Identity in the Scottish Diaspora

[ThistleDown]

The world does not turn on the subject of this thread. Here we are all asking questions, offering answers and stating opinions about genealogy and heritage and the need to combine bits and pieces to reveal who we are. That's all. Nothing hidden.

David, I'm not sure which of the many questions Jock is referring to, but these are my unanswered ones.

Most folk in Scotland (and many on this forum from elsewhere) take their nationality from their citizenship. Even if we have dual citizenship we don't seem to hyphenate the two to describe who we are. There are lots of folk in Scotland from other places; much like non-aboriginal North Americans, they came to Britain for a better life and as soon as they could they acquired British citizenship and became British (English, Scottish, Welsh, if they wished to more closely define the part of these islands in which they chose to live). Earlier in the thread there was a pic of Humza Yousaf wearing clothing representing two bits of his heritage. His father is from Pakistan and his mother from Kenya. Humza was born in Scotland. He is typical of first generation immigrants. He is strongly committed to his birth-nation, but he does not hyphenate his citizenship with his heritage. I suppose if he did he would be Pakistani-Kenyan-Scottish.

That's the way it is in Scotland and that's the reason. Perhaps the other Scots reading this will 'aye' if they agree. Or neigh if they don't

In America and Canada hyphenating citizenship and a selected ancestor's place of birth is frequently, but not always, the norm. That's combining heritage and citizenship; I understand the fact but not yet the reason.

The question that I asked earlier is why? What's the difference that makes this the way in the new land of North America and not in the new land of Scotland?

I have heard that America is a big land and that's the reason. That would seem to me to be saying that a move from Florida to California five generations ago results in the hyphenated Floridian-Californian. I don't know; does it?

Is it a need for deeper roots than those to be found in NA after even as many as five or ten generations? If so, why is the selected ancestry Scottish and not another of the myriad genealogical lines?

Is it an admiration for earlier times in Scotland? An admiration for the Scotland of today? A feeling of spiritual connection and, if so, with what aspect of 'Scottishness'?

Some seem to think there is, but I assure you there is no confrontation in these questions and no accusation. I am seriously interested in why anyone after five or ten generations away from one ancestor's home-land, wants to call himself by that ancestor's nationality.

Perhaps I should make it clear that I have never said that the kilt belongs in The Highlands or even to Scotland in today's world. I wear Highland dress far more often than I wear any other form, and I wear it wherever I am in the world. I am a Moderator of a forum called XMTScot owned by an American (with dual Canadian citizenship, who doesn't seem to have any Scottish heritage). The subject of 'the kilt' only enters my questions in this thread if somebody says 'I wear the kilt because I am Scottish' or 'I am Scottish so I wear the kilt'.