To what extent does a Soviet legacy shape the experiences of former Soviet (FS) immigrants living in the U.S.? This historically grounded question is relevant in a post-Soviet reality as the number of immigrants from FS republics living in the U.S. has increased by almost 200% since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Using semi-structured interviews, surveys and a snowball/quota sampling technique, I inquired among adults of multiple ethnicities and multiple countries of origin within the former Soviet Union who were living in two communities in the United States: Nashville, Tennessee (survey n=46; interview n=10) and Brooklyn, New York (survey n=131; interview n=16). The main foci of research were hypothesis testing about three organizing categories of immigrant status (refugee, titularity, and ethnicity) and theory exploration (social capital and migration theories). In general, I discovered that titularity (a match between ethnicity and country of origin) matters and should be considered in any migration research. To continue to call all persons from former Soviet republics Russian despite their ethnicity and/or country of origin is problematic. More specifically, I found that non-refugees were not likely to engage formal (e.g. government, non-profit) institutions for financial or other forms of help. Non-titular immigrants were more likely than titular immigrants to report experiences of discrimination as a reason for leaving their countries of origin. Titular immigrants were more likely to be temporary immigrants, intending to return home to live. Titular immigrants were more likely to send remittances to their countries of origin and more frequently did so. Central Asian and European non-Jewish ethnic groups were more likely to experience discrimination in Nashville than in Brooklyn. Central Asian and Transcaucasian ethnic groups were more likely to consider their countries of origin as home. I offer an ecology of immigration model as a helpful tool to better understand the immigrant experience. Limitations, implications, and future research ideas are also discussed.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:VANDERBILT/oai:VANDERBILTETD:etd-11262013-173658 |
| Date | 19 December 2013 |
| Creators | Robinson, Jill |
| Contributors | Doug Perkins, Beth Shinn, Richard Lloyd, Kathryn Anderson, Paul Dokecki, Andrei Korobkov |
| Publisher | VANDERBILT |
| Source Sets | Vanderbilt University Theses |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | http://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/available/etd-11262013-173658/ |
| Rights | restricted, I hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to Vanderbilt University or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report. |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds