it will most
likely not involve an extended residence in my home country, at least not in
the distant foreseeable future. In fact, I try to distance myself as much as
possible from these so-called expats, because the vast majority of those I’ve
encountered that identify as such fill that typical expat lifestyle/attitude.
And, really, it’s pretty unattractive.
As I become older and try, more consciously, to better
understand the world I live in, I seem to struggle with simple concepts that
others seem to so easily pass off as acceptable. But this is one that I just
can’t move away from. When I think about the immigrants in Western countries that I have met, there have been
numerous folks that are far more highly educated – and specialized in their
training – than I could ever hope to be. But these achievements are not as
readily accepted, because we’ve been trained to focus on the physical, rather
than the things that actual have merit.
Maybe I’m just over tired. Maybe I’m just sweaty and
needing to rant. But, for the life of me, I can’t figure this one out. If
expats are perceived as giving a certain level of expertise, knowledge or other
notion to the area they reside – be it temporary or permanent in length – then
what of those who have had profound and lasting impacts upon their immigration?
-the Orange Canadian
*Not my beliefs, just summing up the stereotypes I’ve
heard over and over concerning these definitions.
No comments:
Post a Comment