Look around you, you'll see a tribe that brags and boast about success, giving you an impression of accomplishment but are too afraid to walk the streets of their own land.
There is a particular kind of man and the type is common enough to have become almost invisible through familiarity who will cross oceans and continents and every manner of physical and psychological border in pursuit of money, and who will spend the better part of his productive years accumulating it in someone else's country, and who will remit enough of it home to maintain the appearance of generosity while never remitting enough to disturb the fundamental conditions that made him leave in the first place. he is in China, Malaysia, Singapore, Cambodia, South Africa, Liberia, Ghana and all around the world where systems can be compromised without consequences.
He builds in foreign soil what he refused to plant in his own. He waters another man's garden with the same hands that left his father's compound dry. And then this is the part that deserves the longest examination he returns, or threatens to return, or speaks of home with the tender nostalgia of someone who has carefully ensured that home remains exactly backward enough to make his foreign success look impressive by comparison.
He is not a villain in the cinematic sense. He is something more ordinary and therefore more dangerous than that.
He is a fool with a bank account.
It begins, as most human failures do, with something that was not entirely wrong.
The desire to leave is not the problem. The desire to go somewhere larger, somewhere with more possibility, somewhere the ceiling is higher than what inherited circumstance has assigned this desire is not foolishness. It is not betrayal. It is as old as human ambition and as legitimate as hunger. Every civilization that ever grew beyond its origins did so because some portion of its people refused to accept the dimensions of the world they were born into and went looking for a larger one. The movement of people across geographies in search of better conditions is not treachery. It is, in its purest form, hope with legs.
The problem is what the man does with what he finds.
The problem is the point at which ambition quietly separates from responsibility the moment when I am going to build something becomes I am going to build something here, for myself, in this place, among these people who are not my people, and the place I came from can wait. The problem is not the leaving. The problem is the leaving that never returns anything not money in sufficient transformative quantities, not knowledge, not networks, not the skills acquired in the foreign place brought back and planted in the original soil. The problem is the extraction the drawing of all personal energy, all productive years, all the best version of the self out of one place and depositing it permanently in another, and then calling this success.
It is success, of a kind. A limited, privatized, morally unexamined kind.
Watch how he speaks about home.
There is a grammar to it consistent enough across individuals that it begins to feel like a dialect all its own, the language of the productive exile who has made a private peace with his abandonment. He speaks of home with love, always. The love is genuine, or genuine enough, which makes it more complicated rather than less. He misses the food. He misses the music. He misses something atmospheric and irreducible that he calls the people by which he means a quality of human warmth, of communal life, of the particular texture of belonging that exists in the place that formed him and that no foreign country, however prosperous, has been able to replicate.
He misses all of this while doing absolutely nothing to improve any of it.
He laments the corruption from his apartment in London or Houston or Toronto, with the comfortable impotence of someone who has placed an ocean between himself and the obligation to do anything about the thing he is lamenting. He shakes his head at the news from home the infrastructure that collapsed, the election that was stolen, the hospital that ran out of supplies, the road that has been under construction for eleven years and he shakes it with the genuine sorrow of a man who cares, or believes he cares, while sitting in a city where his taxes fund the very systems he wishes his home country possessed. He contributes to the functioning of someone else's state while mourning the dysfunction of his own, and he has made this arrangement so comfortable, wrapped it in so many layers of practical justification, that he no longer feels the contradiction pressing against his chest at three in the morning.
He has confused surviving abroad with serving at home.
Then there is the wealth. Let us examine the wealth with the directness it deserves.
Much of it not all, but enough of it to be noted is assembled through means that would not survive rigorous scrutiny. The foreign country offers opportunity, yes, but for the man without the right papers, the right connections, the right linguistic fluency, the right cultural codes, the right complexion in the right neighborhood the formal economy is often a narrower door than it appears from the outside. And so some enter through other doors. They learn the underground economies of their adopted cities. They discover that certain transactions flourish precisely because they are not recorded, that certain communities create their own financial systems in the gaps between legality and illegality, that money can be made in the shadow of the formal world by those willing to stand in uncomfortable places.
The wealth that emerges from these places has a particular quality. It is large in amount and thin in foundation. It cannot be explained in full sentences to people who would ask the natural questions. It moves in cash, in informal transfers, in the kind of transactions that leave no paper trail because paper trails are the enemy of what is being built. It is wealth that requires, for its maintenance, a certain permanent vagueness a practiced ability to redirect conversation away from origins, to gesture broadly at business or investments or hustle whenever specifics are requested.
And it is this wealth assembled in shadows, laundered through the appearance of legitimate industry that the fool brings home, or sends home, or boasts about from home, as though its origins do not matter because its size is impressive. He builds a house in the village with it. A large house, larger than necessary, larger than practical, larger than anyone in the village needs because the house is not for living in, not primarily, but for being seen. It is a monument to departure. A physical argument for the decision to leave. A structure that says, in brick and glass and imported tile, I was right to go, and here is the proof.
No comments:
Post a Comment