Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Immigration, Hybrid Identity, and Sense of Belonging: New Societies, New Identities

Year 2016, Volume: 5 Issue: 8, 2613 - 2623, 25.12.2016
https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.281840

Abstract

 Immigration is one of the most social
movements in human history. People have changed places in which they live
because of many reasons.
  Through this
process, they have carried their cultures, languages, lifestyles, and so on.
They have met so many different cultures, and they have an interaction and
create new ones. People, as transporter, have a significant effect on society.
They build and change the culture all the time. Thanks to the new technological
improvements, people can have an interaction easier than before. This situation
makes the vast differences in the understanding of a sense of belonging and new
sorts of identities. Today, people can even build their identity. This new kind
of identity is called hybrid identity in sociology.

References

  • Alba, R., Nee, V. (1997). Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. International Migration Review, 31(4), 826-874.
  • Anık, M. (2012). Kimlik ve Çok Kültürcülük Sosyolojisi. İstanbul: Açılım Kitap.
  • Aron, R. (1994). Sosyoljik Düşüncenin Evreleri, çev. Korkmaz Alemdar, 3. Basım. İstanbul: Akım Yay.
  • Bauböck, R. (1998). The crossing and blurring of boundaries in international migration: Challenges for social and political theory. In R. Bauböck and J. Rundell (Eds), Blurred boundaries: Migration, ethnicity, citizenship (s. 17-52). Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  • Brubaker, R., Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and Society, 29 (1), 1-47.
  • Chambers, I. (1994). Immigation, Culture, Identitiy. London : Routledge.
  • Clothier, I. (2005). Created Identities: Hybrid Cultures and the Internet. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 11(4), 44-59.
  • Cieslik, A., Verkuyten, M. 2006. National, Ethnic and Religious Identities: Hybridity and the Case of the Polish Tatars. National Identities 8 (2). 77–93. doi:10.1080/14608940600703650.
  • Erder, S. (1986). Refah Toplumunda “Getto” ve Türkler. İstanbul: Teknografik Matbaacılık.
  • Güvenç, B. (1999). İnsan ve Kültür, Ankara: Remzi Kitabevi.
  • Ilgin, C., hacihasanoğlu, O. (2010). Göç-aidiyet ilişkisinin belirlenmesi için model. İTÜDERGİSİ/a, 5(2).
  • İçduygu, A., İbrahim S. (1999). “Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye’sinde Göç Hareketleri”, 75 Yılda Köylerden Kentlere, Oya B. (der.), İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852.
  • Hattatoglu, P., Yakushko, O. (2014). Experiencing the Formation of Hybrid Cultural Identities in First- Generation Turkish Immigrants To The United States. Journal of Identity and Migration Studies, 8(1), 27-46.
  • Hybrid. (n.d.). In: Cambridge Dictionary, 1st ed. [online] Available at: http://dictionary.cambridge.org [Accessed 23 Aug. 2016].
  • Kaplan, D., Chacko, E. (2015). Placing immigrant identities. Journal of Cultural Geography, (32)1, 129-138. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852
  • Lawler, S. (2008). Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Martin, D. (1995). The choices of identity. Social Identities, 1(1), 5-20.
  • Modood, T. (2007). Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Pembecioğlu, N. (2012). Building identities: Living in the hybrid identities. Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies, 4(7), 46-59.
  • Erder, S. (1986). Refah Toplumunda “Getto” ve Türkler. İstanbul: Teknografik Matbaacılık.
  • Güvenç, B. (1999). İnsan ve Kültür, Ankara: Remzi Kitabevi.
  • Ilgin, C., hacihasanoğlu, O. (2010). Göç-aidiyet ilişkisinin belirlenmesi için model. İTÜDERGİSİ/a, 5(2).
  • İçduygu, A., İbrahim S. (1999). “Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye’sinde Göç Hareketleri”, 75 Yılda Köylerden Kentlere, Oya B. (der.), İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852.
  • Hattatoglu, P., Yakushko, O. (2014). Experiencing the Formation of Hybrid Cultural Identities in First- Generation Turkish Immigrants To The United States. Journal of Identity and Migration Studies, 8(1), 27-46.
  • Hybrid. (n.d.). In: Cambridge Dictionary, 1st ed. [online] Available at: http://dictionary.cambridge.org [Accessed 23 Aug. 2016].
  • Kaplan, D., Chacko, E. (2015). Placing immigrant identities. Journal of Cultural Geography, (32)1, 129-138. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852
  • Lawler, S. (2008). Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Martin, D. (1995). The choices of identity. Social Identities, 1(1), 5-20.
  • Modood, T. (2007). Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Pembecioğlu, N. (2012). Building identities: Living in the hybrid identities. Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies, 4(7), 46-59.
  • Pieterse, J. (2004). Capitalisms: Asian-European Dialogue after Enron. Asian Journal of Social Science, 32(2), 274-289.
  • Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, UK: Sage Publications.
  • Schlesinger, P. (1987). On national identity: some conception and misconceptions criticised. Social Science Information, 26 (2), 219-264.
  • Smith, K. (2008). Hybrid Identities: Theoretical Examinations IN: Iyall Smith, K. and Leavy, P. (eds) (2008) Hybrid identities. Leiden: Brill, 3-11.
  • United Nations (2015). [online] http://www.un.org/en/index.html. Available at: http://unıted nations [Accessed 15 Aug. 2016].
  • Tsouroufli, M. (2015). Hybridity, Identities and Inclusion of International PhD Students in England. Interdisciplinary Perspectives in Equality and Diversity, 1(1), 5-49.

Göç, Hibrit Kimlik ve Aidiyet: Yeni Toplumlar, Yeni Kimlikler

Year 2016, Volume: 5 Issue: 8, 2613 - 2623, 25.12.2016
https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.281840

Abstract

Göç
insanlık tarihinde en önemli sosyal değişimlerden biridir. İnsanlar çeşitli
sebeplerden dolayı yaşadıkları yerlerden göç etmek durumunda kalmışlardır.  Bu göç süreçleri boyunca, gittikleri yerlere
kendi dillerini, kültürlerini yaşam tarzlarını da beraberinde götürmüşlerdir.
Göçmen olarak bireyler taşıyıcı rolünü üstlenmişlerdir ve bu etkileşimler
sonucunda toplumlar üzerinde önemli değişimlere sebep olmuşlardır. Tarih
boyunca göçmenler toplumlar yaratmışlar ve değiştirmişlerdir. Günümüz
toplumlarına baktığımızda ise; yeni kitle iletişim araçlarının sağlamış olduğu
kolaylıklar sayesin de insanlar diğer bireyler ile geçmiş de hiçbir zaman
olmadığı kadar kolay bir biçim de iletişim kurabilmektedirler. Bu yeni
gelişmeler doğrultusunda bireylerin 
aidiyet ve kimlik olgusuna verildikleri anlamda değişimler olmuştur.
Bireyler günümüz toplumlarında, daha önce hiç 
ortaya çıkmamış  ve var olan tüm
kimliklerinden farklı bir kimlik inşa edebilmektedirler. Bu yeni tür kimlikler,
sosyolojik açıdan hibrit kimlik olarak incelenmektedir. 

References

  • Alba, R., Nee, V. (1997). Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of immigration. International Migration Review, 31(4), 826-874.
  • Anık, M. (2012). Kimlik ve Çok Kültürcülük Sosyolojisi. İstanbul: Açılım Kitap.
  • Aron, R. (1994). Sosyoljik Düşüncenin Evreleri, çev. Korkmaz Alemdar, 3. Basım. İstanbul: Akım Yay.
  • Bauböck, R. (1998). The crossing and blurring of boundaries in international migration: Challenges for social and political theory. In R. Bauböck and J. Rundell (Eds), Blurred boundaries: Migration, ethnicity, citizenship (s. 17-52). Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  • Brubaker, R., Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond “identity”. Theory and Society, 29 (1), 1-47.
  • Chambers, I. (1994). Immigation, Culture, Identitiy. London : Routledge.
  • Clothier, I. (2005). Created Identities: Hybrid Cultures and the Internet. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 11(4), 44-59.
  • Cieslik, A., Verkuyten, M. 2006. National, Ethnic and Religious Identities: Hybridity and the Case of the Polish Tatars. National Identities 8 (2). 77–93. doi:10.1080/14608940600703650.
  • Erder, S. (1986). Refah Toplumunda “Getto” ve Türkler. İstanbul: Teknografik Matbaacılık.
  • Güvenç, B. (1999). İnsan ve Kültür, Ankara: Remzi Kitabevi.
  • Ilgin, C., hacihasanoğlu, O. (2010). Göç-aidiyet ilişkisinin belirlenmesi için model. İTÜDERGİSİ/a, 5(2).
  • İçduygu, A., İbrahim S. (1999). “Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye’sinde Göç Hareketleri”, 75 Yılda Köylerden Kentlere, Oya B. (der.), İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852.
  • Hattatoglu, P., Yakushko, O. (2014). Experiencing the Formation of Hybrid Cultural Identities in First- Generation Turkish Immigrants To The United States. Journal of Identity and Migration Studies, 8(1), 27-46.
  • Hybrid. (n.d.). In: Cambridge Dictionary, 1st ed. [online] Available at: http://dictionary.cambridge.org [Accessed 23 Aug. 2016].
  • Kaplan, D., Chacko, E. (2015). Placing immigrant identities. Journal of Cultural Geography, (32)1, 129-138. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852
  • Lawler, S. (2008). Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Martin, D. (1995). The choices of identity. Social Identities, 1(1), 5-20.
  • Modood, T. (2007). Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Pembecioğlu, N. (2012). Building identities: Living in the hybrid identities. Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies, 4(7), 46-59.
  • Erder, S. (1986). Refah Toplumunda “Getto” ve Türkler. İstanbul: Teknografik Matbaacılık.
  • Güvenç, B. (1999). İnsan ve Kültür, Ankara: Remzi Kitabevi.
  • Ilgin, C., hacihasanoğlu, O. (2010). Göç-aidiyet ilişkisinin belirlenmesi için model. İTÜDERGİSİ/a, 5(2).
  • İçduygu, A., İbrahim S. (1999). “Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türkiye’sinde Göç Hareketleri”, 75 Yılda Köylerden Kentlere, Oya B. (der.), İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852.
  • Hattatoglu, P., Yakushko, O. (2014). Experiencing the Formation of Hybrid Cultural Identities in First- Generation Turkish Immigrants To The United States. Journal of Identity and Migration Studies, 8(1), 27-46.
  • Hybrid. (n.d.). In: Cambridge Dictionary, 1st ed. [online] Available at: http://dictionary.cambridge.org [Accessed 23 Aug. 2016].
  • Kaplan, D., Chacko, E. (2015). Placing immigrant identities. Journal of Cultural Geography, (32)1, 129-138. DOI: 10.1080/08873631.2015.1004852
  • Lawler, S. (2008). Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Martin, D. (1995). The choices of identity. Social Identities, 1(1), 5-20.
  • Modood, T. (2007). Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  • Pembecioğlu, N. (2012). Building identities: Living in the hybrid identities. Scientific Journal of Humanistic Studies, 4(7), 46-59.
  • Pieterse, J. (2004). Capitalisms: Asian-European Dialogue after Enron. Asian Journal of Social Science, 32(2), 274-289.
  • Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, UK: Sage Publications.
  • Schlesinger, P. (1987). On national identity: some conception and misconceptions criticised. Social Science Information, 26 (2), 219-264.
  • Smith, K. (2008). Hybrid Identities: Theoretical Examinations IN: Iyall Smith, K. and Leavy, P. (eds) (2008) Hybrid identities. Leiden: Brill, 3-11.
  • United Nations (2015). [online] http://www.un.org/en/index.html. Available at: http://unıted nations [Accessed 15 Aug. 2016].
  • Tsouroufli, M. (2015). Hybridity, Identities and Inclusion of International PhD Students in England. Interdisciplinary Perspectives in Equality and Diversity, 1(1), 5-49.
There are 37 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Barış Çağırkan

Publication Date December 25, 2016
Published in Issue Year 2016 Volume: 5 Issue: 8

Cite

APA Çağırkan, B. (2016). Göç, Hibrit Kimlik ve Aidiyet: Yeni Toplumlar, Yeni Kimlikler. İnsan Ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(8), 2613-2623. https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.281840

Journal of the Human and Social Science Researches is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY NC).