Author’s Note: This is a pretty long article, at least by this blog’s standards. According to Substack, it’s too long so email. Readers are advised to read the post directly on the website. Enjoy.
Greetings,
The question of identity has become a muddled one. Globalization has created a world of deracinated people. Everyone in the globe is affected, no matter how isolated1. Having lived in two different continents on opposite sides of the world, this was crystal clear to me.
This was why I throughly enjoyed an essay by
which attempts to tackle the question of identity in a world where nation-states had become less important due to technology. I recommend people give it a read:As an aside, I didn’t realize the article had been up for six months until I started writing this post. But better late than ever, I guess.
Anyways…
One passage in Megha’s article caught my eye:
There are many ways to answer this question [of identity]. There is the place that you were born, the place that you were raised, the place that your ethnic ancestors find their roots (at least for the last few hundred years), there is the place that you pay taxes and then finally there is the place that is written on your passport. It is a rare person for whom all these places are one place, and for whom this place will not change.
This is why the arguments of nationalists today ring so hollow and trite. An Algerian is not an Irishman he is an Algerian even if he lives in Ireland his whole life. Meanwhile, an “Irishman” by ethnicity and passport is raising his family in Singapore and only really got the passport by relationship to a grandparent he’s never met, just so he can spend as much time as possible in Italy. Who is more Irish? An Englishman by ethnicity who was born and raised in Detroit, is he more English than an Indian by ethnicity born and raised in Stratforshire who loves Shakespeare and Charles Dickens? Rudyard Kipling was an Englishman who spent most of his life in India, and knows more about it than any “Indian” who lived his whole life in New York. To whom does a culture belong? To whom does a nation belong?
I’ll let Megha’s words speak for themselves. Her reasoning was sound, but she lacked something concrete. She had an example, but it was merely anecdotal.
It’s All Greek to Me
At this point, I decided to chime in. I reposted the second paragraph quoted above and added my comments at Substack Notes, it went as follows:
The nationalist could not answer this question without sounding ridiculous. And it’s not like it’s a mere hypothetical. Just look at Giannis Antetokounmpo (since I’ve been taking basketball lately).
The nationalist will say that he’s not Greek but rather Nigerian even though he was born in Greece, he grew up in Athens, he has a Greek name, his surname is Hellenized, he was baptized Greek Orthodox, he served in the Greek military, he represented Greece internationally, he has family members in Greece, and he spoke Greek (rather than Igbo or Yoruba). All because of his ancestry.
To be honest, I didn’t have any particular reason to bring up Giannis Antetokounmpo in this conversation. The NBA Finals was coming up at the time2 and so I just wanted to talk about basketball, even though the Milwaukee Bucks didn’t even make it to the finals.
Actually, scratch that. There is a reason why I brought up Giannis.
As someone who pays attention to sports, I have noticed a trend of immigrant players who have no real love for the countries they represent. One example I can think of is Karim Benzema who represents France in international soccer but had outright admitted that Algeria was the “country in his heart”. I’ll let Wikipedia take it from here:
In other words, the only reason Benzema plays for France is because he has a better chance of success with France than with Algeria. It’s a pretty cynical move but I can’t blame him. Despite his papers and birthplace, Benzema was an Algerian in every other way.
For one thing, he’s Muslim. Keep in mind that France was once known as the ‘Eldest Daughter of the Church’. Even after the French Revolution, Catholicism remains to be a strong part of French identity. This is the nation of St. Louis IX, St. Joan of Arc, and St. Bernadette of Lourdes, amongst others. For this nation to be represented by a Muslim would be odd.
But Benzema is hardly the only example of this. And the issue goes beyond religion.
The The French soccer team is so saturated with African immigrants that some had jokingly referred to it as the first African team to have won the World Cup.
But back to Giannis…
The man formerly known as the ‘Greek Freak’3 doesn’t strike me as someone who sees his birthplace as just an economic zone to be taken advantage of. I have already listed what happened in his life that inured him into Greek culture. But how does Giannis see himself? He was on record having said that he considered himself Greek. Of course, he considered himself Nigerian too, saying that he will raise his kids in both Greek culture and Nigerian culture.
But this should not be surprising. Giannis’ experience is similar to immigrants to the United States. They and their descendants continue to hold on to their culture of origin (like Italian, Irish, Polish, etc.) even as they consider themselves Americans also.
Kicking the Hornet’s Nest
So the question is settled, right? Not so fast. As it turned out, I had kicked a hornet’s nest. Many rushed to voice their disagreements with what I have said. The most prominent was Substack’s resident Greek,
, who responded as such:Gonna disagree. He’s not a Greek.
He’s a Greek nationally and he grew up in Greek culture, but he’s not a Greek. It doesn’t make him a bad person at all. In fact, by all accounts, he’s a really good guy. But he’s not a Greek. Ancestry and history matter.
For example, I was born in America, but to grandchildren and children of Greek immigrants. Am I an American or a Greek?
Another example: I could move to Nigeria and have another child with my wife (who is Greek), who only speaks a language native to that culture, is raised in a Nigerian religion, served in the Nigerian military, who never lived in Greece or the United States, and he’ll never, ever be a Nigerian, nor would Nigerians living in Nigeria or in the Nigerian diaspora consider him a Nigerian. Yet there’s always an exception made for European countries. It’s weird.
Giannis’s progeny could be Greek if he marries a Greek and then his kids marry Greeks and have more Greek babies, etc. That happens all the time across the world.
It’s a touchy issue but there’s a difference between nation and state. And I don’t even know why it’s so touchy. All countries can welcome foreigners as their own. But the process of becoming is more than a piece of paper or where you were born.
I expect tons of disagreement about this, so flame away.
There’s a lot to unpack to Alexander’s comment, so I’ll take it bit by bit. His objections were reasonable. But with respect, I do find his answer to be an example of what I mean in how the “nationalist” can get ridiculous.
Alexander started out by saying that Giannis is not a Greek. But then he contradicted himself in the very next sentence by saying that “he’s a Greek nationally”.
Now to be fair, it’s the kind thing that’s easy to miss. I honestly didn’t see that contradiction the first time I read Alexander’s note.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m not pointing this out to get a gotcha; my interest is not in winning an argument. Rather, I think the second sentence is the key towards understanding the issue.
In his comment, Alexander made a distinction between “nation” and “state”. And there are also others who responded to me who argued to this effect. This is a fair objection. And to be honest, my initial comment does need clarification.
Defining Our Terms
First, we have to define our terms. For the sake of this article, I want to go with “nationality” and “ethnicity”.
First, “nationality”. This is a difficult one. Originally, the word nation refers to a group people from with common origins and language. I will get back to this. Nowadays, “nation” is now synonymous with country, which involves a combination of place and government. Of course, the question of what makes a country is complicated to say the least. This video by CGP Grey describes the situation best:
So much for “nation”.
Now let’s go with ethnicity, which I define as a group of people with common origins and language. What people once understood as ‘nation’ now refers to ethnicity. Here, biology plays a major part, though not exclusively. Ancestry and history is key to understanding one’s ethnicity. To put it another way, ethnicity is something that you are born with.
This brings me to another comment Alexander made: “Ancestry and history matters.” Yes, I agree. As an Indonesian, I will never deny the importance of ethnicity.
Ethnicity, Nationality, and Home
I am Indonesian by nationality, but I am Batak by ethnicity. I am not Indonesian, ethnically speaking. Because there’s no such thing as an Indonesian ethnicity. The closest thing to one is the Betawi, a people native to Jakarta who owned its ethnogenesis4 to the Dutch who brought in peoples of various ethnicities to the area during the colonial period. Of course, anyone who is halfway familiar with Indonesia know that it is laughable to conflate the Betawi with Indonesia as a whole.
To me, the importance of ethnicity is self-evident. My ancestry can be traced to North Sumatra around the coasts of Lake Toba. But I have only visited the place, never living there. My father was born there, but not my mother; her family had been in Jakarta for generations by the time she was born. As for me, I was born in the American state of Oklahoma. Afterwards, I have been living in various places in the US, as well as Jakarta.
In short, Lake Toba and North Sumatra was just a blip in my personal life. And yet… I felt an attachment to that land in ways that I don’t to Belgium, for example5. It’s where I came from, after all. One place I wish to visit at some point in the future is the tomb of Raja Marpaung, the ancestor to all Marpaungs, including yours truly:
I’m sure I’m not the only one with this sense of ancestral attachment. The Chinese has a concept known as the “ancestral home”. As the name suggests, the ancestral home is where your family originated from. A person’s ancestral home is not necessarily the same as where he lives or even where he was born. For example, a man can be born and raised in Hong Kong but his ancestral home is Shanghai.
This concept can also be applied to non-Chinese settings. For example: me. I currently live in Jakarta and I was born in Stillwater, Oklahoma. As for my ancestral home, that would be Balige, a small town close to the southern coast of Lake Toba. I may or may not have been there, I don’t remember. Another example: Giannis (let’s go back to him again, lol). He lives in the US, his birthplace is Greece, but his ancestral home is Nigeria.
I can go on especially with Americans who can trace their origins to various places around the world.
This brings us to a question that Alexander asked in his response: “I was born in America, but to grandchildren and children of Greek immigrants. Am I an American or a Greek?”
Good question. The answer is yes.
Okay but seriously, why not both? That might sound like a copout but that’s the answer that the vast majority of people in America will give - I guarantee you that.
The Sense of Belonging
The question nationality also involves one of belonging. Do they accept you as one of their own? Let’s go back to Giannis once more. Alexander claims that he’s not Greek. Fair enough. I myself am not Greek, so who am I to disagree? However, there are Greeks who do. Here’s one a couple of examples I found in Quora:
Here’s another one from a lady named Dimitra Triantafyllidou (I will quote this one instead of screenshot since it’s a little long):
Giannis is a great basketball player and a great guy. He honors Greece by choosing to be part of this wacky place and I, and a lot of other people, welcome him with open arms. He is a great example for kids of how you can follow your dreams, be successful and be humble at the same time. Do I care that his family is originally from Nigeria? Yes, it makes his choice to serve Greece even more precious. He could go on and become an American or whatever. At a time that a lot of Greeks want to forget [they] are Greeks he comes back and plays for the national team. He is a much better Greek than most.
What do I think about people who argue that he is not Greek? Who are basically rejecting his offer? I think that it is that little green monster that lurks in our heart and for some reason Greeks express more strongly for their fellow Greeks. In short they are treating him like any other Greek: he is too good for his own good, so let’s take him down a notch. Envy has been IMHO the one pervading characteristic of our people. Remember the story when an old man in ancient Athens wanted to ostracize Aristides the “Just” because he had had enough of hearing him being called “Just”?That has been our attitude since forever.
And another thing. Now that the situation in Greece has become quite difficult, for some people the only thing of value they have is their descent from the Greeks. They are unwilling to share this because if somebody can get in, than somebody can lose this “glorious inheritance”. The joke is on them, being Greek has never been an automatic procedure, you choose to be Greek. In that sense, Giannis is just as Greek as my forefathers of 2000 years ago who chose to be Greeks rather than Thracians, or as the Minoans who became Hellenes. It’s not in your genes.
BTW both he and his brother went to the army last July. Unlike many of our top politicians and journalists and showbiz people. Because their place of residence is abroad they will serve three months (that is the Greek law). Their term has been postponed -quite common for young athletes-. Anyway, I think if you add up all the times he has served the national team it will be much more than three months, and a much better service to the Greek people.
That’s quite a mouthful. But needless to say, there are Greeks who are more than happy to accept Giannis as one of their own.
Now this isn’t to say that I agree with Michael and Dimitra over Alexander. As someone who enjoyed Alexander’s Substack6, I place a lot of weight in his opinions. And besides, this is not a democracy. The point is that there is disagreement to found on this topic.
But let’s turn the tables around, in the interest of fairness. So far, I have treated this subject in an ahistorical way. You might notice that so far, the countries who have played host (The United States, France, and Greece) have all been white countries7.
Luckily for us, Alexander has another example:
I could move to Nigeria and have another child with my wife (who is Greek), who only speaks a language native to that culture, is raised in a Nigerian religion, served in the Nigerian military, who never lived in Greece or the United States, and he’ll never, ever be a Nigerian, nor would Nigerians living in Nigeria or in the Nigerian diaspora consider him a Nigerian.
Meanwhile, others who objected to my initial note brought up Japan. The argument goes that one can go to Japan, go through everything that are associated with Japanese culture, assimilate into their society, and the Japanese will never see you as one of their own.
A Touchy Subject
These show a political aspect of the situation that Alexander touched upon: “Yet there’s always an exception made for European countries”. This is true. There is a double standard currently being applied to Western countries when it comes to this issue. The aim is to get the native peoples in the Western world to accept waves of migrants from places like Africa or the Middle East. This will inevitably lead to the breakdown of the social order, and yet when people object to this state of afairs they will be called “racist”.
This is a touchy subject, to say the least. Far be it for me to dismiss these concerns as unimportant. That’s why I want clarify my initial point. There is a difference between groups and individuals. There is also a difference between small groups and hordes. So I’m going to put this issue to the side for now. Not because it’s unimportant but because it’s beyond the scope of my point.
The Question of Diversity
Now let’s go back to the earlier examples brought up. Now I can’t speak for Nigeria nor Japan. However, I can speak for my own country.
Here’s a bit of context first. Indonesia is a multi-ethnic country. And I mean that in a real way, not in a fake “diversity is our strength” way. We have a history of people coming in from other places like China or India. Add them to all the indigenous groups that numbered in the tens of trillions (if we round it down)8, then we have the salad bowl known as the Indonesian archipelago.
If you want you have a closer look at all the ethnic groups in all its glory, feel free to click the link below the map. Needless to say, there are a lot of ethnic groups in Indonesia.
As to be expected, Indonesia has a history of ethnic conflicts. First, the conflict between the pribumi - people native of the archipelago - and those of foreign descents - mostly the Chinese but may also include Arabs and Europeans. But we also have conflict between the native ethnicities. One of the most recurring ethnic rivalries in the archipelago is the Javanese and pretty much everybody else. Then there are the religious conflict, which in some ways is an extension of ethnic conflicts but not exclusively.
Upon this background, the Indonesian national motto is ‘bhineka tunggal ika’ - Old Javanese for ‘unity in diversity’. This is not to be confused with the neoliberal shibboleth: ‘diversity is our strength’. The former is an acknowledgement of the reality of the situation, the latter is a denial of reality in order to socially engineer the existing populace. Bhineka tunggal ika is an attempt to achieve unity despite the diverse array of ethnicities and religions that already existed. Diversity is our strength is an attempt to paper over the fact that the government had destroyed the country’s unity by bringing over large numbers of foreigners into the nation.
They are not the same.
Perhaps because of this, I have little issue accepting a foreigner who had gone through “the process”. And I think Indonesians by and large feel the same way. An example: Cristian Gonzalez.
Gonzalez is a soccer player from Uruguay who found himself playing in Indonesia’s top flight league. Having never played for his home country, he ended up representing Indonesia. In order to do this, he had to undergo the naturalization process which included being in the country for six years. To this end, he didn’t attend his father’s funeral back in Uruguay.
So Cristian has his papers, but how does he fit in with Indonesian society? Very well, I would say. For one thing, he married a local girl. He also became a Muslim and adopted the name Mustafa Habibi9. In addition, Cristian Habibi had appeared in Indonesian commercials and even soap operas, making him a well-known celebrity in the country.
I am confident to say that most Indonesians, both here in the country and abroad, will acknowledge Cristian as an Indonesian. So that’s the nationality question.
But what about ethnicity? This is where things get a little weird. Cristian’s wife is a Batak woman named Eva Siregar. Funnily enough, Siregar is the family name of my maternal grandmother. This means Cristian Gonzalez and I are (very) distant relatives. So do I consider him to be a Batak?
Hell no.
Ethnicities and Honoraries
As I said before, ethnicity is something that you are born with. This is where more than anything, one’s history and ancestry matters. Simply marrying a Batak doesn’t make you one. Neither is being born in Batakland (spoilers: I was NOT born in Batakland). In fact, there is a whole family tree and genealogies that I myself have not fully grasped (to be honest). As Alexander had said in his comment, “the process of becoming is more than a piece of paper or where you are born.”
So can someone be adopted into another ethnicity? This is a gray area. I am inclined towards ‘no’, but I can see some counterpoints.
One example brings us back to the Batak people. The German10 Lutheran missionary Ludwig Ingwer Nommensen was credited with bringing Christianity to the Batak people. He even earned the moniker, “The Apostle of the Batak”. History remembers him as a German, but the Batak refers to him as “Ompung Nommensen” - Ompung being a Batak term to refer to one’s grandparent.
Another example fell right into to my lap when Substack’s resident convict
posted an article detailing his experience of being involved with black criminals. Feel free to give it a read, just be aware that is has strong language (you have been warned):Coleman, though a white man, was accepted by the blacks as one of their own. The evidence? He was able to use the “N-word” without getting beaten up or shot. So is Coleman black because he has N-word privilege?
Once again, I want to go back to my comment that started it all. There was one other objection to it that I want to highlight:
I found this comment to be hillarious. It’s as if the person understood what I was trying to say but simply did not want to acknowledge it. Honorarily entitled to live in Greece and associate with Greeks? That’s a needlessly long way of saying “honorary Greek”.
It’s not like I made up the term out of thin air. The Nazis11 were known to have made exceptions to their racial policies. This led to an informal12 phenomenon known as the “honorary Aryan”. The ranks of honorary Aryans covered a diverse array of people such as:
Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Palestine
Emil Maurice, Hitler’s personal chauffeur who was partly Jewish, and
The entire Japanese race.
I can list more examples but I think I’ve made my point. However, we must keep in mind that the exceptions don’t disprove the rule. As I said before, ethnicity is something that you are born with. If anything, these are the exceptions that prove the rule.
Now I want to borrow
’s comment. He was of the few people who responded positively to what I said (Bolded emphasis mine):There’s a point here. Making ethnicity purely a matter of genetics is excessively simplifying a complicated interplay of culture, faith, and heritage. There’s also no perfect test to determine what someone’s true ethnicity is.
If a single boy is adopted by a family and is raised in their faith, principles, and culture, is his offspring truly a continuance of this “family”? From a genetic standpoint no. from a spiritual standpoint, to a large extent, yes.
If a family adopts twelve children, all of whom were allowed to do “what feels right” while the parent’s two children were inoculated in the parent’s values, are the adopted kids really a continuance of their family in any way? Of course, “no.”
In this case, the Algerian13 is probably more Greek than Algerian, all things considered. But he is a very strong exception to what a Greek is, not the rule.
As Alan said, there isn’t a perfect test to determine one’s ethnicity. In fact, any attempt to find one runs the risk of making the whole thing seem ridiculous, as Nazi Germany had shown.
The Interplay of Ethnicity and Nationality
Though at times nationality and ethnicity conflate, they don’t always do so. Let’s look at the Greeks. Currently, the Greeks have their own unified state. But during the classical era, they were divided into city-states like Athens and Sparta. And during the Late Imperial and Medieval Era, they were the ruling class of the multi-ethnic Eastern Roman Empire.
The difference comes down to the fact that nationality is associated with a power structure, such as the state. Meanwhile, ethnicity is something that you are born with, not just your blood but also your family and relatives. The temptation is to see ethnicity something real while dismissing nationality as nothing but a social construct because it’s enforced by government.
Well… not so fast.
That the state is enforced by the government, very impersonally at times, doesn’t make it not real. This strikes me as dumb libertarian thinking. In fact, there are a lot of people who were proud of their citizenship or service and saw it as a big part of their identity even if it has little to do with their ethnicity.
Conclusion
Now let’s finally answer the title question: “what’s in a nationality?” Just as ethnicity is a complicated interplay of various factors, so is nationality. There’s ethnicity, culture, religion, even government decree (crude as that may be) to take into account.
Many moderns dismiss ancestry, as if one’s parents are unimportant. This is folly. Equally folly is reactionary-types dismissing the importance of both environment and official papers.
There isn’t a be-all and end-all definition to nationality. I understand if you think this is a cop-out. But nationality isn’t the be-all and end-all to life either. To quote St. Paul:
There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free man, there is no longer male or female. For all of you are one in Christ Jesus.
-Galatians 3:28 (NCB)
This isn’t a denial of the reality of race nor status nor sex. Remember that this is the same St. Paul who told women to be silent in church and to listen to their husbands. Rather, this is a reminder to not be obsessed with them and look beyond.
Despite all my talk about being Indonesian or American or Batak or whatever, if anyone asks me who I am first and foremost, I will say Catholic. In the interest of ecumenism, I may also say Christian next.
I can’t pretend I know what will fix society, but I am almost certain it isn’t a half-assed ghost dance to our ancestors. Actually, I do know what it is — it’s everyone kneeling to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Everything else is just middling kitsch.
-Ourospost, Christian Kitsch and Scrupulous Moderns
At the end of the day, that’s all that matters.
Until next time, Michael P. Marpaung
Just ask the people of North Sentinel Island. Actually, don’t do that.
It’s ongoing at the moment.
No one used that moniker for Giannis anymore after he won the NBA championship back in 2021.
This is just a fancy word of saying the formation of an ethnic group.
I visited the country and stayed over in that country for months. Twice.
If you haven’t subscribed to his newsletter, then you’ve been missing out.
In other words, countries of predominantly European descent.
Just kidding.
I don’t like this fact, but Islam is the majority religion of Indonesia. For better or worse, a lot of Indonesians see it as a big part of their identity.
Some say Danish because when he was born, his birthplace was a territory of Denmark. But I digress.
Actual Nazis, not the fake term leftists use to refer to people who disagree with them.
At least as far as I can tell. I know the Wikipedia article I linked says otherwise, but I don’t really trust Wikipedia when it comes to these things. And unfortunately, search engines are garbage now. What is known for sure is that Hitler and his regime made exceptions to their racial rules but the idea that it was a systematic policy of Nazi Germany seems dubious, to be honest.
I believe he meant to say Nigerian here since we’re talking about Giannis.
This article was SO well done. Thank you for writing this and for taking the discussion I started seriously and moving it further. I particularly relate to this discussion because although I am open about my Indian ethnicity online, people online don't interact with me irl. In real life, wherever I have travelled, people have been confused about where I am from and now, living in Dubai, I have Indian people asking me why I have an Indian name, only to be surprised when I tell them I have 100% Indian ancestry. I understand there must be some mixing somewhere in all the conquest and movement that happens at the borders of places such as where I am from, which is what led me down this path of thought. There is no gene that tells us which country exactly we belong to. At most it can tell us a region in which most people historically shared our genes. I don't think that's a solid enough basis to shape a passport or citizenship for example. I believe culture and cultural values are far more relevant. However I loved the point you brought up about the double standard in the West vs the Rest of the World. Only westerners are being told to be blind to ethnicity. Everywhere else, westerners are considered outsiders and "will never belong". Living in Dubai with an English Anglo-Saxon husband, I feel this keenly. It is only logical and fair that European countries should begin to administer the same exclusive standards onto their societies if that is the reciprocity they are experiencing.