Is indigeneity an illusion used to exclude migrants?

Question

Accepted Answer

Indigeneity is Presented as a Myth Used to Exclude Migrants

Indigeneity is often portrayed as a foundational myth that nations construct to create a sense of inherent unity between the land, its people, and the flag. This narrative suggests a historical permanence, implying that the current population and national identity have always been intrinsically linked to the soil. However, this concept is presented as an illusion, a creation myth that countries employ to establish a singular, unchanging national identity, thereby facilitating the exclusion of contemporary migrants.
Nations Construct Creation Myths of Indigeneity

The idea of indigeneity is often perpetuated through national narratives that emphasize an unbroken historical connection between the land and its people. For instance, the United States emphasizes its "founding fathers" rather than acknowledging its origins as a nation of British immigrants. Similarly, Australia celebrates the Anzac spirit while downplaying the historical significance of convict transportation. Brazil, while promoting its cordiality, often marginalizes internal migrants like the Nordestinos who move from drought-stricken regions to urban centers. These examples illustrate a pattern where countries eventually designate earlier waves of migrants as "natives" while simultaneously closing their borders to newer arrivals. The oil palm, introduced to Malaysia in 1910, is now considered "Malaysian," while a human migrant arriving in 2010 is not.
Economic Migrants are Differentiated from Migrant Flora and Fauna

The acceptance of economic migrants, such as the oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) from West Africa and rubber trees (Hevea brasiliensis) from the Amazon, contrasts sharply with the rejection of human migrants. These plant species, successful "migrants" that have significantly contributed to Malaysia's economic growth, are celebrated for their GDP generation. In contrast, human migrants, who bring diverse cultures, accents, and religious practices, are seen as a threat to identity. This heightened visibility of human migrants, coupled with economic anxieties like stagnant wages and precarious housing, often leads to them being scapegoated for societal problems. Despite studies indicating that long-term migration can expand the overall economy, the fear of cultural dilution frequently outweighs economic considerations.
The Speed and Scale of Human Migration Contrast with Gradual Botanical Introduction

The introduction of the oil palm and rubber trees into Malaysia occurred over decades, involving scientific study, agricultural management, and gradual integration. This process allowed for a slow, almost imperceptible assimilation of these species into the economic landscape. Human migration today, however, often occurs at a much faster pace and larger scale, frequently depicted through raw, uncontextualized images of boats and caravans arriving at borders. This immediate and overwhelming visual representation of human arrivals, without the accompanying context of the underlying causes like war, drought, or poverty, can create a perception of invasion rather than a gradual influx. The objection to human migrants, therefore, is presented not as an economic necessity but as a moral failing, stemming from a selective application of acceptance.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Is indigeneity an illusion used to exclude migrants?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends