The Main Conclusions

Not so long ago most politicians and academics, both those on the right and those on the left of the political and intellectual-academic spectra, dismissed ethno-national diasporism and diasporas as ephemeral social and political phenomena that did not merit specific attention or detailed study. It was also held that the numbers of members in those communities were negligible and that their ability to influence cultural, political, and economic developments was minimal.

Politicians and academics subscribing to rightist and nationalist philosophies hoped that nation-states, ruled by dominant ethnic nations or ethnic groups, would be able to cope with all of the other ethnic groups, including ethno-national diasporas, residing within their borders. On rather questionable theoretical and empirical grounds they were con.dent that such nations, nation-states, and dominant groups, which they portrayed as superior to all other social and political entities, would be able to impose their norms and eventually achieve assimilation, or at least full integration, of all other groups. Leftist observers argued that the continuing existence of diasporas was attributable mainly to economic factors. They believed that either improvements in economic conditions, through further expansion of the welfare state, or success of the anticipated class struggle would remove the incentive for migration and reduce the tensions between host societies and their ethnic minorities and resident diasporas. Above all, they hoped for eventual disappearance of those ethnic entities.