“The Geopolitics of Diaspora” by Sean Carter: Summary and Critique

1. Challenges to Essentialist Diaspora Narratives

• Sean Carter critiques prevailing diaspora theories for their tendency to celebrate hybridity and non-essentialized identities, arguing that these approaches often neglect the geographical specificities of diasporas and the reproduction of essentialist identities within diasporic discourses (Carter, 2005, p. 54).
• Diasporas are often depicted as “nations unbound,” which transcend territorial and identity boundaries. However, Carter emphasizes how certain diasporas reinforce fixed identities and territorial claims (Cohen, 1997, p. 2).

2. Spatial Metaphors and Re-Territorialization

• The article critiques diaspora literature for relying heavily on spatial metaphors without thoroughly addressing the geographical and political realities of diasporic communities (Mitchell, 1997, p. 534).
• Carter highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of how diasporic identities both disrupt and reaffirm territorial attachments, emphasizing a dual process of deterritorialization and re-territorialization (Carter, 2005, p. 55).

3. Croatian-American Diaspora as a Case Study

• The Croatian diaspora in the United States during the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s serves as a prime example of these dynamics. While engaging in humanitarian and political activities, this community also reproduced nationalistic and essentialist ideologies tied to the Croatian homeland (Carter, 2005, p. 57).
• Diasporic practices included fundraising for the Croatian war effort, political lobbying, and public relations campaigns, often reinforcing a nationalistic vision of Croatia (Goss, 1994, p. 27).

4. Diasporic Practices and National Identity

• Diasporic engagements often took the form of “banal nationalism,” with activities such as bake sales, concerts, and local rallies becoming key mechanisms for maintaining and promoting a cohesive national identity within the diaspora (Billig, 1995).
• Despite the mundane nature of these practices, Carter argues that they essentialize national identity and territory, reflecting a re-territorialization process (Carter, 2005, p. 58).

5. Political Shifts within Diasporic Institutions

• The Croatian Fraternal Union (CFU) and other community organizations demonstrated a shift from apolitical stances to overt nationalism, particularly during the Croatian War of Independence. This included support for nationalist Croatian leaders and the adoption of patriotic rhetoric (Carter, 2005, p. 59).
• These shifts sometimes alienated progressive members of the diaspora who had supported more inclusive and multicultural ideals before the dissolution of Yugoslavia (Carter, 2005, p. 60).

6. Role of Public Relations in Diasporic Engagement

• Public relations campaigns became central to diaspora activism, with Croatian-American leaders focusing on shaping public opinion in the United States and countering perceived anti-Croatian media bias. This effort aimed to align American and Croatian interests, emphasizing shared democratic and free-market values (Goss, 1998).

7. Reconsidering Territoriality in Diaspora Studies

• Carter calls for a “geopolitics of diaspora” that integrates empirical research on specific diasporas with theoretical insights. This approach would address how diasporic communities reconfigure political and cultural territorialities through their transnational practices (Carter, 2005, p. 61).
• He emphasizes the dual processes of de- and re-territorialization, wherein diasporas challenge traditional notions of territory while simultaneously constructing new territorial claims (Carter, 2005, p. 62).

8. Implications for Nationalism and Geopolitics

• The study reveals that diasporic nationalism operates across multiple scales, impacting both the homeland and host nations. Carter argues for a rethinking of the relationship between nation-states and diasporic communities, particularly in the context of globalization and transnational networks (Agnew, 1994; O Tuathail, 1998a).

1. Postcolonial Theory

• Contribution: Carter interrogates the celebratory approach in diaspora studies that emphasizes hybridity and non-essentialized identities, critiquing how such perspectives often ignore re-territorialization and the persistence of essentialist practices.
• Supporting Reference: Carter critiques the “progressive potential” often attributed to diasporic identities in postcolonial studies, emphasizing how essentialist ties to homeland and identity remain central to many diaspora practices (Carter, 2005, p. 54).
• Impact on Theory: This work broadens postcolonial discussions by highlighting the interplay between hybridity and territorial essentialism, showing how diasporas can reproduce colonial and nationalist ideologies.

2. Cultural Geography in Literary Studies

• Contribution: The article emphasizes the need to move beyond metaphorical uses of space in cultural and literary studies, advocating for a grounded understanding of geography in diasporic experiences.
• Supporting Reference: Carter notes that diaspora literature often “invokes space but leaves it un-interrogated,” and calls for integrating the “specific maps and histories” of diasporic communities into theoretical frameworks (Carter, 2005, p. 55).
• Impact on Theory: By tying cultural geography to diaspora narratives, Carter provides a methodology for examining how spatial practices influence literary representations of identity and belonging.

3. Critical Geopolitics and Literary Narratives

• Contribution: Carter integrates the concept of geopolitics into discussions of diaspora, showing how diasporic practices like lobbying and fundraising construct and reinforce territorial narratives.
• Supporting Reference: The Croatian diaspora’s political activities during the Balkan conflicts demonstrate how diasporas reconfigure modern territoriality rather than surpassing it (Carter, 2005, p. 58).
• Impact on Theory: This geopolitical lens enriches literary theories by offering insights into how diaspora literature navigates the intersections of political activism, identity, and spatiality.

4. Identity and Diaspora in Feminist Literary Theory

• Contribution: Carter’s focus on how diasporas negotiate identity aligns with feminist theories that critique fixed notions of subjectivity and emphasize relational networks of belonging.
• Supporting Reference: Diasporic consciousness, as described by Carter, involves “remembrance and commemoration” but also the risk of re-essentializing identity through territorial claims (Carter, 2005, p. 56; Gilroy, 2000, p. 124).
• Impact on Theory: This provides feminist literary theorists with a model for analyzing how diasporic subjectivities challenge and reinforce traditional narratives of belonging.

5. Banal Nationalism in Literary Studies

• Contribution: Carter draws attention to the mundane, everyday practices that reinforce national identity within diasporic communities, expanding the scope of literary analysis to include such “banal” acts.
• Supporting Reference: Fundraisers, bake sales, and local events in the Croatian diaspora illustrate how banal nationalism perpetuates essentialist identities (Carter, 2005, p. 58; Billig, 1995).
• Impact on Theory: This focus on everyday nationalism provides a lens for examining how diasporic literature incorporates ordinary practices to reflect and shape collective identities.

6. Transnationalism in World Literature

• Contribution: Carter critiques the idealized portrayal of diasporas as “nations unbound,” highlighting their role in constructing new forms of bounded territoriality.
• Supporting Reference: The concept of “nations unbound” is reinterpreted through the Croatian diaspora’s political lobbying and public relations efforts, which reaffirm territorial claims (Carter, 2005, p. 55).
• Impact on Theory: This challenges transnational literary frameworks to account for the ways diasporic literature both resists and reinforces national boundaries.

7. Spatial Theory in Literary Studies

• Contribution: Carter applies spatial theory to diaspora studies, arguing that diasporic practices create simultaneous processes of deterritorialization and re-territorialization.
• Supporting Reference: He describes how diasporic activism “simultaneously de- and re-territorializes both ethnic identity and political community” (Carter, 2005, p. 62).
• Impact on Theory: This duality enriches spatial theory by providing a dynamic model for analyzing how space and place function in diasporic narratives.

8. Theories of Long-Distance Nationalism

• Contribution: Carter critiques Benedict Anderson’s concept of “long-distance nationalism” by emphasizing the mundane and complex dimensions of diasporic politics beyond extremism.
• Supporting Reference: Carter acknowledges Anderson’s work but argues that focusing only on extremism overlooks the broader range of banal and political practices within diasporas (Carter, 2005, p. 62).
• Impact on Theory: This nuanced approach refines long-distance nationalism theories, encouraging literary scholars to explore how diasporic texts reflect both mundane and overt forms of political engagement.