Hakka Identity Formation among Caribbean and Indian Hakkas in Toronto

Inspiration for writing is drawn from several sources and motivated by various factors. In the fall of 2001, while deciding on a topic for my Master’s thesis, I chose to investigate Hakka identity for three main reasons. First, at a personal level, this research served as a critical self-reflective project, through which I sought to “discover” and “understand” my own Hakka roots and hoped to gain a deeper understanding of my identity relative to others. My intentions are most eloquently captured by Kobayashi (1994: 78), who stated: “I do not use other people’s struggles, [experiences and concerns] as the basis for my research; I use my research as a basis for struggles, [experiences and concerns] of which I am a part”. Secondly, at the community level, I attempted to address a concern many Hakkas face as a result of our unique history. The issue of ethnic identity was underscored at the 2000 Toronto Hakka Conference and during my focus group discussion, where it became clear that Hakka identity was a pressing topic that warranted further exploration. Lastly, at the academic level, my goal was to contribute to academia by adding to the ongoing debate on ethnic identity formation and shedding more light on this largely under-researched Chinese ethnic group.

Ethnic identity has become “one of the most common categories humans use to organize their ideas about who they are, to evaluate their experiences and behaviours, and to understand the world around them” (Cornell and Hartmann,

1998: 12). Although ethnic identity can be conceived as a seemingly simple concept, numerous scholars have presented conflicting perspectives on its formation. One of the major debates surrounding ethnic identity in academia can be encapsulated using three major competing theories. The Primordial theory views ethnic identity as an ascribed identity that is fixed and permanent and rooted in ancestry, culture and history. The Instrumentalist theory views ethnic identity as a tool through which political, economic and social resources can be obtained (Cornell and Hartmann, 1998: 68). Meanwhile, the Constructionist theory views ethnic identity as multi-dimensional, dynamic and fluid, and constructed in relation to factors such as ‘place’ and social interactions (Isajiw, 1999; Cornell and Hartmann, 1998, Barth, 1994). The Constructionist theory also contends that unequal power relations are elementary in the formation of ethnic identities, where “dominant cultures” can produce “other identities” or “minority cultures” (Peake and Ray, 2001: 18; Yon, 1996). “Difference” does not refer to inherited traits, heritage and traditions; rather “difference” is imagined, created and dependent on the interaction between the “’dominant culture’ and ‘minority cultures’” (Yon, 1996: 481).

The objective of this paper is to explore the characteristics central in the formation of Hakka identity, with particular emphasis on the population in Toronto. In-depth face-to-face interviews were conducted with fifteen Caribbean-born and fifteen Indian-born Hakkas in Toronto between October and November 2002. The interviews explored themes such as participants’ views on ethnic identity and their position in relation to the three theories.