The debate about settling back to one’s homeland is always lively, variegated and often heated. More often than not it peters out without any conclusions to resurface again after sometime wearing a new cloak of ideas and words. On the part of the emigrants it is a cautious foray into a charted territory they do not really want to go back to. On the part of the natives it is often treated with high level of cynicism. Living outside your country somehow automatically demotes you to a lower moral pedestal. Therefore as a corollary you, an emigrant are not supposed to talk about moving back. Moving back in the name of "serving" your country (or some other higher values) is met with even more cynicism. This attitude is justified to some extent. To see the emigrants as deserters is not.

Recently I posted some comments on a discussion board about my thoughts on moving back. Some took an affront to my candidness. As usual the topic ended up with some getting personal in their remarks (as is usually the wont in most Desi discussions).

And this brings us to the issue of being candid on this issue. What keeps the immigrants in the West are not only the its attraction but also the dread of going back. Everybody knows this little secret but few ever acknowledge it. While most of the immigrants here that I have met treat the subject of settling back with a lukewarm response, others play this game to perfection. This is not only true with the newer immigrants who have not gone through all the phases of emotional change but also with the older, well settled people. I see people who hate the moral depravity of the West; writers with a yearning for their homeland and culture; professionals disenchanted by the mechanical lifestyle of the West; and visionaries whose values are diametrically opposite to their adopted lands not only living here but in fact being quite happy. When you talk with these people you get a feeling that they have set up an institution, a business or an undertaking back home that is just about to take off; have packed their bags and are about to leave anytime now. However, I have never seen those plans come to fruition - ever. Life goes on with all its drudgery. However, in a world where appearance is as good as reality this approach works quite well. Most importantly, it brings one to nearly the same moral level as their compatriots’ back home.

But are emigrants really "morally disadvantaged"? Are they actually the turncoats and hedonists they are made out to be? Do they have to play games to placate people back home? It depends who you ask. Most of the natives will answer in the affirmative while most of the emigrants would beg to differ. In times of a heated discussion on this topic it seems sometimes as if there is no middle ground between the two parties. I like to think of this problem in terms of an analogy, which I call "the analogy of the cave". Imagine a group of people is trapped in a cave. Everybody wants to come out. But to be able to do that you have to climb a huge wall. Those who are able to do that become free while those who are not remain trapped inside. Is it wrong to try to get out of the cave? Once you are out what are you supposed to do? My answer to the first question is a resounding no. However, the million-dollar issue is what to do after you come out? - And that seems to be a bigger moral dilemma to most of us.

Most of us would simply answer: help your people and your homeland. The devil lies in the details however, as they say. Moreover, in a post 9/11 world this goal has become somewhat more elusive for some. For many that were already having a hard time juggling different cultural values, luck seems to have thrown religion and nationality into the mix as well. Also, consider this: many claim that the only way to serve one’s people is to eventually come back and face the music. I have seen a few trying out this approach. Needless to say that the failure rate of this venture is quite high - in fact close to a hundred percent in my experience.


Finally, there is the question of how to serve your people. On a collective level it can (and should) be done on a cultural level (like the Hispanics), with political activism (like the blacks), through lobbying efforts (like the Jews) and most importantly on an economic level to have any sort of viable community. The emigrants as a whole are doing a decent job on the economic front in the US. However, we lag far behind in politics and cultural activism. But one thing is for sure, in the present world representation in the West through our citizens is vital even if it is weak. It will be sometime before we can expect to see the activism and community development along the lines of other more developed minorities in the US. On an individual level it requires an honest review of one’s priorities. One’s lifestyle could be a good measure of that. However, in the end like most of the things in life, every man has to find his own answers.