Stephen Gill on his Writing and Diaspora

I do think that Gill might study the theory of hybridity in his discussion of diasporia. Gill claims that second and third generations that do not perform traditional identity cannot be said to belong to a diasporic community, which to me seems problematic. It implies choice and not the results of policies, geographic contexts, language acquisition and retention, bilingualism, access to education that might support familial language, historical labor phenomena. The very example that Gill uses in discussing Indo-Carribean populations is a great example. Can Indo Carribean citizens identify themselves as Indian? Who is empowered to "name" them? Also, why does Gill's conceptions of diaspora not take into account the destruction of culture, as with the process of indentured servitude/economics that left Indians in Trinidad and Guyana? How can one possibly measure one's diasporicness-in how much Hindi/Urdu was somehow retained, the degree of "Indian-ness" in roti, curry and Diwali?

Spelling of my name is incorrect.Please rectify it,if possible.
Nilanshu Kumar Agarwal