Immigration is an issue, I am sure you will agree. As an immigrant, I have something to say. Let’s start with a story:
A victim of a religiously motivated attack is hospitalised. His injuries are serious, but not life-threatening. The hospital, as you can imagine, is busy dealing with multiple victims of this cowardly attack, as well as the usual load.
The young man receives visitors. One of them (friend or relative) tells the doctor on duty to increase the temperature of the room as the patient was cold. The doctor explains that it is not possible since the AC governs multiple rooms in the ward, it is an old system and is known to be a bit uneven. The person insists with these words: “If you can’t fix it, you have ten minutes to find someone who can”. The doctor ignores the request and visits other patients. In another room the doctor is instructed to help a guest visiting a victim by stopping what they are doing, and plugging a mobile phone into a charger. The guest could not do this himself, as it is Shabbat and this would constitute ‘work’. The doctor is so flabbergasted, they simply comply as the easy option out.
A few minutes later, the Premier of the State arrives, in the room of the first victim, and not long after that AC technicians who proceed to reset the temperature in that room. Down the hall, in an adjacent room, the nursing staff now attend to a 74-year old bed-ridden man by loading him up with multiple blankets, including a ‘space blanket’, because for some inexplicable reason his room has ‘suddenly’ become freezingly cold.
I will leave it up to your imagination as to whether I made that up or not. The ethnicity or religion is not relevant - but the behaviours are. Let’s consider the facts for a moment.
Most reasonable people would be able to simultaneously condemn the attack on the innocent people (making him a victim) and also recognise that this behaviour reeked of entitlement that deserves reproach.
The problem is that it has become impossible to criticise this behaviour. And this problem needs fixing, because it relates to how we build society in a diverse world.
Immigrants are prone to behave in quite specific ways - especially when they are (a) forcefully dispersed and perceived as victims, (b) are strongly mono-cultural, (c) have religious bonds and (d) have no homeland (safe haven) to return to and (e) when there are sufficient numbers present to obviate assimilation.
Whether you are Somalian in Minnesota, Islamic in Germany or Jewish in Australia, multiple of these factors may apply to some extent.
Here are some hypothetical ways in which the behaviors of a displaced, scattered diaspora from a small, historically cohesive nation might become maladaptive while trying to preserve their original identity.
Side Note: These are generated by AI, because (a) it is not really important what my opinion is and I did not want to lead the AI down a path of my prejudices, and (b) the AI will get this information from ‘somewhere’ in its training archives, which makes it objectively available somewhere on the internet.
According to AI, these maladaptations arise:
Cultural Freezing / Idealisation of the Past
The diaspora rigidly preserves customs, language, and traditions exactly as they were at the moment of displacement, treating any evolution as betrayal. This can lead to an increasingly archaic identity that feels alien even to younger generations born abroad, causing intergenerational conflict and isolation from both host societies and any evolving culture back in the homeland (if it still exists).Hyper-Insularity and Endogamy
Strong pressure to marry only within the group to "preserve purity" reduces genetic and social diversity, limits integration opportunities, and can create closed communities that struggle economically or socially in diverse host countries.Victimhood-Centered Identity
The narrative of displacement becomes the core of identity ("we are the people who were wronged"). While initially unifying, over generations this can foster resentment, entitlement, or passivity, discouraging proactive adaptation and alienating host populations who grow tired of perpetual grievance.Rejection of Host-Country Loyalty
Refusal to pledge allegiance, learn the local language fluently, or participate in civic life out of fear it dilutes identity. This can result in marginalization, poorer economic outcomes, suspicion from hosts, and vulnerability to exploitation or deportation policies.Mythologization of the Homeland
An idealised, almost fantasy version of the lost nation is maintained ("our homeland was perfect, our people were uniquely virtuous"). This can prevent realistic engagement with any possibility of return or reconciliation and make integration feel like moral failure.Internal Policing and Conformity Pressure
Strong social sanctions against members who adopt host-country behaviors (fashion, food, dating, politics). This stifles individual growth, drives youth away from the community entirely, and creates a brain drain within the diaspora itself.Over-Reliance on Symbolic Rather Than Substantive Practices
Emphasis on visible markers (traditional clothing on holidays, specific foods, flags) while core values (e.g., communal solidarity, work ethic) erode. Identity becomes performative rather than meaningful, leaving the community culturally hollow over time.Political Radicalisation or Irredentism
Some factions fixate on reclaiming the homeland or supporting extreme politics there, diverting energy from building sustainable lives in host countries. This can lead to involvement in foreign conflicts, surveillance by host governments, or generational trauma.Economic Self-Sabotage
Preference for working only with co-ethnics or in traditional occupations, even when disadvantageous. This can limit upward mobility and keep communities trapped in low-wage niches.Selective Historical Memory
Suppression of inconvenient aspects of pre-displacement history (internal conflicts, flaws in traditional society) to maintain a unified narrative. This creates a brittle identity that collapses when younger members discover the full history.Resistance to Hybrid Identity
Rejection of any cultural blending (e.g., mixed-language media, fusion cuisine, dual celebrations) as "inauthentic." Over time this makes the community less resilient and less able to transmit identity meaningfully to children who naturally develop hybrid identities.
In summary, the core maladaptation is treating identity preservation as a zero-sum game: any adaptation is seen as loss. Successful diasporas (historical examples include Jews, Armenians, overseas Chinese, Irish) have often thrived when allowing controlled evolution—maintaining core values and cohesion while adapting behaviors to new realities.
The most maladaptive path is when the desire to "stay the same" overrides the need to survive and flourish in changed circumstances.
When the numbers are low - like the Polish immigrants to Australia who came to work on the steel mills - they assimilate effectively. They may still be called ‘wogs’ - but that would largely become a term of endearment as they eventually assimilated. They all went to Australian schools, learned English and came to love football.
It is when the numbers are big, in a short space of time, that these issues are aggravated, and maladaptation is more likely.
The challenge for every immigrant - assuming you are interested in solving the problem - is to run through that checklist of maladaptive behaviours and make an honest assessment of how your explicit behaviours and your implicit beliefs stack up.
The boy in the opening story was let down by the people around him who should have known better. This is a disproportionate sense of entitlement, expecting the host nation to bend to your customs and your comfort - and worse, to use your power and influence to force them to do so. If your reaction to that list is to insult me, or defend what you are doing, or to claim that I/others don’t understand, then you are the problem.
I too, am an immigrant. I gave up my religious denomination, I gave up my language, and the kids gave up their heritage and their family in the process of migrating here. Some family members distanced themselves from me, labelling me a traitor for leaving the country. I say this not to claim superiority, but to say that I was aware that migration had a price, and I willingly paid the price.
I was asked at the time why I did not settle in St Ives or Rosebay - notoriously South African enclaves in Sydney. My response was that if I needed to live amongst South Africans, I should have stayed in South Africa.
I chose Australia for a number of reasons that were better for us as a family. Australia is not perfect, in fact, there is a lot I don’t like. But the things I like outweigh the things I don’t, and like any relationship, neither party to that relationship is perfect.
I really can’t stand the obsequious nanny state that is Australia, but it is a lot better than the hellish, crime-ridden lawlessness of South Africa - for my children at least. So it is a trade-off. And there are many more like that.
Immigrants should make those trade-offs. Anything less will turn the host country ultimately into a low-trust society, which will inevitably become a lot worse than the one you escaped from.
When people criticise us (immigrants), it may appear racist and right wing. But it is usually really just an intuitive reaction to feeling threatened, and they might lack the verbal dexterity to adequately express the complexity of the situation. It is easier to simply yell ‘send them all back’ on X than having a nuanced discussion. It is their hive mind at work, warning them-and rightly so- of imminent danger. Just like our hive mind is prone to want to congregate with people like us. We really are no different.
The reality is: the host country does not owe us anything, so the first move is up to the immigrant. And we are not doing it well.
