You are rather short-sighted in your analysis.
We shall see.
1) The spread of Chinese culture, values, and interests need not be intentional, or politically motivated. Every person brings their own cultural values with them every time they interact with another person. Chinese people will join cultural events, community groups, and make socio-political decisions that are based on Chinese cultural values and interests. THAT is how overseas Chinese promote Chinese culture, values, and interests, and there is nothing "nebulous", "alien", or "tarring" about it!
Sounds alright, except:
Every individual has his own characteristics. Some Chinese people are articulate and charming, they no doubt promote. Others are not so much. They probably have a negative effect, if anything. Take an example, Chinese counter-protests against Olympic torch protests or Tibet protests, and let's see if a local western find that a particularly fine promotion of Chinese culture, values and interests.
I am not sure how you can possibly assume that just because a Chinese person brings some aspect of China with them they would automatically promote anything. Give you another example. Mid to late 19th century Chinese immigrants to America were a very hard working people. Some of the ideas they bring to the Western mind about China is the stereotypical pig-tailed, dirty, scrapping, dog-eating 'Chinaman'. Still think all overseas Chinese promote Chinese culture just by interacting?
2) Assimilation happens depending on the family. Some Chinese families decide to let their children assimilate, others strive to have their children learn the Chinese language and culture. You are also wrong in claiming that 2nd and 3rd gen Chinese cease to identify themselves as Chinese. Look at San Francisco: there are ethnic Chinese communities over there that were established in the 19th century. Look at how enthusiastic they were about Beijing getting the 2008 olympics. Look at the turn out and the outpouring of support among SF Chinese communities that happened during the torch relay.
Yes? ANd what's the percentage in each? Are you claiming that an actual majority of persons of Chinese ancestry self-identify as Chinese? If so, show some evidence to back up your claim. Preferably with some statistics, otherwise this is all meaningless. And since you called anecdotal to support your claim, I'll come right back with 'just because your parents want to immerse you in Chinese culture, doesn't mean you'll actually like it or do it, look at any number of 2nd generation persons of Chinese ancestry who rebel against that'.
And oddly enough, you can actually celebrate a sporting event without actually supporting the country. And San Francisco, believe it or not, is an insignficant part of the persons of Chinese ancestry as a whole. I fail to see how you can generalise a bit of real estate with Chinese signage and people turning out on parades does not actually make them Chinese? I am sure they turn out in force to celebrate Christmas, too, does that make them all Christians? At its highest it makes them Chinese-Americans. It does not make them Chinese, and therein lies a big difference..
You fail to understand that people are complex animals. They can hold somewhat different and maybe contradictory ideas in their heads, like 'I am Canadian' and 'I am Chinese' to form their own unique identity. So they can go on a Chinese New Year parade one day and then happily go to Canada Day celebration the next (well, not literally the next day). It's when the chips are down and it comes down to a choice between, say, China and their adoptive homeland - or that of their own - interests that one can determine their loyalty. I want you to look me in the eye and tell me that an 'average person of Chinese ancestry' will put Chinese interests first.
Funny how some people automatically brand as "racism" any mention of an ethnic community being "special". What you fail to realize, however, is that the Chinese people is special. It is the Chinese culture that makes them special. Yes, the same culture that has enabled the Chinese to assimilate two foreign dynasties and turn them into Chinese dynasties. The same culture that has allowed a people to survive millenia of political upheaval and still retain a national identity. Anyone who denies the power of culture is just ignorant, or willfully blind for the sake of PC.
Racist rubbish. I look at Mongolia, they use OUR script, the Cyrillic script, and many of them speak Russian. They don't look assimilated Chinese to me. Just because you can flood Inner Mongolia with immigrants doesn't mean you've successfully assimilated the Mongolian people.
And guess what, assimilating a conqueror is hardly an exclusively Chinese phenomenon. Quite a few peoples did it. Norse and Huns disappeared into Christian European, Rusyn' adopted Greek Orthodoxy and script, the Turks saw themselves and successors of Rome, Persia swallowed up her Arab conquerors, and India ate up more conquerors than you can count. The fact that you actually think this is a unique phenomenon speaks volumes about your skewed view, and even blinder to the fact that assimilation goes both ways. There is a lot of 'barbarian' blood in Chinese culture, starting from the semi-'barbaric' Qin and Chu kingdoms through the volkwanderung of the 4th to 6th centuries, the Tang dynasty, and so on. China's 'identity' CHANGED. You can blindly close your eyes and claim that China retain the same national identity over the last 2 millennia of a sometimes-united Chinese state, but that is equally ignorant, if not more so.
There are plenty of other peoples who endured similar or worse and retained a similar sense of national identity over a similar period. The Jews, the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, even the Turks have an astonishingly robust national consciousness stretching over 1300 years.
China is not unique or special, get over it.
3) If you think overseas Chinese are not interested in defending Chinese interests, then you've obviously never read Chinese newspapers during the Tibet riots, or heard about the March 29 rallies, seen the nigh-unanimous support for the Beijing olympics, or the out-pouring of contributions for the Sichuan Earthquake.
I was in Hong Kong when that happened, the government parade was notable by its sparse attendance. And this is Hong Kong, hardly what you'd called 'overseas Chinese'.
Hogwash. I donated 5,000 HKD to Sichuan, are you saying I am Chinese now? Having sympathies due to common cultural heritage is not the same as identifying oneself as Chinese. JAPAN and KOREA gave large amounts of donation, and so did the largely hostile Taiwan. Are they Chinese too?
4) No, I'm not saying people with cutting-edge expertise should go back to China. Whether they do or not is entirely their own decision. What I am doing is speaking out against the automatic (and entirely wrong) assumption that one can only contribute to China's development by going back to China.
I accept that is what you say. Here's an interesting piece of statistics. Over 90% of the 54,000 or so Chinese people who gained PhDs in America since the reopening of overseas studies for PRC residents elected to stay in America, you may take that how you will, I am sure YOU think they all have China in their hearts.
Also, this whole "management-bottleneck" thing is bogus. I'm not saying that China doesn't need quality management personelle. I'm saying the idea that Western-trained management professionals can alleviate any kind of economic bottle-neck in China is nebulous at best, and wishful-thinking at worst. Western business dynamics is very different from Chinese business dynamics, and issues of corruption (in public or private sectors) aren't going to be resolved by an MBA from a western institution.
Except China keeps on employing hundreds of thousands of Westerners and Western-trained managers. The problem with you is I debate with facts, and you with rhetoric and opinion.
Finally, patriotism is a choice. You might not be interested in it, but that doesn't mean other people aren't. There is nothing conflicting about making a better life for yourself overseas while promoting the interests of your homeland at the same time. Not unless you are an adherent of the idea that global politics is a zero-sum game.
Are you of the opinion that it's NEVER a zero-sum game? Sometimes there may be none. An Englishman emigrating to America or Australia doesn't really change much of anything. But when there is often power contradictions between your adoptive homeland and your ancestral ones, conflict of interest WILL arise. I am astonished that you cited the Tibet and Olympic counter-protests as examples and yet fail to see that. That's wilful blindness at its worse. Anybody can see that China and the West has areas of conflict.
So what do you serve if a conflict boils over over Taiwan? It's not always Chinese cultural evenings and Chinatown new year parades, you know. When the conflicts are below the surface, it's easy. Try looking at times when things are tough.
Personally, I don't wish to see a repeat of the Cold-War era, and I believe that globalization can be an engine for global cooperation. I also think that a global balance (as opposed to imbalance) of power is more conducive toward achieving that goal.
I don't even see what that has to do with the issue. I wish to see World Peace, too, doesn't mean we are going to get along with the Latvians tomorrow.
Edit:
Ever read about the contributions of overseas Chinese toward the Resistance War against Japan? Did you know that Sun Zhongshan's (Yat-sen) brother lived in America, and that he supported Sun Zhongshan financially throughout his revolutionary activities? Still think overseas Chinese don't act in China's interests?
Isolated examples. That's like saying since individual Japanese helped Dr. Sun, therefore Japan contributed greatly to China's revolution. The fact that you take something that happened a century ago and somehow generalised that into something that is true generally speaks volume of the validity of your argument.
Why don't you consider the nation of Singapore? An entire nation of OVerseas Chinese, do they always act for China's best interests?
The crux of the matter is that you made an extremely bold claim that overseas Chinese are out there to promote Chinese interests, I have yet to see a single piece of actual evidence backing this up. Chinese emigrants are people just like any other sort of emigrants, they emigrate for their own personal reasons, they do not go out there for the good of China as a general rule. Back up your assertions with evidence and reasoning, retract it.
