From the "Influx of the Yellow Race" to "Migrant Workers": Dynamics of the Languages for Describing Cross-Border Migrations in Russia

Due to their dominance in the Soviet era, the “national” idea and the language, that were rather organic and accepted not only by ideology, but by the mass consciousness as well, became a natural and dominant tool for describing and assessing mass cross-border labour migrations after socialism. However, although this language was widely used by the authorities and the mass media, as well as ordinary people and, to put it carefully, a noticeable part of the scientific community, its limited heuristic capabilities soon manifested themselves. In other words, the migration situation did not fit into the “national” language. This might not even been realised and not reflected, but such words from the socio-economic dictionary as “migrants”, “labour migrants” and “migrant workers” smoothly entered, and then started prevailing in the language.

This dynamic did not mean a complete replacement of one system of representations and description language with another. When the hierarchy of discourses changes, overlapping, coexistence and interaction, rather than their replacement, takes place. Even the racial approach, that seemed to be completely discredited and displaced by the events of the 20^th century, left a noticeable trace of words and images. The “yellow” ones of the late imperial era were replaced by the “blacks” of the late socialism and post-socialist transition. However, for all its operability, now it is a clearly marginal language, forced out from the public sphere, and having lost its heuristic function. The word “yellow” could have a neutral connotation, from the author's point of view, a statement of insurmountable natural differences. “Blacks” is merely an insult.

The ethnic language of description retains its strong positions for a completely obvious objective reason. Cross-border migrants bring not only their workforce, but their languages, cultural norms, behaviour models and practices, as well as lifestyle. Migration processes have a clear and powerful ethnocultural component, which is not heuristic to ignore from a scientific point of view and dangerous to ignore from the social and political points of view. The point here is the priorities and the adequate use of description languages. It is clear that this is largely a spontaneous and poorly regulated process. However, the fact that authorities declare their desire to “work with diasporas” in solving migration problems at all levels, and that there are plans to transfer migration issues from the destroyed migration service to another “national policy” department, indicates a clear lag in understanding the problem in all its dynamics and complexity.

The migration situation is dynamically developing. Russian society and its attitude to the problem of the presence of migrants is changing dynamically as well. The rich and contradictory migration experience of other countries, especially the countries of Europe and North America is increasingly comprehended and experienced. Probably due to the fact that the process of comprehending and verbalising the migration phenomenon in Russia has not been complete. A new configuration of both already known and tested approaches, as well as radical changes in the language of description and evaluation are possible.

References

Abashin, S.N. (2012). Sredneaziatskiya migratsiia: praktiki, lokal'nye soobshchestva, transnatsion- alizm [Central Asian Migration: Practices, Local Communities, Transnationalism]. In Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Etnograficheskoe obozrenie], 4, 3-13.

Dameshek, L.M. (2016). Okrainnaia politika imperii i metody inkorporatsii korennogo naseleniia sopredelinykh territorii Rossii XVIII - nachala XX v. [Suburban Policy of the Russian Empire and Methods of Incorporation of the Indigenous People of the Neighbouring Territories of Russia in the 18^th - Early 20^th Century]. In Izvestiia Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia «Istoriia» [The Bulletin of Irkutsk State University. Series «History»], 17, 35-47.

Dyatlov, V.I. (2000). Migratsiia kitaitsev i diskussiia o “zheltoi opasnosti” v dorevoliutsionnoi Rossii [Migration of The Chinese and The Discussion of The “Yellow Peril” in Pre-Revolutionary Russia]. In Vest- nikEvrazii [Bulletin of Eurasia], 1, 63-89.

Dyatlov, V. (2008). “I togda mama vziala obrez...” Samosud i otnoshenie k “chuzhakam” v obshchestvennom mnenii rossiiskoi provintsii 1990-kh godov [And Then My Mother Took A Sawn-Off Gun ...” Lynching and Attitude to “Strangers” in The Public Opinion of The Russian Province of The 1990s]. In VestnikEvrazii [Bulletin of Eurasia], 4(42), 142-176.

Glebov, S. (2017). Between Foreigners and Subjects: Imperial Subjecthood, Governance, and the Chinese in the Russian Far East, 1860s-1880s. In Ab Imperio, 1, 86-130.

Grave, V.V. (1912). Kitaitsy, koreytsy i iapontsy v Priamur'e. Otchet Upolnomochennogo Ministerstva Inostrannykh Del V.V.Grave [Chinese, Koreans and Japanese in the Amur region. Report of the Plenipotentiary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs V.V. Grave]. In Trudy komandirovannoi po Vysochaishemu poveleniiu Amurskoi ekspeditsii [Proceedings of the Amur Expedition Sent by the Royal Command], 9, Saint-Petersburg. 465 p.

Gulina, O. (2016). Semantika migratsionnykh terminov [Exploring the Semantics of Migration Terminology]. In The Journal of Social Policy Studies, 14 (3), 331-346.

Klements, D. (1905). Beglye zametki o zheltoi opasnosti [Quick Notes about The Yellow Peril]. In Russkoye bogatstvo [Russian Wealth], 7, 36-56.

Kovalevsky, M. (1909). Porto-franko vo Vladivostoke [Porto Franco in Vladivostok]. In Vestnik Evropy [Bulletin of Europe], 255, 423-437.

Larin, A.G. (2009). Kitaiskie migranty v Rossii. Istoriia i sovremennost' [Chinese Migrants in Russia. History and Modernity]. М., Vostochnaia kniga. 512 p.

Levinson, A. (2005). “Kavkaz” podo mnoiu. Kratkie zametki po formirovaniiu i prakticheskomu is- pol'zovaniiu “obraza vraga” v otnoshenii “lits kavkazskoi natsional'nosti” [“The Caucasus” Beneath Me. Brief Notes on The Formation and Practical Use of The “Image of The Enemy” in Relation to “Persons of Caucasian Nationality”]. In Obraz vraga [The Image of The Enemy]. М, OGI, 276-301.

L.G. (1916). Zheltyi trud na Dal'nem Vostoke po dannym 1914 goda [Yellow Labour in the Far East according to the Data of 1914]. In Voprosy kolonizatsii [Issues of Colonization], 19, 140-171.

Lohr, E. (2017). Rossiiskoe grazhdanstvo: ot imperii k Sovetskomu Soiuzu [Russian Citizenship: From Empire to Soviet Union], Tr. by M. Semikolennykh, М., Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 344 с.

Matsokin, P.G. (1911). Otsenka dannykh proizvodstv v iaponskikh, kitaiskikh i evropeiskikh remeslenno-promyshlennykh zavedeniyakh za 1910-1911 gg. [Assessment of Production Data in Japanese, Chinese and European Handicraft and Industrial Enterprises for 1910-1911]. In Vestnik Azii [Bulletin of Asia], 10, 1-20.

Merlin, A., Radvani, J. (2003). Russes et Caucasiens a' la fin du XX Siecle. Identites et territories. In Revue d'etudes comparatives Est-Ouest, 34 (4), 77-94.

Mezhduvedomstvennoe soveshchanie po delam Dal'nego Vostoka. Spravka po voprosu o merakh bor'by s kita'skoi torgovlei v Priamur'e [InterdepartmentalMeeting on The Issues of The Far East. Information on Measures to Combat Chinese Trade in The Amur River Region]. (s.l.n.d.).

Migratsiia v Rossii. 2000 - 2012. Khrestomatiya v 3 tomakh [Migration in Russia. 2000-2012. Anthology in 3 Vol.] (2013). М., Spetskniga, Vol. 1-3.

Pal'veleva, L. (2008). Kliuchevoe slovo: “litso kavkazskoi natsional'nosti” [Keyword: “Person of Caucasian Nationality”]. In Radio Svoboda [Radio Svoboda]. 16.05.08.

Panov, A. (1910). Zheltyi vopros v Priamur'e [Yellow Issue in the Amur Region]. In Voprosy kolonizatsii [Issues of Colonization], 7, 53-116.

Petrov, A.I. (2001). Koreiskaia diaspora v Rossii [Korean Diaspora in Russia. 1897 - 1917]. Vladivistok, FEB RAS. 400 p.

Pozniak, T.Z. (2004). Inostrannyepoddannye vgorodakh Dal'nego VostokaRossii (vtoraiapolovina XIX - nachalo XX v.) [Foreign Nationals in the Cities of the Russian Far East (Late 19^th - Early 20^th Century)]. Vladivistok, Dal'nauka. 316 p.

Predvaritel'nye itogi biudzhetnogo obsledovaniia rabochikh i sluzhashchikh Dal'nego Vostoka v marte 1924 g. [Preliminary Results of a Budget Study of Workers and Employees of The Far East in March 1924] (1925). Khabarovsk. 24 p.

Siegelbaum, L.H. Moch, L.P. (2014). Broad Is My Native Land: Repertoires and Regimes of Migration in Russia's Twentieth Century. Cornell Univ. Press. 440 p.

Slovar' osnovnykh istoricheskikh poniatiy: Izbr. stat'i: v 2 t. [Dictionary of Basic Historical Terms: Selected Articles: in 2 vol] (2014). M., Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Vol. 1. 736 p.

Sorokina, T.N. (2009). Proekt immigratsionnogo zakona dlia oblastei Dal'nego Vostoka 1914 g. kak istoricheskiy istochnik [The Draft of The Immigration Law for The Regions of the Far East of 1914 as A Historical Source]. In Dokument v kontekste istorii: materialy 11 Mezhd. nauch. konf. [Document in The Context of History: Proceedings of the 11 International Scientific Conference], Omsk, 197-204.

Unterberger, P.F. (1900). Primorskaya oblast' 1856 - 1898 gg. [Primorskaya Oblast of 1856 - 1898]. Saint-Petersburg. 324 p.

Valetov, T.Ya. (2008). Samoorganizovannye sezonnye brigady (shabashniki) v SSSR v 1960-1980- kh gg.: ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye aspekty [Self-Organised Seasonal Teams (“The Shabashniks”) in the USSR in 1960s-1980s: Economic and Social Aspects]. In Ekonomicheskaa istoriia. Obozreniie. Vypusk 14 /Pod red. L.I. Borodkina [Economic History. Review, Ed. L.I. by Borodkin]. М., MSU Publishing House, 14, 203-226.

Vsepoddanneishii otchet Priamurskogo general-gubernatora General-Leitenanta Dukhovskogo. 1893, 1894 и 1895 gody [Annual Most Humble Reports of the Amur Governor General Lieutenant Duk- hovsky. 1893, 1894 и 1895] (1895). Saint-Petersburg. 172 p.

Yurchak, A. (2016). Eto bylo navsegda, poka ne konchilos'. Poslednee sovetskoepokolenie [Everything was Forever, Until it Was No More: The Last Soviet Generation]. М, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. 664 p.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

От «наплыва желтой расы» к «гастарбайтерам»: динамика языков описания трансграничных миграций в России

Аннотация. Феномен массовых трансграничных трудовых миграций в Россию позднеимперского и постсоветского периодов остро нуждался в осмыслении с тем, чтобы выстраивать взаимоотношения (для населения) и «управлять процессом» (для властей). Новизна феномена требовала формирования корпуса миграционной терминологии - как обыденной, так и официальной, публичной. Важность изучения проблемы состоит в том, что в термины закладывается как понимание феномена, так и отношение к нему, с их помощью формируется дискурс. В позднеимперскую эпоху использовалась привычная терминология подданства и сословия, начали применяться этнические категории, однако ключевой была метафора, ставшая термином «наплыв желтой расы». В нем концентрировалось представление о миграции как о природном стихийном процессе и о мигрантах как части расово чуждых природных тел. Советская эпоха оставила господство примордиалистского этнического дискурса, который преобладал на первой стадии миграционного процесса постсоветской эпохи. Вскоре он начал дополняться, а затем и вытесняться социальной, собственно миграционной терминологией. «Китаец» становится «китайским мигрантом», затем просто «мигрантом», на смену которому приходит «гастарбайтер». Эта динамика не означала полной замены одной системы представлений и языка описания другой, меняется иерархия дискурсов. Однако она отчетливо показывает смену отношения принимающего российского общества к мигрантам и миграционной ситуации в целом.

Ключевые слова: миграции, мигранты, позднеимперская Россия, постсоветская Россия, миграционные термины, «наплыв желтой расы», «китайский мигрант», «гастарбайтер», «таджик».