Becoming Indian in America

Unless a new understanding of being Indian, which foregrounds global solidarity with the oppressed and prioritizes the most oppressed in the community, being an Indian in a multicultural environment will be tied to supporting systems of oppression.

A crowd of US-based supporters await the arrival of Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India for a community reception September 28, 2014 at Madison Square Garden in New York.

In the 1800s, the Indian population in the United States was weak, politically, economically and numerically. They migrated as labourers after the abolition of slavery and would mostly marry into the communities of other oppressed races, and settled mostly in the newly settled western areas.

Industrial Revolution and the Second World War 

Starting in the late 1800s and early 1900s, as an effort to benefit from industrial progress and scientific advancement, some Indians began to migrate to America in educated and middle-class capacities, using scholarships given by the British government or from Princely states. They were few in number, and those who did not return to India faced racial discrimination. They were not able to get citizenship. They were not able to marry people from different races, and they faced hostility and discrimination. Some of them eventually became involved in radical politics, fighting racism and class oppression in America and imperialism in India. The most famous organization was the Ghadar Party that facilitated revolutionary action in India. At the time, Asians from all countries were held in contempt by the wider American society. White Americans were suspicious of Asians, holding on the idea that they were unruly, lazy and barbarous.

During the Second World War, the Nazi party attempted to smear the American image by pointing to its racial diversity. American people were described as being interbred of dogs having lost any racial purity. American country propaganda responded by portraying its racial diversity as its strength and as representative of liberal values. After the war was over, this put American into a trap. On one side, it built an image of multiracial solidarity. This would be crucial in developing alliances in the post-war era when the United Kingdom and France, traditional American allies, would lose direct control in Asia and Africa. On the other side, anti-racist movements progressed and many leaders advocated for leftist reforms.

This led to a change in American immigration policies that allowed Asians to become citizens and eventually reformed the immigration policy. The immigration policy was reformed more as a way of managing the impression of America as a racist state than to accommodate progressive movements. Countries were given migration quotas, and a selection criterion developed to make sure that skilled labour with high levels of education migrated in. Many Asian success stories were highlighted to dismiss allegations of racism in American society.

The Model Minority

In this period, Japanese, Chinese and Indians were described as the “Model Minority,” who because of cultural values of hard work and respect for education, could overcome any limitations racism could impose. They were displayed as proof that allegations by African American, Native American and Latin American communities of racism were false excuses. Asians existed in small enough numbers, not to be a threat to the established racist order. Indians, because of their relatively advantaged position in the British Empire in colonial administration and trade, would be approved for immigration even from countries where they were a small minority.

From India, community and education networks gave Upper-caste Hindus and Christians an advantage in the immigration process. More so than other Asians, a large number of immigration visas to the US are based on family support. Even after reaching the US, these networks help newly arrived Indians get support in times of need, often being the basis of their survival in America. Unlike other “model minorities” like Jews, East Asians, and Southeast Asians, Indians often have to distinguish themselves from other minorities, (e.g.: Middle Eastern, Black, Hispanic, and less well-off South Asians). This creates a situation where they often have to double-down on the more traditional aspects of their identity. Even when they try to break those traditional systems, they become aspirant, attempting to secure more privileged positions.

Around the time immigration picked up for Indians, India also went through a process of social transformation. In the 1950s-1970s, investment in higher education increased and primarily benefited upper-castes. In the 1970s and 1980s, many of them began to migrate to the US and set up organizations there. The RSS benefited from this trend by working through the Viswa Hindu Parishad (VHP).

In the 1960s, members of the RSS formed front organizations that could survive its banning. The VHP was formed to be a religious face. It was founded in 1966 and maintained a set of laws to distance itself from politics. Over the years, the VHP organized Hindu religious leaders and moved on to organize them abroad as well. They set up its first American office in 1970.

VHP organized Hindus abroad, using networks run through universities and temples. Even language and ethnic groups, which organize on caste networks, create a dual identity for Indians as needing to show respect for conservative aspects of their parent nation. Fissures in this come from identities that do not fit into the traditional landscape of Indian culture, such as people from marginalized castes, people whose families remember separatist struggles, people from gender and sexual minorities.

 

The VHP developed networks for Indians to send money to their organizations in the form of remittances. Today money sent from the US is equivalent to nearly 0.8% of the Indian GDP, and money sent from abroad overall, is 4% of the Indian GDP. This is up from 0.5% in 1991. This helps make the RSS the NGO with the highest amount of foreign funding.

Not all of this funding is through direct Hindutva propaganda. As documented by the Campaign to Stop the Funding of Hate, there are front organizations, such as the innocent-sounding names like Indian Development Relief Fund, who funnel money towards Sangh activities. However, a high amount of support for those activities depends upon the support they have garnered from the Indian community.

Shifts in Indian Identity

The Indian identity is based on the colonial image of Indian civilization. The idea of being Indian abroad does not compel Indians abroad to challenge structures of oppression, as it did in the early twentieth century. With the changes in immigration policies, the Indian immigration experience must be placed in a privileged position within white supremacy, where oppression within and outside of the community persists.

Despite being a former colony, being Indian only in rare circumstances compels Indians abroad to show solidarity with other struggles against oppression, in the way Latin American, African, or even Muslim identities do. Unless a new understanding of being Indian, which foregrounds global solidarity with the oppressed and prioritizes the most oppressed in the community, being an Indian in a multicultural environment will be tied to supporting systems of oppression. Organizations that placate the more conservative impulses will continue to hold sway.

Donate

Independent journalism can’t be independent without your support, contribute by clicking below.

March 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here