english
30 I Jorge Duany
key actors in the Dominican economy and politics, at the same time that they
have incorporated into the U.S. economy and politics. Finally, I suggest that
migration has reconfigured the national, ethnic, and racial identities of Do
minicans in the United States and the Dominican Republic. The large number
of U.S. Dominicans who classify themselves as neither black nor white, but
rather as "other" has profound repercussions for racial and ethnic relations
in the United States and in their country of origin. In states like New York and
Florida, Dominicans and other Latinos already constitute a "third force" in
racial discourses, business enterprises, community organizations, interethnic
contacts, and cultural politics.
Go to page 35 to continue reading the article
-
Transnational Migration from the Dominican Republic to the United States / .3S
The Rise ofTransnational Communities
Since the 1960s, hundreds of thousands of Dominicans have moved
abroad. In 1997, nearly one out of ten persons of Dominican origin was
living in the U.S. mainland. Of these, 24 percent were born in the United
States, a figure that speaks of a growing second generation of Dominican
immigrants (U.S. Census Bureau 1998). In addition, substantial Dominican
communities have emerged in Puerto Rico, Venezuela, Curac;ao, Spain, and
the U.S. Virgin Islands over the past few decades (Duany, Hernandez
Angueira, and Rey 199 5; S0rensen 1996). Thus, the Dominican population
has become increasingly deterritorialized, with regard to nativity and
residence. The massive displacement of Dominicans to the United States
and elsewhere is popularly known in the Dominican Republic as irse a las
paises (literally, "moving to the countries"). As I will argue later, the plural
and generic way that Dominicans refer to their current migration patterns
suggests the development of a translocal, diasporic, or transnational
identity.
A second feature of the Dominican diaspora is its extraordinary growth.
The number of Dominican migrants was so small until the mid-1960s that
the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) did not collect sepa
rate data for them before 1930. In 1950, the Census Bureau found only
4,200 persons of Dominican birth in the United States (Graham 1998, 45).
Largescale population movements from the Dominican Republic began
with the end of Rafael Trujillo's dictatorship in 1961 and especially after the
civil war and U.S. military occupation in 1965. In turn, changes in the
U.S. economy and immigration policy fostered the Dominican exodus,
such as increasing demand for cheap labor in northeastern cities as well
as the abolition of immigration quotas by national origin in 1965. As a result, Dominican migration to the United States jumped from 9,897
persons in the 1950s to 93,292 in the 1960s. The outflow continued to
increase in the l 970s, when 148,135 Dominicans were legally admitted to
the United States. During the
Transnational ,\ligration from the Dominican Republic to the Cnited States I 45
Caribbean and Latin America, Dominicans have been intensely criminalized
and racialized in the popular imaginary of the United States, Puerto Rico , and
other countries.
Transnationalizing Identities
A final issue is the transformation of collective identities as a result of trans
national migration from the Dominican Republic to the United States. I
would like to approach this topic from two complementary angles: first, how
moving abroad sharpens the migrants' awareness of their race and ethnicity;
and, second, how their prolonged residence in the United States alters pre
vailing views of those two constructs. On the one hand, transnational migra
tion can erode hegemonic discourses on race and ethnicity in both sending
and receiving countries. On the other, the racialization of Dominicans in the
United States-as well as Haitians in the Dominican Republic or Dominicans
in Puerto Rico-can harden fundamentalist concepts of cultural difference.
This section will concentrate on the immigrants' dash with the dominant
system of racial classification in the United States.
Since 1980, the Census Bureau has asked U.S. residents to classify their
race separately from their Hispanic origin. In 1990, 29.2 percent of Domini
cans responded that they were white, while 30 percent considered themselves
black. The most striking finding in this regard was the high proportion of
Dominicans choosing the "other" category-39.8 percent of the total (Rod
rfguez 2000, 9). These figures parallel a general trend among U.S. Hispan
ics-42.2 percent in 2000-who prefer the intermediary label ''other'' to
describe their racial identity. (At the time of this writing, 2000 census figures
on the racial breakdown of specific Latino groups were unavailable.) In the
Dominican case, the prevalence of the "other race" category probably re
flects the large number of people with mixed African and European ancestry,
usually grouped under the folk term indio in the Dominican Republic.
These statistics suggest three main patterns in the social construction of
race and ethnicity among Dominican migrants. First, many avoid the bipolar
model of racial classification into white or black, the so-called one-drop rule,
which still dominates in the United States. Rather, they continue to use a
tripartite system that recognizes a mulatto or mixed race location along the
color continuum. Elsewhere I have explored in more detail the profound
ideological transformation produced by the confrontation of the Dominican
model of race relations with the American classification system (Duany
1998). Other scholars have also noted the strong reluctance among Domini
cans to label themselves as "black" in the United States. Most consider them
selves to be neither black nor white, but other, such as Hispanic, Latino,
18 / Ernesto Sagas and Sintia E. Molina
Certainly, Dominican transnational migration has acquired a life of its
own. In spite of a stable-though not improved-economic situation in the
Dominican Republic, a languishing industrial sector in the U.S. Northeast,
and a rising wave of anti-immigrant discourses and policies in the United
States and Europe, tens of thousands of Dominicans still leave their home
land every y ear. Thousands more travel back and forth between the
Dominican Republic and foreign countries, often staying at any one
location for a few weeks or months, while others visit the country briefly to
see their relatives but maintain strong affective and economic links with
their country of origin. Throughout time, Dominican transmigrants have
established a web of social networks that now spans most of the Atlantic
world-and it keeps growing. The following section details how the
contributors to this volume explain this complex transnational migratory
phenomenon.
End of article
-
, ,
,,
v