|
Post by Caslav Klonimirovic on Apr 20, 2009 2:09:33 GMT -5
I can see how people can get pissed off with the attitude of the diaspora in general but Insomniac has brought up a good point as well. Especially in Montenegro I found that I knew way way more about the history & even recent politics of Montenegro compared to the people that actually live there. I was actually quite shocked at the ignorance and apathy. In Serbia it was different. People knew a lot more... Who their local polititians were and who their neighbour votes for... maybe it was just because elections were on. As for the first versus second generation thing I think there are some obvious differences between each.
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 3:12:07 GMT -5
Some comments here are just judgements. I know plenty of first gen and even second gen like me that are living in the Balkans and gave it a go and it's working for them. So you can't judge that they know less or more than anyone else. We all have ties to the place no matter how big or small it is.
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Apr 20, 2009 7:24:49 GMT -5
Experience is knowledge. But sometimes, It happens when a foreigner knows more about the country than a local. Experience may be knowledge but it doesn't change the negative impression of those people about diaspora. Because in the end, you will still come-off like an arrogant Westerner who thinks they know their situation better than they do. You might actually know more but you aren't living their life.
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 11:23:46 GMT -5
I guess people failed to read my thread topic. It was not meant to be like the other one. My point was more pointing to the people here who are first gen dijaspora constantly making fun of second gen dijaspora. Not people back hom making fun of us.
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Apr 20, 2009 11:33:37 GMT -5
We get the topic - think the answer is pretty obvious.
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Apr 20, 2009 11:35:27 GMT -5
Isnt 1st generation someone who was born in that country but their parents are born overseas and 2nd generation someone whos parents were born in that country but their grandparents were born overseas?
Like for example Fazla/Dario are not first generation Italians/Swedish but their kids will be (if they end up being born in Italy/Sweden)
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 11:41:10 GMT -5
^^^joj which country you talking about lol? The way I see it I am not first gen, I am second gen even though my parents and grandparents were born overseas...i.e it technically makes them first gen Australian residents and citizens (which they are).
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Apr 20, 2009 11:43:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Apr 20, 2009 11:45:26 GMT -5
^^^joj which country you talking about lol? The way I see it I am not first gen, I am second gen even though my parents and grandparents were born overseas...i.e it technically makes them first gen Australian residents and citizens (which they are). The way you see it is incorrect. Sorry darling.
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 11:48:40 GMT -5
I used to think I was first gen, but how can I be when there were others here before me, even if they were not born here... get it??? :-)
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Apr 20, 2009 11:50:31 GMT -5
Yes but you're still incorrect. As per usual Meanings for words dont revolve around you like you think everything does
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 11:53:03 GMT -5
There are too many definitions. I never said I was right or wrong, but I tend to understand the fact that I would be second gen and so would you. Makes more sense.
|
|
paja
Membrum
Posts: 193
|
Post by paja on Apr 20, 2009 11:54:16 GMT -5
You can still be called a First-Generation Immigrant which is a person who is living in a country other than the country they were born in.
Or 1.5 generation which refers to people who immigrated to a new country before or during their early teens.
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 11:56:47 GMT -5
^^^There you go :-)
|
|
|
Post by Ja Ona i Pivo on Apr 20, 2009 12:23:56 GMT -5
lol 1.5 gen..
|
|
|
Post by SKORIC on Apr 20, 2009 12:41:15 GMT -5
lol never heard of "1.5" generation There are too many definitions. I never said I was right or wrong, but I tend to understand the fact that I would be second gen and so would you. Makes more sense. Why would i? I came to Aust when i was a kid
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Apr 20, 2009 13:05:55 GMT -5
Cula sam za 1.5 gen...i...pa isto sam smijala :-) It exists :-)
|
|
|
Post by fazlinho on Apr 20, 2009 13:34:39 GMT -5
sam se smijala
|
|
|
Post by Username on Apr 20, 2009 22:10:39 GMT -5
Yes but you're still incorrect. As per usual Meanings for words dont revolve around you like you think everything does Sorry, but I agree with illyria. The word may have a different connotation to people in different countries. HERE, in Canada, a nation built on immigration, much like Australia, when you say "first generation", its referring to the ones with citizenship who were not born here. Second generation are the children of the immigrants. What exactly would you call the Canadians who weren't born here then? I have never encountered the word being used any differently. The word may very well have different meanings though. Edited: dictionary.reference.com/browse/first%20generationDictionary.com lists both definitions. I believe that identifying illyria as 2nd generation is much more common though.
|
|
|
Post by zgembo on Apr 20, 2009 23:20:38 GMT -5
^ That is how I have always understood it. But the categorization can bring about some confusion. If three generations (grandparents, parents and children) immigrate to a country at the same time, who is a 1st generation immigrant? Grandparents, parents or all three? So you can't judge that they know less or more than anyone else. We all have ties to the place no matter how big or small it is. It's not about knowledge. It's about nationalism and political stances. It is ridiculous for someone living abroad (much more so a 2nd generation immigrant) to criticize a particular moderate politician or to pretend they know what's best for a country that they don't live in. Similarly, it is ridiculous for someone to be ignorant and hateful of Serbs, Croats, Albanians, Muslims, etc. when they are in the diaspora (and again, especially when they are 2nd generation immigration). We may all have ties to the place, but it matters how big or small they are. Somebody who lives there, and has to live with the consequences of their political stances, shouldn't have to hear from the diaspora that they are not nationalistic or conservative enough. A 2nd generation immigrant, who has never lived in the Balkans, should not pass ignorant judgments on the ethnic groups there over a 1st generation immigrant who actually lived and was exposed to them. People still do this, and nothing I say will stop them. But you cannot be surprised when locals get pissed off at the nationalism of the diaspora. And you cannot be surprised when 1st generation immigrants on this forum are repulsed by the ignorance and arrogance of 2nd generation immigrants.
|
|