Diaspora: A scattering of 'human' seeds

The word 'diaspora' is derived from the Greek diaspeirein, which suggests the scattering of seeds. However, there is ongoing debate about what 'dispora' actually denotes. Dispora is commonly defined as human dispersals abroad... a human seed scattering.

Australia is the pre-eminent diaspaoric community with 40% of its population born outside Australia, or at least on parent born outside Australia. In 1947 the Australian population was 7.6 million of which only 9.8% were overseas-born. Of these, 90% were from Great Britain or Ireland. This large percentage is representative of the White Australia policy of this time. According to the 1991 Census, 24% of Australia's population were immigrants and 40% were born overseas or had one parent born overseas. This large increase reflects the abolition of the White Australia policy and the creation of a much wider immigration policy.

My adoptive parents immigrated from Northern Ireland in the 1950s (although my genetic lineage is 7th generation Australian). However, due to socialisation and indoctrination processes I still retain strong memories and images of Irish culture, Irish songs, Irish food, Irish religion (staunchly protestant), Irish sayings, Irish jokes, Irish ancestry, friendships with predominantly Irish people (although the occasional Scot or Brit was OK). As a child I had a very broad Irish accent and I remember when I first attended primary school, the other children had trouble understanding me. As far as anyone was concerned I was an Irish child. Even today, I still retain a strong Irish cultural identity and regard myself, at least partially, as the product of Irish decent. My early socialisation certainly makes for an interesting reflection on childhood socialisation and biological determinism.

As an 'Irish' child growing up in the 60's I recall a plethora of British shows which, I am sure, helped new immigrants feel 'at home' (We certainly watched all of them!) Today, however, technology has made communication easy and available to maintain links to homelands. There is television (particuarly the SBS which was created for immigrants and dedicated to promoting multiculturalism), movies, radio, video, email, online usenets, online religion, YouTube, blogs etc. The ability to remain culturally connected to the homeland is easier than ever.

We human beings are very tribal in nature. We feel comfortable in like minded groups. Perhaps this is why diasporic communities retain strong links with the cultural roots rather than trying to adopt and embrace the culture of their new country. Loneliness and isolation are no longer a problem when moving away from your homeland. We maintain ties via new technologies that enable members of disasporas to engage in their cultural heritage, albeit a hyperreal cyberspace version.

There are concerns that globalisation and disasporic dispersion throughout the world will bring about homogenisation and effectively dilute culture. This idea is discussed by Larry Strelitz in Where the Global Meets the Local: Media Studies and the Myth of Cultural Homogenization. The views of Douglas Kellner, known as 'media.cultural imperialism thesis' are discussed by Strelitz and and are defined as a "global culture, with the hallmarks of homogenisation and convergence is obliterating local cultures, creating in its wake the mirrors of American consumer society." Strelitz argues that globalisation has had a positive effect on other cultures and points to the fact that most forms of culture in the world today are the result of historic cultural encounters and are therefore hybrid cultures.

So, is globalisation good or bad? In our fast changing world this complex question is far too simplistic. However, I'm sure there will be much debate and research done in this interesting area of study.