Diasporic Cosmopolitanism and Global Inequalities:  Research Paradigms beyond Methodological Nationalism

The transnational migration paradigm has been a concerted attempt to move migration studies beyond its use of the nation-state as its primary unit of study and analysis.  However, several problems have arisen. These include the reassertion of binary thinking and the accompanying reassertion of ethnic and national boundaries, the transformation of transnational migration research through its adoption within discourses of migration and development, the preoccupation of migration scholars in a particular and narrow reading of the concept of social cohesion, the question of the second generation and the failure of advocates of the transnational migration paradigm to provide entry points for research beyond the ethnic lens. Moreover, a global perspective on the structures of power, which construct and maintain gross inequalities within and across states,  has been generally neglected.

This talk addresses these issues by asking, ‘what research possibilities emerge for migration scholars if we move beyond methodological nationalism and the ethnic lens?’  As one example, I explore the concept of diasporic cosmopolitanism. I begin by defining key terms, and reviewing the foundational social theory that has naturalized the binary thinking. I proceed by exploring the binary thinking that underlies methodological nationalism and much of the writing about cosmopolitanism.  In its place I propose that migration research build on the theorization of relationality and simultaneity. I then propose several analytic conceptualizations that build on this theorization including (1) Transnational social fields; (2) the mutual constitution of the local, national, and global; (3) cities as entry points for the analysis of networks of hierarchical power;  (4) variation finding and; (5) the relative scalar positioning of localities. Next I suggest ways in which researchers can systematically explore varieties of diasporic cosmopolitanism. To illustrate the very different forms of diasporic cosmopolitanism, I draw from research on the relationship between migrants and cities in several differently positioned cities