Los Angeles language schools and competing Chinese nationalisms

The relationship between homeland states and their diasporic subjects abroad has been a subject of social scientific inquiry on both sides of the Atlantic (Dufoix 2008; Smith 2003). Scholars from various disciplinary perspectives have put forth theories of why homeland states engage with emigrant or coethnic populations, and why these populations seek to engage with the government of their homeland. What is missing in the literature is a theory of how such homeland-diaspora relationships come into being and how they change over time. Understanding the development of homeland-diaspora relationships is crucial for making sense of migrant transnationalism and of state sovereignty in a globalized era. This study addresses this gap in the literature through a historical and ethnographic study of the relationship between the Republic of China (ROC) and Chinese language schools in Los Angeles. The case of the ROC and the Chinese diaspora is an illuminating case because the anomalous nature of the ROC’s political status calls into question many of the main assumptions in the existing literature. In particular, it challenges the assumption that each diaspora corresponds to a sole, legitimated homeland state. In the Chinese case, the geopolitical divisions at the end of the Chinese Civil War resulted in two states: the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on the Chinese mainland and the ROC on the island of Taiwan. While the communist PRC was not geopolitically legitimate in the West during the early part of the Cold War, widespread recognition of the PRC in the 1970s has left the ROC’s statehood claim in a liminal state. For the diaspora, this has resulted in two potential homeland states. The ROC’s de-legitimated claim to statehood has left it dependent on diaspora political support just as demographic shifts and transformations in the US social and political environment made it easier for the diaspora to support the PRC. I argue that the balance of power between the ROC diaspora bureau and the language schools have transformed since the Cold War as a result of domestic and geopolitical changes. The key factor shaping this relationship is the presence of the PRC and its changing geopolitical role since the 1980s. My explanation bridges theories of migrant transnationalism with theories of resource dependence among hierarchically linked organizations. This study contributes to the literatures on immigration, nationalism, and ethnicity, but also to broader literatures on borders and the reach of the state.