The colonial hangover effect: Migration, tokenism, and western superiority

The hangover of colonialism, or the psychological and cultural trauma due to colonial rule, is deep-seated among nations of the Global South; no less so in South Asia. 

Centuries of domination inculcated an inferiority complex of sorts into the colonised psyche, a trend that seemingly has run unabated to the present day. This hangover mentality conditions the region's perception of migration and informs its attitudes toward the West. 

The colonial era scarred the political and economic landscapes of South Asia, entrenching dependence on former colonial powers and tucking an entrenched belief in Western superiority into the psyche. Such a colonial hangover informs the continuing gaze for validation from the Global North by people from the Global South and presents a migration trajectory that is informed by neocolonial structures sustaining global inequities.

Migrants from the Global South thus face an explosive combination of "inclusion" and "tokenism" when they reach the West as part of a new colonial control. In fact, acceptance often masks an ugly reality: that the invitation to equality extends only to press migrants into roles already preordained by the West.  

In doing so, Western societies reduce migrants to symbolic meanings that benefit the performers in reinforcing their "progressive" image. This may turn into a mechanism of dehumanising migrants and develop it into a cycle of violence by using the colonial mentality to their benefit.

There is an idealistic expectation within Western societies- the United States, Canada, and parts of Europe- regarding the notion of the "melting pot" as evidence of integration. But this extends the colonial legacy for migrants from former colonies: South Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean. 

These migrants come holding a colonial-induced conviction of Western supremacy, or a "colonial hangover," wherein they are rendered helpless before tokenistic gestures of inclusion that veil demands for assimilation rather than any real cultural acceptance.

I have personally witnessed this dynamic in a neoliberal WhatsApp group for international students in Germany as part of my social experiment. This group was actually supposed to praise inclusiveness in Western education while actually steering clear of the critical discussion of power structures embedded in it. 

When I began questioning these structures, a coordinated, immediate group mob confronted me: there were those who suggested that, as I liked European education, I should not talk against it; one member went as far as to tell me to "go back" to my country. 

This episode underlined how deeply entrenched the colonial mentality among migrants often equates critiques of the Western system with ingratitude or betrayal. That was an experience exposing a community of educated international students, unconsciously upholding the superiority of the West by demeaning systemic critiques as divisive.

For many migrants, the pressure to live up to Western norms for tokenistic acceptance creates a serious dent in their mental health. There have also been reports that racial minorities in the West have higher levels of anxiety and depression due to various dual pressures of assimilation and passing microaggressions day in and day out. They are caught in a Catch-22: expected to "bring diversity" while at the same time being made to feel obligated to meet Western standards. 

After my experience in the WhatsApp group, the psychological effect of othering within an inclusive space became well explained. My cumulative resistance further enforces my isolation, while others-instead of questioning the system with me- have strengthened their allegiance to Western norms. 

This is a demonstration of the psychological effects of tokenism: large numbers of students, instead of being empowered, become defenders of a system that marginalises them.

The latest German citizenship act is the most recent textbook case of how tokenism and historical disinformation unite in the service of a power structure whose most basic mode of survival is silencing dissent. This year, Germany introduced a new demand from those applying for its citizenship in a way that has been interpreted as affirming Israel's "right to exist" as a prerequisite for obtaining German citizenship. 

Curious about this, I posted a question in a Bangladeshi alumni Facebook group. One member responded with a perspective that closely mirrored the Western narrative, tagged as German, which suggests that Germans have a 'moral obligation' to Jewish communities because of the Holocaust, and that supporting Israel's 'right to exist' is simply an extension of that duty.

My response was also put through by offering historical context of the Ha'avara Agreement and British colonial involvement in the creation of Israel, whereupon my comments fell into total discomfiture; the original responder deleted their remarks thereupon. 

I did not aim to absolve Germany from its historical guilt but to add some nuance to the complex beginnings of Israel– a history not only of the Holocaust but of colonial aspirations and alliances that continue to have salience in the Middle East today through genocide and an extension of regional destruction in Lebanon.

This incident taught me that even among co-ethnics, Westernised discourses are never challenged, and no real historical critique can be articulated. 

Migrants often arrive with a 'colonial hangover' that promotes Western values as intrinsically superior; thus, they become easy targets of tokenistic measures toward integration. In Germany's case, the citizenship requirement frames support for Israel as a "moral responsibility," overlooking the intricacies of Israel's history and discouraging critical perspectives. 

Narratives that erase uncomfortable facts-such as Zionist-Nazi collaborations or British colonial strategies in Palestine-stifle open debate. Such stories become especially hazardous to the migrants as it can be equated to social exclusion or accusations of 'offending' the values of Western civilisation.

This is a hazardous turn in using ideological police as the measure of new citizenship. This does indeed weaponise citizenship– a basic right-through its conditionality of adopting the pro-Israel stance, rendering punishment to any kind of dissent in the disguise of "loyalty." 

This is a fundamentally authoritarian position that has nothing to do with a politics of historical responsibility, but as a repressive measure, it enforces uniformity while silencing a legitimate critique. Instead of democratic discussion, Germany has chosen a variant of a loyalty test divesting fundamental rights from those who refuse to kowtow to its state-sanctioned position on Israel.

This policy represents an escalation of Germany's neo-colonial stance on Palestine and irrevocably cements it in its complicity with Israeli apartheid and settler colonialism. Instead of encouraging genuine dialogue, today Germany has citizenship policies that force migrants, particularly those from former colonies, to swear fealty to a selectively remembered Western narrative. This is a disturbing return to colonialist politics, where ideological fealty was coerced at the expense of actually belonging.

Tokenism and selective historical discourses, such as Germany's so-called "moral obligation" to Israel, serve as ideological barriers for migrants to actively debate. The expectation of being in concord with social groups and requirements for citizenship stands as a burden to comprehensive understanding, which is required in the way to genuine inclusion.

The resolution on German citizenship shows how deeply colonial mindsets are embedded within Europe. Using citizenship as a weapon and stifling criticism of Israel does nothing to protect human rights; rather, it shields an oppressive status quo. 

If Germany is truly to face up to the burdens of its history, it must cease using the past as an excuse for oppression in the present. Without open debate, tolerance of dissent, and fully coming-to-terms with historical guilt, Germany cannot be an honest advocate for justice.

This is an authoritarian measure betraying the very democratic ideals it seeks to protect by silencing the voices of critical thinking and commanding blind loyalty to one narrative-the one which, by its very nature, ignores the historical nuances of both Europe and Israel's respective colonial pasts. 

This should serve as a stark reminder that, if Europe wishes to embark on creating a future that listens to all voices and respects all histories, then it must come to terms with-and let go of-the legacies of colonialism, truly upholding the values of justice and equality.

Saad Shahriar is an anti-racist activist, filmmaker and writer with a focus on truth-telling and social justice. He is currently pursuing further studies in Visual Anthropology at the University of Münster, Germany. Saad also founded Unrest Radio (https://linkin.bio/unrestradio/), an autonomous platform dedicated to highlighting marginalised voices and social issues in Germany.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.