Thread by @shrikanth_krish

Cultural capital often stems from resisting assimilation

Jews are a classic case in point

All major ethnic groups in US - be it Germans, Irish, Italians - brought in their unique genius which was an outcome of endogamy - which typically lasted for 1-2 generations

https://twitter.com/vikramwkarve/status/1085376436200984576

This whole "Be a roman in rome" assimilation rhetoric stems from a tendency to view diversity as acceptable only when it exists across geographies, but not within a geography

But diversity is most beneficial as well as most problematic only when it exists in the same geography

If you take India as an example - it is a country where groups have resisted total assimilation not for centuries, but millennia

Let's take the example of Marwaris - a very mobile group with significant presence across provinces. From Kozhikode in Kerala to Kolkata in Bengal

Now the Marwaris ofcourse do engage v closely with the culture they are located in. But the assimilation is never total

Endogamy is practiced, and a certain cultural distinctiveness remains even 100-150 years after migration

This reflects in the outcomes of the group too - they still dominate business / trade disproportionate to their absolute numbers in towns like Calcutta, where they are an ethnic minority

There is another community called Sankethis in Karnataka - a very small brahmin Smartha group that migrated from Southern Tamil Nadu to the Mysore region 1000 years ago

Even a millennium later, they retain their distinctiveness, and dialect. And their outcomes are different

Another example is the community of Sri-Vaishnavas in Mysore region - again a very heterogeneous bunch - some of them are local converts to Sri-Vaishnavism, others are migrants from Tamil country - at various points in history ranging fro 12th to 20th century

Again these groups have remained distinct and not melted into the larger brahmana demographic of Karnataka.

They still speak Tamil and not Kannada, even 2-3 centuries after migration

This urge to be different and aloof can have several motivations - which you may or may not care for

But it is not altogether a negative thing - as it is a source of cultural capital, a counterweight to populism, regional nationalism, and groupthink

Now when Indians (who move) don't really melt and adopt the culture of the province they are in, even within India, why would you expect them to do that when they move countries?

It is unlikely at least in the short to medium term - say a couple of generations