This week’s reading introduced us to Salvadoran migration to the US, where the vast majority of Salvadorans outside El Salvador reside. The article places geography (social and physical) as an important lens on how to view transnational migration since it places an importance not only on El Salvador and the US, but also the urban centres where many migrants come from, which is also of importance.
Although I think a geographic perspective is vital to understanding migration, I wonder if the article helped with that. I’m trying to convince myself that the word or concept of the transnational, for this article was forced in order to explain how Salvadoran migration could also be regarded within this vein or concept. And although, I don’t disagree that it could be seen through a transnational lens, what the article wrote about was more a static, or traditional (for lack of a better word) form of migration. This form of migration is not difficult to understand given the precarious legal status (temporary protective status or undocumented) that many Salvadorans find themselves in. Both the above-mentioned statuses place a geographic wall in front of many since it makes it virtually impossible to travel back and forth between the US and EL Salvador through channels that will not make them break any laws (e.g. returning via the Mexico-US border), thereby making it almost impossible to gain permanent residency.
What I found interesting (even if the text is about 10 years old) is the important insight on technology. Yes, technology allows many of us to go beyond border, as well as flying faster and cheaper to other countries and continents. Technology, however does not reach everyone, and at the same time, it helps prevent more and more people from moving since they may not have the right tech in their passport for instance (i.e. biometric passports).
The example of remittances brought, in my mind at least, how the transnational in this case exists, yet does not at the same time. On one hand, the transnational aspect of remittances can be thought in how money is wired in a transnational way to families and friends in El Salvador (in this specific case). On the other hand, this same transnationalism, cannot be thought of when in comes to population movement (as it would be in the EU for example) since people (especially those considered low or no skilled labour) are actively prevented from entering a country, or if inside, the loom of constant removal is always present.
Die
Am 30. November 2016 um 21:50 Uhr
I can’t say I was a fan of this text to be honest, I found the writing clunky and the analysis pretty superficial. I was also surprised to read that it came as news to three white academics (possibly four, I couldn’t find a picture of Miyares) that they might not be met with open arms and exuberant enthusiasm. A few other things struck me as a little strange e.g. “The research team’s feeling that uncertain legal status permeated every nook and cranny of daily life was confirmed by Salvadorans” Really? You figured out that living in a state of constant precarity wasn’t that agreeable? That’s some fine work detectives. It’s just as well they offered gift certificates to the participants (and indeed mentioned it in the write-up.)
A couple of aspects that did strike me as noteworthy were A) The logic behind the US policy of accepting immigrants from war-torn countries. Was this merely a result of public pressure? Was it PR? Was there an awareness of which type of work would be available to such individuals with this status and the effect this would have on them/ the communities to which they move/the ‘receiving’ country on a macro level? B) What were the factors affecting the guilt felt by those who had ‘made it’? Was it as simple as leaving people behind? C) The small measure of social mobility afforded those still in San Salvador via the remittences received struck me as interesting as well. A final interesting point in the text was the lack of understanding on the part of some in the original community regarding the difficulty in frequent movement between the two migratory poles.
The rest of the text I found to be fairly superficial description of the (very real) woes of Salvadoran immigrants without much useful analysis. The idea of “permanent temporariness as exerting a discipling power over bodies, families, and social fields, which helps promote the interests of the state and capital” I found quite discursive and poorly elaborated.
Am 3. December 2016 um 19:03 Uhr
In their paper, Bailey et al. attempted to contribute to the theoretical debate on migration from a balanced perspective that takes into consideration the structural constrains faced by migrant individuals and communities, without neglecting the agency factor. In this sense, the authors’ analytical endeavor was quite ambitious, to the point of privileging the theoretical discussion over the extensive interpretation of their findings on the field, at least at some passages of the narrative. I´m neither an expert on migrant studies, not have a broad knowledge on theoretical and methodological insights produced within that disciplinary field, yet, I enjoyed this reading due to the authors’ attempt to produce new and interesting theoretical insights that might be useful for future research initiatives, though it wasn´t fully harnessed in this particular attempt.
Howbeit, I´m also troubled by the propensity of the authors to force some of their interpretations of the every-day-life experiences of Salvadoran migrants on the basis of their comprehensive theoretical apparatus. An example of the latter can be found on page 137, where the notion of strategic visibility is employed when referring to the way in which “Gloria” boasted about her daughter’s cleverness, which was recognized by the child´s teacher. From my perspective, any parent, in disregard of his/her social background or the particular circumstances they might be going through, tends to feel proud when witnessing what they consider to be their children´s exhibition of talent that would also result in public recognition; to me, the latter has little to do with a particular strategy employed by the adults to draw attention upon their legal status or to counteract their isolationist social situation vis-à-vis the community core.
Am 4. December 2016 um 17:31 Uhr
I must agree with the first comment, I did not really like the article. For me, it was too superficial and I was not sure what news the authors want to tell. Apart from that, it was an interesting introduction and overview in the field of Salvadoran migration which I did not know about it – primarily you hear or read about Mexican Migration to the US.
For me the most interesting was that the remittances make so much up of the countrys GDP and I wonder what happens if Trump goes ahead with his threats to throw millions of immigrants out of the US. Again I found it really hard to read about the single fortunes and I would have liked to read more of the personal statements.
Am 12. December 2016 um 12:49 Uhr
After a long and dense “introduction”, the authors finally enter their subject but, in my opinion, do not really focus on the “transnational” aspect of the Salvadoran migration. Indeed the examples mentioned at the end of the text mostly occurred within the US state.
The need to focus on TPS migrants to finally reach the idea of “permanent temporariness” was too obvious and I started to ask myself if the interviews were not realised and / or selected to biased the demonstration in this particular direction…
Apart from those considerations I think it is indeed worthy to mention the importance of technology in the process of migration. Technology is linked to the idea of “space-time” relations as Harvey explained and it implies a new way of selecting people “skilled” to migrate. The idea of adaptation for incorporation is global and local : technology but also the “strategic in/visibilty” are examples of how Salvadoran migrants adapt themselves to enter the US society.
Am 17. January 2017 um 12:32 Uhr
Personally I didn’t know that the settlement of Salvadorans in the US was quite recent (most of them arrived in the last 20 years) and I thought it was quite similar to the Mexican one.
In all in one, the article makes me consider especially the frustrating situation immigrants have to face and to accept once they arrived in an another country, in the text is well explained when they talk about instability/insecurity, discrimination, high turnover, marginalization, racism of their transnational daily life (133).
Moreover, I also found very interesting the idea of technology and its role in the local-global-interplay of people, although a really big part of the society is not included in it and remains outside of the benefits that progress communication and transportation technology can offer nowadays.