Chinese Immigration in
Australia
Introduction
Immigration
has led to the growth of a prominent Chinese population in NSW and the rest of
Australia since the time of the gold rush in 1850 (Collins 2002).
More than 47%
of the New South Wales population have parents born overseas and immigrants
with Chinese ancestry constitute the 5th largest percentage in the
state of New South Wales population (ABS 2012). China is the second most common
country of birth while the languages Mandarin and the dialect Cantonese makes
up around 4% of the languages spoken in New South Wales other than English (ABS
2012).
This article seeks to examine whether a Marxist or Weberian approach is
more effective considering the intersection of Chinese immigration and social
class in New South Wales and the wider Australian population.
Marxian Analysis
A
Marxist approach typically focuses on the economic struggle and inequality
between the proletariat (working class) and the bourgeoisie (capitalist class).
Marx viewed the bourgeoisie as those who own the means of production while the
proletariat had nothing to sell except their working power thus simultaneously
producing the wealth of those who tower over them and the inequality that encompasses
them.
In the early Chinese Diaspora or
‘spreading out’ to Australia there were around 38,000 Chinese immigrant workers
in the 1850’s (Choi 1975, p.22 as quoted in Collins 2002). Despite their prevalence
in the population there was clearly economic inequality between the worker vs
capitalist. ‘In Queensland, Chinese were paid about 20 pounds per year, which
was 22 pounds less than Europeans were paid’ (Collins 2002) which is an example
of the subsistence wage that is also considered in a Marxist analysis.
A
more contemporary example would be the difficulty of Chinese immigrant
accounting students in securing a job after graduating from university. According
to interviews conducted by Collins (2002) Chinese graduates are limited by
‘elaborate systems, networks, protocols and processes’ that ensure the ongoing
maintenance of the upper-class. Collins (2002) interviews demonstrate that the
Australian government ‘system’ misleads Chinese immigrants with the idea of a
prosperous future through higher education.
From a Marxist perspective the
Australian university sector is simply another bourgeoisie system that sells
education as an economic commodity and subsequently forces many Chinese
immigrants who, having been rejected by accounting firms, have no choice but to
either return to China or take up low paying jobs and ‘thus join Australian
society’s marginalised “underclass” (Collins 2002) a class position that
Marxism views as a consequence of bourgeoisie hoarding and movement of capital
between markets.
However
Marxism of the 19th century as a social analytic tool is flawed in
that Marx believed the society would split up into two opposing sides of
bourgeoisie vs. proletariat. By the 20th century Marxism had to be
modified to accommodate the growing emergence of a middle-class.
According to Ho
and Kee (1988) Chinese immigrants have become ‘an integral part of the middle
class landscape’ due to changes to immigration policies that have brought in
more highly educated and skilled immigrants into the Australian population and
the workforce. Marxian class analysis
seems to be effective in examining the capitalist system and how individuals
are distributed within this system yet relies too heavily on the assumption
that there are two major sides and not considering other factors.
Weberian
Analysis
A Weberian
approach to class involves an analysis of three main factors, economic class,
status groups and party. Weber expanded the economics of Marx into the
propertied class, the intelligentsia, traditional petit bourgeoisie and the
working class. Weber considered ones market situation to be ultimately their
market situation. Income, career prospects and skills are just some of the
numerous factors that make Chinese immigrants ‘sought after as important
"contributors" to a rapidly changing Australia, both in terms of
their economic and cultural capital’ (Inglis et al, 1998).
Residential areas
are another factor that should considered in conjunction with income. Burnley (2002)’s findings show that Chinese
immigrants in high income brackets of around $78,000 settled in ‘upper class’
areas of Sydney such as Hornsby and the North Shore. These upper class Chinese
immigrant residents were also typically in managerial work thus demonstrating
the relevance of Webers addition of the intelligentsia class. However the
article also pointed out that many Chinese immigrants are now settling in the
Inner West in areas such as Strathfield and Ashfield as they are closer to
Chinese social and cultural institutions, which bring us to Webers second class
factor.
While Weber
agreed with Marx’s analysis of economic inequality, he believed that status
groups also played a critical role in understand ones class situation. In a sense cultural capital was as essential
as economic capital and could be anything from aristocratic groups, specific ethnic
markets or sharing similar religions.
Among the Chinese population in Sydney 17%
were Christians, 10% were Buddhists and 65% were “other” or without religious
beliefs (Burnley 2002). Even immigrants, who were not overly religious before
arriving in Australia, typically attended local Chinese Christian churches or
Buddhist temples for social support due to limited English. However status can include factors such as
gender, race, and lifestyles among others and as such is a vital yet extremely
broad term to use.
The
last of Webers analytical ideas is party which involves political organisations
in society that function as means for wielding power and influence over the
general populace. Chongyi (2011) discuss the ‘cultural, ideological or
political baggage’ carried over by Chinese immigrants. In an effort to “enhance
Sino-Australian understanding and friendship” affluent Chinese immigrants organise
major Chinese festival and invest in Chinese culture among other things, in
order to engage in the “politics of the homeland” as well as participate in
Australian politics.
Another party factor
that influenced Chinese immigration and class would be the White Australia
Policy implemented in 1901. Weber believed that political parties are concerned
with the acquisition of social power which in this case was the power to
discriminate against Chinese immigrants. A ‘dictation test’ was implemented as
a method of excluding immigrants who couldn’t answer correctly in a European
language. According to Choi (1975) through Collins (2002) this party policy
definitely had an impact on the Chinese immigrant population as it fell from
30,000 in 1901 to 9,000 in 1947.
There are
numerous Chinese organisations such as the Australian Chinese Forum in Sydney, and the Newcastle and Hunter Valley Chinese Association (Chan 1989).
While they do not possess the party power that Weber attached to government and
pressure groups, they do provide a means for new wave Chinese immigrants to
find a sense of unity within a foreign country.
Yet according to
Chongyi (2009) the People’s Republic of China have criticised overseas Chinese
for being in different to the host societies affairs, for economic greed and
abuse of leadership positions. Thus it
can be gathered that such parties do provide a sense of belonging yet also
hinder the progress of integration into the host society and could result into
abuses of party power not so much on a government political level but from a
simpler economic level and disregard for the welfare of ordinary members. Thus
the Chinese parties may inadvertently be affecting the class situation of their
own members (Chongyi 2009).
Conclusion
Understanding
the social class situation of Chinese immigrants using Marxian and Weberian
analysis has its ups and downs. Marxism is extremely effective at shedding
light on the economic situation of Chinese immigrants and wealth inequality. Yet
its reliance on two major classes of the proletariat vs the bourgeoisie means
Marxian analysis is flawed because it only works on a global economic scale as
evidenced by the need to modify 20th century Marxism to accommodate
the middle class. Webers intelligentsia and the traditional petit bourgeoisie
remedy Marxism economic class and his introduction of party is vital to
understanding why immigrant populations may or may not integrate into a host
society like Australia. However status groups pose a problem as there many
possible factors such as religion and age. Overall Weberian analysis if
researched and used thoroughly considering as many factors as possible is a
superior analytical tool to the economically restricted Marxian perspective.
