Very interesting that the definition of migrants and expats are not that different.
Looking at how I see the word being used, I feel that also the political economic situation of the “home” country plays a role.
I think that we use migrants for workers that are economically and or politically pushed out of there country to find - almost out of necessity - better standard of living, whereas expats might come from countries with political economic situations where they don’t necessarily have to leave from have a comfortable future. Instead expats might choose to maximising there political economic situation.
Now you see with the above that we almost would divide migrants and expats according to the north/west south/east divide I.e migrants come from the economic south and political east, and go to the political west and economic north. Expat on the other hand move within the economic north and political west.
Now, indeed I see also the term expat being used for people from the political east/economic south. In these cases there is a differentiation whether they did their studies already abroad or whether they had some experience in the “home” country before migrating. i.e the term expats refers to the migrants with skills that are requested by the new country. Instead when the whole bachelor is done abroad, more often the term migrant is being used. Again here I feel the political economic situation plays a role in the sense that doing the whole studies abroad could reflects a situation of the “need” to go abroad to secure a better future.
Especially in this situation where there seems to be a thin line between the use of expats and migrants from the same country, the term braindrain is often coined. This concept of “braindrain” could maybe be interesting to look at in your future post!
I don't think what you 're saying is far from what I believe and tried to conveyed in the post. There are differences between countries for sure and it would be naive to ignore them (pun intended).
The problem arises, when we think we are better than someone, because of our inherent privileges. The words themselves are not a problem. The problem is that a human being might think that they are better than another human being, because they earn more money.
The perpetuation of these terms and their connotations is done by both sides: the incoming migrants/expats and also the host countries. At this point, it's hardwired not only in linguistics but also in our subconscious, where, as the commenter above rightly pointed out, we make immediate assumptions of the expats and immigrant status based solely on nationality, and some countries even codified these long-held assumptions in the form of higher salaries for 'expats' from certain countries, and lower salaries for 'immigrants' from other countries. It would probably be a while before we move past this mentally and on the ground...
That is a very good point. Countries also cultivate these connotations. It is also politically driven: many countries are shifting their narrative towards the extreme right. And part of that narrative is that to associate immigrants with illegality. So expat becomes someone who moves with a job, pays taxes and is a law-abiding citizen. An immigrant on the other hand, is someone who most likely crossed the border without any papers and is making an illegal living by exploiting the system.
I actually had this discussion a couple of times with voters of such parties. When you ask them,why dont you want me in your country,the reply is always "no not you, you are a good one".
This is an excellent commentary on the difference between the terms. I stopped calling myself an expat years ago when I realized the privilege that it connotes. And while I do need to acknowledge and honor the fact that I do have extreme passport privilege as a Canadian (for now anyway), it's not something I like to go around broadcasting or bragging about. And the very idea of calling myself something that others who want to do the same type of thing as me, move abroad, don't qualify for because their passports don't let them into as many places and perhaps they come from a poorer country where access to education was significantly more limited than mine, makes me cringe to no end. You call it white collar here, but it screams white privilege to me. And that's not to say that only white people can be expats, but there are definitely some similarities there. And for that reason, I think the term borders on racism.
I don't think there is anything wrong with either term -as I tried to explain in the post. I think the problem arises when we try to use the term expat to "brag".
It can very well be that you decided to move for a couple of years, knowing you will most probably return. That makes you an expat and there is nothing wrong with that. But in that scenario, you should not think that you are better from an immigrant.
I agree 100% about acknowledging our privileges and being humble and grateful for them.
In my 35 years of living in many places outside my birth country, I always took "expat" to mean those who were only temporarily stationed outside their "home" country. It's interesting to see that the dictionary definitions of "expat" and "immigrant" are not so far apart.
When my spouse and I landed in (German-speaking) Switzerland some years ago– he from Germany, I from Latvia– we referred to ourselves as "Gastarbeiter," which always got a shocked reaction. We were on annual visas linked to our jobs because that was the framework available at that time. Economic migrants. Our employers could hire us because there were no qualified Swiss workers to do our jobs. The money might have been different, but the vulnerability was there: without the job contract, we had no legal right to live here.
Indeed the definitions of the two terms differ mostly in duration of stay. What I tried to highlight is that, regardless of definitions, the term "expat" is often used to mean "good type of immigrant". It sounds like your experience as a "guest worker" is not far from that.
There is a reason we have all these terms and they all have their purpose, but we should not use them to discriminate against someone.
I think the distinction between an expat and an immigrant becomes more obvious depending where you live. In China, in Hong Kong, an expat is a class of foreigner. They’re not living like the rest of us foreigners. They have expat packages (still, even if not as swanky as in the past). They’re often not integrated at all into local job markets or even foreigner job markets…the only job market they’re on is the one from their home country. Their lives are managed by the companies they work for. They get exclusive services on par with their home countries (international education, international healthcare). They are set apart in a bubble of privilege.
So I always distinguish between expats and immigrants. I think it’s important to — there’s nothing in common between them. An expat hasn’t really immigrated anywhere…they’ve just gotten permission to work in a foreign country for a time. The immigrant experience, by contrast, is an inherently difficult one. I think calling expats immigrants does a disservice to actual immigrants.
I pointed this out to someone once and they took great offence, calling me closed minded and saying that expats think they’re above being called immigrants. But I myself have been an immigrant to two countries, something close to an expat in a third, and something in between an expat and an immigrant in a fourth. It’s hard to be an immigrant. It’s just not at all the same as being an expat.
But it’s an interesting discussion, no? Moving across countries gives you so many insights into global economics and politics.
Indeed I have met people who have lived in China, because they got an "expat contract" from their European employers. I think it is a great opportunity to see a new place, and I agree that probably the level of integration is very low. I haven't experienced it myself, but what you describes matches what I have heard.
I have also been both an expat and an immigrant, and I agree they are very different, without that meaning that one is "better" than the other.
I call myself an expat but actually I'm not; I don't own a 'foreign' salary from my home country. But I'm also not an immigrant, because I don't intend to stay permanently. But I totally agree 'expats' are being glorified while 'immigrants' are vilified. Ultimately, I just consider myself a blob floating across the earth surface at various speeds and distances.
Well that is the point. We are all blobs and in 99% of conversations the small differences between the meaning of 'expat', 'immigrant' or even 'blob' do not matter.
I’ve always thought ‘immigrant’ and ‘emigrant’ had a hint of opposing duality. There is an implication of a circle where to exist, and people would come into the circle, or would leave it. From a Latin perspective, it’s hard to define yourself as an immigrant until you’re part of the circle.
True, the prefix defines the "direction of the migration". And there are cases we need to differentiate.
What I tried to highlight is that in the expat culture, the definitions do not matter. We can ofc come up with new words, but if one wants to misuse them to brag, then they can do that with any word.
Do you think there was something about the definitions, that I should have added?
Your article was really good! I think you've been very thorough in highlighting what most people don't even think of (the status thing? wow) and if an article sparks discussions is also a testament to your ability to be approachable and not just throwing facts at people. You found a healthy balance there
Very interesting that the definition of migrants and expats are not that different.
Looking at how I see the word being used, I feel that also the political economic situation of the “home” country plays a role.
I think that we use migrants for workers that are economically and or politically pushed out of there country to find - almost out of necessity - better standard of living, whereas expats might come from countries with political economic situations where they don’t necessarily have to leave from have a comfortable future. Instead expats might choose to maximising there political economic situation.
Now you see with the above that we almost would divide migrants and expats according to the north/west south/east divide I.e migrants come from the economic south and political east, and go to the political west and economic north. Expat on the other hand move within the economic north and political west.
Now, indeed I see also the term expat being used for people from the political east/economic south. In these cases there is a differentiation whether they did their studies already abroad or whether they had some experience in the “home” country before migrating. i.e the term expats refers to the migrants with skills that are requested by the new country. Instead when the whole bachelor is done abroad, more often the term migrant is being used. Again here I feel the political economic situation plays a role in the sense that doing the whole studies abroad could reflects a situation of the “need” to go abroad to secure a better future.
Especially in this situation where there seems to be a thin line between the use of expats and migrants from the same country, the term braindrain is often coined. This concept of “braindrain” could maybe be interesting to look at in your future post!
Oh and thanks for the braindrain tip. It is on my backlog, but it is also one of those topics that "hit the spot" so it takes longer to write.
I don't think what you 're saying is far from what I believe and tried to conveyed in the post. There are differences between countries for sure and it would be naive to ignore them (pun intended).
The problem arises, when we think we are better than someone, because of our inherent privileges. The words themselves are not a problem. The problem is that a human being might think that they are better than another human being, because they earn more money.
The perpetuation of these terms and their connotations is done by both sides: the incoming migrants/expats and also the host countries. At this point, it's hardwired not only in linguistics but also in our subconscious, where, as the commenter above rightly pointed out, we make immediate assumptions of the expats and immigrant status based solely on nationality, and some countries even codified these long-held assumptions in the form of higher salaries for 'expats' from certain countries, and lower salaries for 'immigrants' from other countries. It would probably be a while before we move past this mentally and on the ground...
That is a very good point. Countries also cultivate these connotations. It is also politically driven: many countries are shifting their narrative towards the extreme right. And part of that narrative is that to associate immigrants with illegality. So expat becomes someone who moves with a job, pays taxes and is a law-abiding citizen. An immigrant on the other hand, is someone who most likely crossed the border without any papers and is making an illegal living by exploiting the system.
I actually had this discussion a couple of times with voters of such parties. When you ask them,why dont you want me in your country,the reply is always "no not you, you are a good one".
As the famous saying goes: Lol.
Totally agree, the situation is one of economics in home country vs destination country.
This is an excellent commentary on the difference between the terms. I stopped calling myself an expat years ago when I realized the privilege that it connotes. And while I do need to acknowledge and honor the fact that I do have extreme passport privilege as a Canadian (for now anyway), it's not something I like to go around broadcasting or bragging about. And the very idea of calling myself something that others who want to do the same type of thing as me, move abroad, don't qualify for because their passports don't let them into as many places and perhaps they come from a poorer country where access to education was significantly more limited than mine, makes me cringe to no end. You call it white collar here, but it screams white privilege to me. And that's not to say that only white people can be expats, but there are definitely some similarities there. And for that reason, I think the term borders on racism.
Hi Kaila and thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I don't think there is anything wrong with either term -as I tried to explain in the post. I think the problem arises when we try to use the term expat to "brag".
It can very well be that you decided to move for a couple of years, knowing you will most probably return. That makes you an expat and there is nothing wrong with that. But in that scenario, you should not think that you are better from an immigrant.
I agree 100% about acknowledging our privileges and being humble and grateful for them.
In my 35 years of living in many places outside my birth country, I always took "expat" to mean those who were only temporarily stationed outside their "home" country. It's interesting to see that the dictionary definitions of "expat" and "immigrant" are not so far apart.
When my spouse and I landed in (German-speaking) Switzerland some years ago– he from Germany, I from Latvia– we referred to ourselves as "Gastarbeiter," which always got a shocked reaction. We were on annual visas linked to our jobs because that was the framework available at that time. Economic migrants. Our employers could hire us because there were no qualified Swiss workers to do our jobs. The money might have been different, but the vulnerability was there: without the job contract, we had no legal right to live here.
Hi Caroline. Thanks for sharing your experience.
Indeed the definitions of the two terms differ mostly in duration of stay. What I tried to highlight is that, regardless of definitions, the term "expat" is often used to mean "good type of immigrant". It sounds like your experience as a "guest worker" is not far from that.
There is a reason we have all these terms and they all have their purpose, but we should not use them to discriminate against someone.
I think the distinction between an expat and an immigrant becomes more obvious depending where you live. In China, in Hong Kong, an expat is a class of foreigner. They’re not living like the rest of us foreigners. They have expat packages (still, even if not as swanky as in the past). They’re often not integrated at all into local job markets or even foreigner job markets…the only job market they’re on is the one from their home country. Their lives are managed by the companies they work for. They get exclusive services on par with their home countries (international education, international healthcare). They are set apart in a bubble of privilege.
So I always distinguish between expats and immigrants. I think it’s important to — there’s nothing in common between them. An expat hasn’t really immigrated anywhere…they’ve just gotten permission to work in a foreign country for a time. The immigrant experience, by contrast, is an inherently difficult one. I think calling expats immigrants does a disservice to actual immigrants.
I pointed this out to someone once and they took great offence, calling me closed minded and saying that expats think they’re above being called immigrants. But I myself have been an immigrant to two countries, something close to an expat in a third, and something in between an expat and an immigrant in a fourth. It’s hard to be an immigrant. It’s just not at all the same as being an expat.
But it’s an interesting discussion, no? Moving across countries gives you so many insights into global economics and politics.
Hi Liya and thanks for the insight.
Indeed I have met people who have lived in China, because they got an "expat contract" from their European employers. I think it is a great opportunity to see a new place, and I agree that probably the level of integration is very low. I haven't experienced it myself, but what you describes matches what I have heard.
I have also been both an expat and an immigrant, and I agree they are very different, without that meaning that one is "better" than the other.
Well argued and researched.
I call myself an expat but actually I'm not; I don't own a 'foreign' salary from my home country. But I'm also not an immigrant, because I don't intend to stay permanently. But I totally agree 'expats' are being glorified while 'immigrants' are vilified. Ultimately, I just consider myself a blob floating across the earth surface at various speeds and distances.
Well that is the point. We are all blobs and in 99% of conversations the small differences between the meaning of 'expat', 'immigrant' or even 'blob' do not matter.
motion to rename us as 'floating blobs'. Sometimes we plant roots, sometimes we crosspollinate, other times we float back (or back and forth)
I’ve always thought ‘immigrant’ and ‘emigrant’ had a hint of opposing duality. There is an implication of a circle where to exist, and people would come into the circle, or would leave it. From a Latin perspective, it’s hard to define yourself as an immigrant until you’re part of the circle.
True, the prefix defines the "direction of the migration". And there are cases we need to differentiate.
What I tried to highlight is that in the expat culture, the definitions do not matter. We can ofc come up with new words, but if one wants to misuse them to brag, then they can do that with any word.
Do you think there was something about the definitions, that I should have added?
Your article was really good! I think you've been very thorough in highlighting what most people don't even think of (the status thing? wow) and if an article sparks discussions is also a testament to your ability to be approachable and not just throwing facts at people. You found a healthy balance there
Thanks.
PS: Don't be shy to point out things you would like to see more of. I am always open to suggestions and feedback :)