“West Indian Migration in New York: An Overview” – Foner

In her introduction, Nancy Foner discusses the reasons for as well as the phenomenon associated with West Indian migration to the United States, specifically New York City. Most people who emigrate from the Caribbean do so due to poor economic conditions, including unemployment and scarce resources. Most of these migrants come to New York City, contributing to a high proportion of West Indians in the city. Many come with the help of migrant networks and maintain many transnational ties while living here. These ties may manifest themselves with the exchange of letters or goods between the immigrants and relatives in the home country as well as through formal associations. Technology (e.g. cheap telephone, email, jet planes) facilitates these ties. Transnational ties even play a role in the politics of the home country and can extend beyond those ties between the United States and Caribbean.

West Indians are usually lumped together with African Americans because of skin color. As a result, they face some prejudice and discrimination and are subject to racial stereotyping. This puts barriers and constraints in the way of West Indians, especially when it comes down to where they live. West Indians are often segregated from whites as are African-Americans and live in communities where they can face minimal racism. There is also a process of racial turnover that occurs.

(1) Black families attempt to branch out from the communities they live in and move into white communities.

(2) As a result of prejudice, white families begin to move out and no new whites move in.

(3) Thus, communities become increasingly black, and the pattern of segregation is reinforced.

In these communities, West Indians are forced to live in areas with inferior schools and higher crime rates. This is a wake-up call for West Indians because they come from societies where being black is not a sign of inferiority. Thus, they have a different notion of race and are not overly concerned with it either. However, they have a strong ethnic identity and try to separate themselves from African Americans.

There is the question of what second-generation West Indians will identify as. They could adopt an ethnic identity, an immigrant identity, or an American identity (as African American). However, most identify as both West Indian and American.

Foner ends with numerous suggestions for future research. These topics include exploring the experiences of new immigrant cohorts, the role that religion plays for these migrants, and the experiences of East Indians from the Caribbean (among other topics).

I have known for a while that migrants exchange letters and other goods with family and friends in their home countries. However, I was surprised by how far some people took this (and how committed they were):

“One barrel sent by a Trinidadian domestic worker in the 1980s contained almost eight hundred dollars worth of goods, including three gallons of cooking oil, forty pounds of rice, twenty pounds of detergent, flour, tea, cocoa, toothpaste, and other items” (7).

Another point I want to touch on is identity awareness by “outsiders.” How do people (such as whites) see West Indians? Are they seen as belonging to the same group as African Americans? Or are they seen as an entirely different group? The author mentions that immigration from the West Indies is “chipping away at notions of a monolithic blackness.” Some West Indians emphasize their ethnic heritage to separate themselves from African Americans. But are they becoming more “visible” in light of this? This would make a nice point of study, similar to the ideas that Foner lays out at the end of the article.

Something I saw that was repeated throughout the article was the concept that context is important. One cannot simply compare two events, phenomenon, or groups without considering the context surrounding them (e.g. location, time period, and existing attitudes). For example, West Indians living here in New York City are distinct from those living in, say, Chicago. Although they may share the same roots, they live in completely different places and may have very distinct experiences. Thus, I can understand why Foner proposes such a study in her conclusion.

Overall, I was pleased with this article. It offered a “refresher” in West Indian migration patterns, the existence of transnational ties, and the race and ethnicity issues that West Indians face.

“New York as a Locality in a Global Family Network” – Olwig

In this chapter, Karen Fog Olwig discusses what New York City means to migrants from the Caribbean. It is a commonly-held stereotype of migration that a poor, neglected group of people migrate to a new country to achieve the American dream. These migrants are incorporated into American society, thus shedding their old identity and making them true Americans. However, this notion does not tell the whole story. There are two opposing theories:

(1) A segmented assimilation occurs, where migrants are incorporated into separate subcultures rather than mainstream American society.

(2) Migration occurs between places and crosscuts several countries. There exists a two-way flow of people, goods, money, and ideas. This represents incorporation into a transnational system.

New York is seen as migrants’ first encounter with American society as well as a point of transition. In a study of a single Jamaican family, members saw New York firstly as a destination to achieve their dreams (or, as the article puts it, “a major center of attraction”). They later saw it as a family center, where the whole family literally lived within walking distance of each other. As the family left New York, they saw it as a formative period in their lives. However, it was a place that was to be left behind because of family problems and because it deteriorated right before their eyes (in terms of racial acceptance and solidarity as well as the influx of low-class West Indian migrants).

I must start off by saying that I fully disagree with the incorporation notion (that is, the notion that states that migration is more of a one-way phenomenon with migrants cutting ties with their home countries and incorporating themselves fully into American society). If it were not for the maintenance of transnational ties, we would not see stores selling Caribbean food or parades celebrating West Indian culture. Indeed, migrants maintain, strengthen, and even celebrate ties to their home countries, while simultaneously incorporating (to a degree) into American society.

As was seen with the Jamaican family, New York City is not the place to end all migration. Instead, it is seen simply as a place, a transition into American living. The members of the Jamaican family eventually left New York and had no regrets in doing so. Some even went back to Jamaica.

I must agree with the author when she says that the incorporation notion is “closely tied to the cultural and societal interests of the migrant destination” (145). Incorporation would lead to a degree of nationalist/patriotic feeling directed toward the United States. This is understandably in the interests of the migrant destination itself (in this case, the United States). More patriotism leads to more loyalty to the country as well as a heightened identification with American values. However, this seems impossible (for the vast majority of migrants) due to various reasons (one of the biggest being racism and discrimination).

I particularly enjoyed the analysis of the Jamaican family. Instead of reciting an impersonal list of facts and statistics, the interviews gave the author’s ideas and the information more of a personal touch. It made the stories more relatable and (for me) allowed the author to get her point across more effectively.

“Trust Networks in Transnational Migration” – Tilly

This article discusses the role that trust networks play in transnational ties, especially in the sending and receiving of remittances. The author defines trust as an attitude or relationship that “consists of placing valued outcomes at risk to others’ malfeasance, mistakes, or failures” (7). Trust networks have a number of characteristics in common:

(1) There are a number of people who are connected via similar ties.

(2) The tie itself gives a person claims on the attention or aid of another.

(3) Members of the network are collectively carrying out long-term enterprises.

These transnational networks play a huge role in the lives of migrants. Members may seek out information and advice from these networks and/or rely on members to fulfill certain responsibilities.

According to the article, remittances made up about 1.6% of Latin America and the Caribbean’s gross domestic product. Remittances from hometown associations play a role in altering the organization of power in the hometown itself, as was seen in the case of Ticuani. Remittances also maintained the trust networks that were present and reinforced the remitter’s power and control over the money. These also upheld the remitter’s obligations, as those who did not follow through on these obligations were often criticized and shunned.

However, the author mentions that the presence of trust networks may limit the opportunities of migrants. Members may find themselves confined in niches that are based in these trust networks. Although these networks provide a sense of security and solidarity, they may limit the opportunities and overall futures of migrants.

The author starts off with a statement that was similar to one made in the last article (by Olwig):

“I do mean, however, to challenge popular images of immigrants as one-way travelers, desperate for work or welfare in a richer country, who cut home ties as soon as possible in order to take advantage of their own country” (4).

Here, as in the last article, the author is criticizing the incorporation notion of migration. This article, in particular, illustrates how migrants maintain connections to their home countries through the sending and receiving of remittances. I believe that the author actually did a good job in opposing the notion of incorporation and emphasizing the transnational ties that are actually present.

Although I like the author’s definition of trust, I would like to provide my own definition in order to supplement the one given in the article. To me, trust is an attitude toward a relationship where a party relies on another to fulfill their responsibilities and ensure that the relationship progresses smoothly. I believe that the emphasis should not be placed on the inherent risk in such activities but rather on the feeling of reliance that is present between both parties. In the case of remittances, one party relies on another to send a remittance (semi-)regularly in whatever way, shape, or form possible. By sending these remittances, the relationship between both parties is maintained and progresses smoothly, and the trust between the two parties is also maintained and may even grow.