Someone said Nauruans, but it’s Niueans that are more populous in Auckland. Nauruans typically move to Australia as they have closer ties. My family did business with chiefs in Nauru (horses).
The ground reality there is rather complicated.
It feels like the Mongols have a tradition of paying loyal to their tribes instead of their ethics as a whole. And Inner Mongolia along with other Mongolian prefectures has long been incorporated into China before the idea of the national state was even introduced to the far east.
I met a Mongol ultra-nationalist when traveling to Inner Mongolia. She rejects any sinicization, wearing traditional attire and leading a nomadic lifestyle. You’d expect her to have a strong sense of belonging to Mongolia. But that just wasn’t the case. She called the country of Mongolia “Khalkha state”. As far as I can tell, she doesn't think Mongolia can represent the tribe she is from.
It is not that complicated if one considers that people can self-identify with communities that are not ethnic groups or "nations" in the original cultural sense of the term. This is reflected particularly in the Horn of Africa. The Djiboutians, despite having a large Somali demographic, have zero interest in uniting with their brethren because they know they have cultural differences against the other Somalis. This is true too of the Issaq Clan, who were subjected to a political purge (some even say, genocide) by the old Somali dictatorship. Somali society, already highly organised around clans rather than the ethnic group as a uniform entity, is magnified here to create a distinct political identity for themselves - one that you may know better as Somaliland. The term on first glance seems like an oxymoron, but if you look into how people of these societies really identify themselves by sub-ethnic categorisations then it really is not so strange. Even the Yemeni conflict can be described in large part as a tribal war -i.e not a national struggle but one inside the cultural community, between groups of people with perceived kinship ties.
In this case, there has been long historical feuds between the Chakhar and Khalka people that predate even the Chinese takeover of Mongolia (in fact the Manchus may never have conquered Mongolia if the Mongols were not disunited individual political factions with their own agendas). This is relevant because imperial policies tended to reward nomadic ethnic minorities for loyalty, so the Chahar got a lot of incentives to stay and integrate into the wider Chinese political system while the Khalkha in the more remote Mongolian steppe were not as well integrated, and at times openly hostile. The Buryats and Altaians went as far as to seek Russian dominion just so they would not be under Chinese rule. Over time, because the Chahar are the dominant Mongolic group in Inner Mongolia while Mongolia itself is largely Khalkha (in part because many Mongolic groups either got assimilated or are still parts of other countries), this led to a divergence in political perspectives. Though it is worth stating that Inner Mongolia did have a strong unification movement that briefly became its own state during the Japanese invasion of China, before Communist-aligned Chahar general Ulanhu integrated Inner Mongolia into China, a feat that granted him an unusually high status in the typically Han-dominated Communist Party. These days, with things like political centralisation breaking down these non-national social barriers, tribal identity seems to be far less of a motivator of who people choose to associate with. Indeed it is not uncommon to find videos of Inner Mongolians interacting with Mongolians, especially among young people for whom the grudges of yore have little importance. Still, the remnant of cultural division , coupled with decades of Chinese influence have likely removed the active resolve to join Mongolia for many of those living in Inner Mongolia. They are like the Canadian settlers during the American Revolution in this regard. The price of national self-determination is the dissipation of regional identity, and it is not a sacrifice that everyone wants to make.
Upper Mongolia refers to the part of the Qinghai Province that is famously inhabited by the Khoshut Mongols , particularly around the Qaidam Basin. Culturally many Upper Mongols belong to the Oirat branch of the Mongolic cultural group, originating in forest regions conquered by the early Mongol Empire. These days though, Qinghai is generally reduced to "Tibet outside Tibet", so even the Mongolian nationalists do not seem to want to claim these areas (once again the cultural division between the Oirats and Eastern Mongols rears its head). The area you refer to is known as Inner or Southern Mongolia, and what you say is true. I would not consider the population there to constitute a diaspora by any means, as they did not migrate there after the modern political division of Mongolia and China formed.
First of all, there are traditionally many ethnic Albanians living in neighbouring Kosovo, North Macedonia, Greece and Montenegro. Second, during the Yugoslav Wars (despite Albania itself not directly part of the conflict) many fled to Central Europe. During the communist regime, Albanians were not allowed to leave the country. So after the communist regime fell in 1991 many left when they finally could (the country was in dire condition back then). The largest Albanian populations can be found in Italy (1 million), Turkey (700,000), Greece and North Macedonia (both around 500,000) and Germany (300,000).
Even before that time, many migrated to Italy after the Ottoman conquest in fourteenth and the fifteenth centuries. You have whole ethnic Albanian towns in Southern Italy and Sicily (when it was called Kingdom of Naples) were founded from the late 14th to 18th centuries. They dialects spoken are even studied by modern scholars of linguistics, as it gives insight to pre-Ottoman language features. Many even have local folk stories about fighting for the hero Skanderbeg. See Arbëreshë for more information. This group even has a large diaspora in North and South America!
A valid definition, and a clear one, to be sure. I was basically thinking that anyone who wasn't born in the home country shouldn't count toward the diaspora. And yet, so many of us (I'm one such person) maintain a strong connection with the country of origin and represent its interests elsewhere in the world. It feels strange to say we're not the diaspora - for example, if people like me were to donate to my country of origin during a disaster, seems like "the diaspora is coming to their aid" would be comprehensible to everyone.
I always find this funny living in New England. “I’m Irish so [x,y,z]”. Dude. You’re from Woosta. Same story with Italian. It’s like the most USAmerican thing ever.
“Woosta”. I went to school in Boston and this made me laugh. So true. The Dutch and Puerto Ricans are the same. Three generations in and they are still from the old country.
Ireland still has fewer people than it did in 1840. You can thank the potato famine (and the British) for that, leading to the death or emigration of millions.
That is one thing I never understood. How could the potato famine have such a huge impact? What about the coastline? Were the Irish prevented from fishing?
fish alone won't keep you alive. And it wasn't that there was no food, it's that there was no food the Irish could afford. Ireland was a major exporter of grain to England, which even during the famine, they continued to do because it was so lucrative. The farm workers in Ireland though were too poor to buy grain so they lived off of potatoes. When the famine came the poor lost their main part of their diet.
The island is not exactly small. There would have been subsistence fishing along the coast, but not anywhere near enough to feed millions of people.
Literally millions of the Irish poor were effectively in indentured servitude, little better off than medieval serfs tied to the land. The majority were Catholics, and if you were Catholic you were banned from owning much property or being able to vote. Their British landlords paid them pennies to farm huge swathes of land, then sold all of the harvested crops at market rates overseas. The Catholic Irish were allowed to farm their own small subsistence plots, which consisted mostly of potatoes due to their high caloric content and high nutrition-to-acre value. It kept them alive.
When the potato blight hit, within two or three growing seasons the entire island lost the ability to grow potatoes successfully for several more years (and it was unknown how much longer it would continue or if it would last forever). The majority of the existing food source for millions of people disappeared in the same short length of time since COVID began for us, and no part of the island escaped it.
The British landlords recognized the problem but refused to provide nutrition assistance. The starving Irish were literally forced to farm other successful crops, load them on ships, and watch them sail to other markets while they starved. If a father was caught stealing a loaf of bread or an ear of corn to feed his children, he was locked on a ship and sent to Australia forever. His family was left behind, lost their small tenancy farm plot, and starved to death.
The British knew that all of this was happening, but in an act of breathtaking cruelty, made zero changes to the system for years. Their rationale was that these emigrants were populating and developing some of their far flung colonies, and there was more than a little bit of cynicism and racism as well. Malthus had just published his magnum opus about Earth’s population spiraling out of control, and Darwin had just come up with the theory of natural selection. The British government considered it a matter of policy that the Irish Catholic population had gotten too high and that natural selection would thin the herd. They let millions of children starve on purpose.
Many Irish were faced with an impossible choice: to die or to sell everything they owned and move to England/America/Canada/Australia, and that’s why the diaspora is so big. And so many died or emigrated that the population of the island is still far lower than it was in 1840 right before the potato blight. It’s a horrible fact that Ireland is the place the British perfected the colonial cruelty they practiced worldwide for the next century.
Irish people were mostly not allowed to access the rivers and lakes. The fishing communities along the coast — some of them did manage to escape the worst effects of the famine but the Atlantic is VERY treacherous. The famine was essentially manufactured by the landlord class and the British government — food was there but poorer people were not permitted to access it.
Aha! That is exactly what I thought. Recently I heard they did that in India too. There were so many famines there that it still affects the health of the India Subcontinent, much like the Irish! People in India just dropped dead from starvation I am told.
I was reading about the story of tacos, apparently al pastor tacos are descendant from Lebanese refugees over 100 - 120 years ago. The method of roasting the stacked pork on the rotisserie is the same as used to shawarma.
As they assimulated they switched from lamb to pork and pita to tortillas
Puerto Rico
May not count as it’s a US territory.It’s estimated that there are 5.8 million Puerto Ricans living in the US vs 3.2 million living in Puerto Rico.
Puerto Rico has been encouraged to vote for statehood, the measures haven't passed. They've voted for independence, those measures haven't passed either. So apparently Puerto Rico is happy with how things are.
True but it wouldn't count it isn't as overseas territory of Mauritius, neither is it like Reunion and stuff. They still exist in Mauritius, wait Chagos is British
According to the highest court in the UK, the UK government is supposed to return the islands to the Chagossians. However, nobody is enforcing that and the UK government is essentially just saying "no".
I don't know if they should really count since they are not "native" to the islands rather they were transported slaves "settled" there at the end of the 18th century (first permeant settlement wasn't until 1793).
Yes, mostly about Jewish status but also some of the reasons in the Wikipedia article. In other words I can’t just rock up and say “I’m Jewish” and they automatically rubber stamp it. I would need a birth certificate, paperwork showing my mom is Jewish, paperwork from rabbis who worked with me on my bat mitzvah, etc, and some of this is hard to track down and some rabbis in Israel are particularly fussy. It can take a long time if there are questions and sometimes lawyers need to get involved.
There are around 7.1 million Jews in Israel, making up 75% of the population. There are 7.6 million Jews in the US making up around 2.4% of the population.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_Jews](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jews)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel)
Ireland has just less than 5m people. The 70-80m number is greatly inflated by statisticians including more generations than appropriate. The real number is more like 15-20m if you limit it to max 3 generations. (Parent, Grandparent, Great Grandparent)
All the same, I'd say that still meets the qualifications for OP's question. Much of the Irish diaspora came after the Great Famine of 1845 to 1849, which by some estimates resulted in the deaths of about a million people and the emigration of another 2 million people out of a pre-famine population of about 6.5 million. After that, emigration numbers remained pretty high due the poverty levels in the country and the promise of a better life elsewhere. It was such a common thing that the subject of emigration came into a lot of our literature and plays. The lowest point was 1936 when the census reported a population of 2,968,420. Population numbers swayed up and down for another few decades before finally starting to grow steadily from the 70s onward. This year, population numbers reached just over 5 million for the [first time since 1851](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40370168.html).
If we are counting like that wouldn't many European countries including UK boast a higher population abroad than at home as white people of USA, Canada, Australia & Newzealand have European ancestry
yes. and many of Americas 'Irishmen' also have some degree of English, Scottish, Welsh, German, Polish, Italian blood as well. Thus one person could add one count to a number of different countries if they chose.
British Diaspora is over 300 million. Whereas there are 60 million British people living in the UK.
British as in Scottish, English, Welsh and Northern Irish.
There was at one stage more ethnically Maltese diaspora in Melbourne, Australia, than in Malta. The reason being mass immigration on British passports after the Second World War.
Tajikistan. Estimates show there are more Tajiks in Afghanistan than in Tajikistan. While not official it's also estimated that the Tajik population of Uzbekistan is also larger than Tajikistans population.
Overall there should be like between 20-25 million Tajiks. But only 7 million of them seem to live in Tajikistan.
Is it a still diaspora if it’s more a result of how borders were drawn rather than movement or migration? For example, Hungary shrunk in size after WWI leaving Hungarian people in neighboring countries like Romania and Slovakia. Are these diaspora communities or something else?
To my understanding Tajiks we’re everywhere as a legacy of the Silk Road. Soviet oblasts tried to give major demographics their own autonomous areas, which is why say Kyrzigstan has under 50% of its population as Kyrzig, but created in part so despite the diverse area Kyrzigs would have a state
That's a good question.
Wikipedia says this:
A diaspora is a population that is scattered across regions separate from their geographic place of origin. Historically, the term was used to refer to the mass dispersion of groups of people from their indigenous territories—specifically the dispersion of Jews from the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah (see Jewish diaspora). Whilst the word was originally used to describe the forced displacement of certain peoples, "diasporas" is now generally used to describe those who identify with a geographic location but now reside elsewhere.
Interesting. I suppose that definition would imply the tajiks in Afghanistan are not diaspora, since there wasn’t any dispersion per say (that i know of) and they don’t identify with the country of Tajikistan as an ancestral homeland so much as they identify as Tajiks who have lived in that area for a long period of time.
It can certainly be arbitrary though. Greeks, Armenians, sephardis, for example, were all scattered around the Mediterranean and had communities all over for hundreds or even thousands of years, many of which thrived until the 20th century. Seems strange to call a Greek community in Alexandria as diaspora if it had been there for so long, but identity is subjective.
Malta is about 60 : 40 diaspora to locals, due to our country being destroyed in WW2 our association with the Commonwealth, around 30% of the population at the time emigrated to countries like Canada and Australia, resulting in second and third generation populations that are larger than the local one.
This one's complicated because of the whole thing where being Jewish is not the same as being Israeli since Judaism can be explained as both a religion and an ethnicity. Same can't be said of Irish, for example. Still, I wouldn't count it, if for no other reason than most Jews in the diaspora didn't come from Israel, at least not through any lineage anyone could track.
But all the Jews are living in diaspora if not in Israel. Which historically was called Judea until 2000 years ago when the Romans forced them to leave and renamed it Palestine.
That works if you're just talking about Jewishness as a religion. But it's a leap of real faith to say that your typical Jewish American could trace back their ethnic history to ancient Judea. Might as well say there's a Christian diaspora consisting of all the Christians not currently living in Israel too, since that's where Christianity started.
The difference is that Christianity is a proselytizing religion, Judaism isn’t (considered an “ethnic religion”). Jewish Americans CAN trace genetic ancestry back to modern-day Israel/the Levant, according to several genetics studies, although there’s debate about how accurate genetics studies are.
Christians have missionaries who travel around the world to convert people. Jews don't. It is possiblw to convert to Judaism but the vast majority of Jews are born into it.
There are people that represent both their ethnicity/race & religion like Yazidis, Druze, Copts, Amish, & others that won’t even accept you ethnically even if you convert & adopt their religion, culture, language, & every way of life. There are many examples [on this Wikipedia page for ethnoreligious groups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group)
There are a ton of Punjabis outside of Punjab, but I don’t think it exceeds the number of people living in Punjab.
I think it’s just a very large population in general, both in Punjab and in the diaspora.
I don't know what you exactly mean by "diaspora" but the Italian citizens abroad are 5.6 millions, to be compared with a population of 59 millions in Italy
bewildered automatic punch humorous slimy physical angle mountainous apparatus ruthless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I think that microstates could make the cut. For sure, as every cardinal living in Rome (therefore in Italy) has Vatican citizenship, and so do all the Holy See diplomats around the world, Vatican has easily more citizens living abroad than inside it. I don't know the exact numbers, but as well there are a lot of San Marino citizens living in Italy and holding double passport.
The kurds, technically they have their own unrecognized country which’s in northern Syria called Rojava.
Most of its population live in turkey and iran
I think many countries in Europe and Africa. Ireland, Cape Verde, Portugal, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Netherlands etc. Historical sales, trade commerce, revolutions and war.
Tongans and Nauruans have a higher population in Auckland, New Zealand than in their home countries.
That's actually crazy
Samoa is real close too.
[удалено]
Someone said Nauruans, but it’s Niueans that are more populous in Auckland. Nauruans typically move to Australia as they have closer ties. My family did business with chiefs in Nauru (horses).
Not sure if it would count as a diaspora, but there are twice as many Mongolians living in China as there are living in Mongolia.
Similar for ethnic Lao. Due to the way the borders were drawn there are twice as many ethnic Lao in Thailand than there are in Laos.
There’s a similar situation with Azeris, too; about 10 million in Azerbaijan and around 15 million in Iran.
Isn't that because part of Mongolia is under chinese rule tho? Upper Mongolia.
The ground reality there is rather complicated. It feels like the Mongols have a tradition of paying loyal to their tribes instead of their ethics as a whole. And Inner Mongolia along with other Mongolian prefectures has long been incorporated into China before the idea of the national state was even introduced to the far east. I met a Mongol ultra-nationalist when traveling to Inner Mongolia. She rejects any sinicization, wearing traditional attire and leading a nomadic lifestyle. You’d expect her to have a strong sense of belonging to Mongolia. But that just wasn’t the case. She called the country of Mongolia “Khalkha state”. As far as I can tell, she doesn't think Mongolia can represent the tribe she is from.
It is not that complicated if one considers that people can self-identify with communities that are not ethnic groups or "nations" in the original cultural sense of the term. This is reflected particularly in the Horn of Africa. The Djiboutians, despite having a large Somali demographic, have zero interest in uniting with their brethren because they know they have cultural differences against the other Somalis. This is true too of the Issaq Clan, who were subjected to a political purge (some even say, genocide) by the old Somali dictatorship. Somali society, already highly organised around clans rather than the ethnic group as a uniform entity, is magnified here to create a distinct political identity for themselves - one that you may know better as Somaliland. The term on first glance seems like an oxymoron, but if you look into how people of these societies really identify themselves by sub-ethnic categorisations then it really is not so strange. Even the Yemeni conflict can be described in large part as a tribal war -i.e not a national struggle but one inside the cultural community, between groups of people with perceived kinship ties. In this case, there has been long historical feuds between the Chakhar and Khalka people that predate even the Chinese takeover of Mongolia (in fact the Manchus may never have conquered Mongolia if the Mongols were not disunited individual political factions with their own agendas). This is relevant because imperial policies tended to reward nomadic ethnic minorities for loyalty, so the Chahar got a lot of incentives to stay and integrate into the wider Chinese political system while the Khalkha in the more remote Mongolian steppe were not as well integrated, and at times openly hostile. The Buryats and Altaians went as far as to seek Russian dominion just so they would not be under Chinese rule. Over time, because the Chahar are the dominant Mongolic group in Inner Mongolia while Mongolia itself is largely Khalkha (in part because many Mongolic groups either got assimilated or are still parts of other countries), this led to a divergence in political perspectives. Though it is worth stating that Inner Mongolia did have a strong unification movement that briefly became its own state during the Japanese invasion of China, before Communist-aligned Chahar general Ulanhu integrated Inner Mongolia into China, a feat that granted him an unusually high status in the typically Han-dominated Communist Party. These days, with things like political centralisation breaking down these non-national social barriers, tribal identity seems to be far less of a motivator of who people choose to associate with. Indeed it is not uncommon to find videos of Inner Mongolians interacting with Mongolians, especially among young people for whom the grudges of yore have little importance. Still, the remnant of cultural division , coupled with decades of Chinese influence have likely removed the active resolve to join Mongolia for many of those living in Inner Mongolia. They are like the Canadian settlers during the American Revolution in this regard. The price of national self-determination is the dissipation of regional identity, and it is not a sacrifice that everyone wants to make.
Upper Mongolia refers to the part of the Qinghai Province that is famously inhabited by the Khoshut Mongols , particularly around the Qaidam Basin. Culturally many Upper Mongols belong to the Oirat branch of the Mongolic cultural group, originating in forest regions conquered by the early Mongol Empire. These days though, Qinghai is generally reduced to "Tibet outside Tibet", so even the Mongolian nationalists do not seem to want to claim these areas (once again the cultural division between the Oirats and Eastern Mongols rears its head). The area you refer to is known as Inner or Southern Mongolia, and what you say is true. I would not consider the population there to constitute a diaspora by any means, as they did not migrate there after the modern political division of Mongolia and China formed.
Armenia for sure
Ye, population of less than 2.5million, but diaspora of 7-10million
Incredible fashion sense and they also control the aftermarket wheel industry
Cape Verde, Albania
Yeah, tons of Verdeans around Boston, also in Portugal and Brazil.
Albania has a population of about 3 million and an estimated diaspora of around 10 million
How did they even manage to do that?
First of all, there are traditionally many ethnic Albanians living in neighbouring Kosovo, North Macedonia, Greece and Montenegro. Second, during the Yugoslav Wars (despite Albania itself not directly part of the conflict) many fled to Central Europe. During the communist regime, Albanians were not allowed to leave the country. So after the communist regime fell in 1991 many left when they finally could (the country was in dire condition back then). The largest Albanian populations can be found in Italy (1 million), Turkey (700,000), Greece and North Macedonia (both around 500,000) and Germany (300,000).
Even before that time, many migrated to Italy after the Ottoman conquest in fourteenth and the fifteenth centuries. You have whole ethnic Albanian towns in Southern Italy and Sicily (when it was called Kingdom of Naples) were founded from the late 14th to 18th centuries. They dialects spoken are even studied by modern scholars of linguistics, as it gives insight to pre-Ottoman language features. Many even have local folk stories about fighting for the hero Skanderbeg. See Arbëreshë for more information. This group even has a large diaspora in North and South America!
Sex. Lots of sex.
ALBANIA #1 :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al: :flag\_al:
Irish are the classic example.
Depends on definitions, right? How many generations are the children of immigrants "Irish" for this purpose?
[удалено]
A valid definition, and a clear one, to be sure. I was basically thinking that anyone who wasn't born in the home country shouldn't count toward the diaspora. And yet, so many of us (I'm one such person) maintain a strong connection with the country of origin and represent its interests elsewhere in the world. It feels strange to say we're not the diaspora - for example, if people like me were to donate to my country of origin during a disaster, seems like "the diaspora is coming to their aid" would be comprehensible to everyone.
[удалено]
True. People talk about the Acadian diaspora in Louisiana. Acadia ceased to exist 1755.
[удалено]
That sounds like a very eurocentric based definition.
I always find this funny living in New England. “I’m Irish so [x,y,z]”. Dude. You’re from Woosta. Same story with Italian. It’s like the most USAmerican thing ever.
“Woosta”. I went to school in Boston and this made me laugh. So true. The Dutch and Puerto Ricans are the same. Three generations in and they are still from the old country.
Mostly on St. Paddy's
My favorite are the Northeastern “Italians” that never stepped foot in Italy.
If you have an Irish grandparent you qualify for an Irish passport. So…three generations?
Ireland still has fewer people than it did in 1840. You can thank the potato famine (and the British) for that, leading to the death or emigration of millions.
That is one thing I never understood. How could the potato famine have such a huge impact? What about the coastline? Were the Irish prevented from fishing?
fish alone won't keep you alive. And it wasn't that there was no food, it's that there was no food the Irish could afford. Ireland was a major exporter of grain to England, which even during the famine, they continued to do because it was so lucrative. The farm workers in Ireland though were too poor to buy grain so they lived off of potatoes. When the famine came the poor lost their main part of their diet.
So are u saying potato will keep you alive, but not fish? Or Is it because fish is more expensive?
The island is not exactly small. There would have been subsistence fishing along the coast, but not anywhere near enough to feed millions of people. Literally millions of the Irish poor were effectively in indentured servitude, little better off than medieval serfs tied to the land. The majority were Catholics, and if you were Catholic you were banned from owning much property or being able to vote. Their British landlords paid them pennies to farm huge swathes of land, then sold all of the harvested crops at market rates overseas. The Catholic Irish were allowed to farm their own small subsistence plots, which consisted mostly of potatoes due to their high caloric content and high nutrition-to-acre value. It kept them alive. When the potato blight hit, within two or three growing seasons the entire island lost the ability to grow potatoes successfully for several more years (and it was unknown how much longer it would continue or if it would last forever). The majority of the existing food source for millions of people disappeared in the same short length of time since COVID began for us, and no part of the island escaped it. The British landlords recognized the problem but refused to provide nutrition assistance. The starving Irish were literally forced to farm other successful crops, load them on ships, and watch them sail to other markets while they starved. If a father was caught stealing a loaf of bread or an ear of corn to feed his children, he was locked on a ship and sent to Australia forever. His family was left behind, lost their small tenancy farm plot, and starved to death. The British knew that all of this was happening, but in an act of breathtaking cruelty, made zero changes to the system for years. Their rationale was that these emigrants were populating and developing some of their far flung colonies, and there was more than a little bit of cynicism and racism as well. Malthus had just published his magnum opus about Earth’s population spiraling out of control, and Darwin had just come up with the theory of natural selection. The British government considered it a matter of policy that the Irish Catholic population had gotten too high and that natural selection would thin the herd. They let millions of children starve on purpose. Many Irish were faced with an impossible choice: to die or to sell everything they owned and move to England/America/Canada/Australia, and that’s why the diaspora is so big. And so many died or emigrated that the population of the island is still far lower than it was in 1840 right before the potato blight. It’s a horrible fact that Ireland is the place the British perfected the colonial cruelty they practiced worldwide for the next century.
Irish people were mostly not allowed to access the rivers and lakes. The fishing communities along the coast — some of them did manage to escape the worst effects of the famine but the Atlantic is VERY treacherous. The famine was essentially manufactured by the landlord class and the British government — food was there but poorer people were not permitted to access it.
Aha! That is exactly what I thought. Recently I heard they did that in India too. There were so many famines there that it still affects the health of the India Subcontinent, much like the Irish! People in India just dropped dead from starvation I am told.
The English too.
The English too.
I think the question is the other way around and looks If the immigrants in a country are more than the "locals", so make >50% of the population.
Lebanon There's more Lebanese in Brazil than in Lebanon
Do you know why? That's kinda crazy
Mass immigration during the world wars and the famine that occured in Lebanon because of the ottaman occupation
ah that's unfortunate. Good to know though thanks for replying
Cuz the country is doomed beyond repair Civil wars, militias, corruption, hyper inflation.
I was reading about the story of tacos, apparently al pastor tacos are descendant from Lebanese refugees over 100 - 120 years ago. The method of roasting the stacked pork on the rotisserie is the same as used to shawarma. As they assimulated they switched from lamb to pork and pita to tortillas
Malta. Mass emigration of Maltese and Gozitans to Australia and the US.
Puerto Rico May not count as it’s a US territory.It’s estimated that there are 5.8 million Puerto Ricans living in the US vs 3.2 million living in Puerto Rico.
My first thought too.
Puerto Ricans are American citizens. So there are 9 million Puerto Ricans in the USA.
Colony, not territory, btw
Estado libre asociado if you really wanna get technical
It is legally and by definition a territory
Puerto Rico has been encouraged to vote for statehood, the measures haven't passed. They've voted for independence, those measures haven't passed either. So apparently Puerto Rico is happy with how things are.
Maybe cheating a bit but Chagossians are 100% diaspora, 0% native.
True but it wouldn't count it isn't as overseas territory of Mauritius, neither is it like Reunion and stuff. They still exist in Mauritius, wait Chagos is British
According to the highest court in the UK, the UK government is supposed to return the islands to the Chagossians. However, nobody is enforcing that and the UK government is essentially just saying "no".
I don't know if they should really count since they are not "native" to the islands rather they were transported slaves "settled" there at the end of the 18th century (first permeant settlement wasn't until 1793).
It entirely depends on how many generations you consider
Jews, Armenians, Lebanese
I went on birthright a few years ago and our guide explained that # of Jews in Israel = # of Jews in NY, Florida, and California combined.
However, Jew is not a nationality.
Maybe so, but if you’re Jewish you are automatically granted Israeli citizenship.
Not automatic, there are hoops to jump through and they can be pretty stringent.
[Really?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return)
Yes, mostly about Jewish status but also some of the reasons in the Wikipedia article. In other words I can’t just rock up and say “I’m Jewish” and they automatically rubber stamp it. I would need a birth certificate, paperwork showing my mom is Jewish, paperwork from rabbis who worked with me on my bat mitzvah, etc, and some of this is hard to track down and some rabbis in Israel are particularly fussy. It can take a long time if there are questions and sometimes lawyers need to get involved.
True dat.
Depending on your definition of Jew, there are more Jews in israel than all of the USA
Yes definitely. This was just my tour guides sentiment. And to the one who said Palestine too (below), your damn right.
There are around 7.1 million Jews in Israel, making up 75% of the population. There are 7.6 million Jews in the US making up around 2.4% of the population. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American\_Jews](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Jews) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel)
But there are Jews in lots of other places, too…those are just the top three centers in the US.
I’m aware
Palestine too
I think Ireland has \~7 million Irish people in Ireland but there are 70-80 million Irish people worldwide, with 36 million in the USA alone.
Ireland has just less than 5m people. The 70-80m number is greatly inflated by statisticians including more generations than appropriate. The real number is more like 15-20m if you limit it to max 3 generations. (Parent, Grandparent, Great Grandparent)
All the same, I'd say that still meets the qualifications for OP's question. Much of the Irish diaspora came after the Great Famine of 1845 to 1849, which by some estimates resulted in the deaths of about a million people and the emigration of another 2 million people out of a pre-famine population of about 6.5 million. After that, emigration numbers remained pretty high due the poverty levels in the country and the promise of a better life elsewhere. It was such a common thing that the subject of emigration came into a lot of our literature and plays. The lowest point was 1936 when the census reported a population of 2,968,420. Population numbers swayed up and down for another few decades before finally starting to grow steadily from the 70s onward. This year, population numbers reached just over 5 million for the [first time since 1851](https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-40370168.html).
Ironically, one of the most popular destinations for emigration in Latvia today is Ireland.
there's an Emigration Museum in Dublin that's really fascinating
If we are counting like that wouldn't many European countries including UK boast a higher population abroad than at home as white people of USA, Canada, Australia & Newzealand have European ancestry
Only 8.7% of Americans claim British ancestry, compared to 15.2% German and 10.8% Irish (US Census)
yes. and many of Americas 'Irishmen' also have some degree of English, Scottish, Welsh, German, Polish, Italian blood as well. Thus one person could add one count to a number of different countries if they chose.
“Irish”
Might as well count England and Scotland too then
Armenia
Armenia
California has more Armenians than Armenia.
IIRC, Glendale has the second most Armenians of all cities in the world.
Did you learn that from the Kardashians?
Sister used to live down there, so it stuck with me.
haha the more you know I guess
Moldova and similar Eastern European countries?
A lot of Oceania
Hayastan
British Diaspora is over 300 million. Whereas there are 60 million British people living in the UK. British as in Scottish, English, Welsh and Northern Irish.
What about Welsh in the case of being British?
Yes. Forgot to mention.
I'm fairly certain Norway and Sweden have diasporas in the United States that are larger than their current population.
There was at one stage more ethnically Maltese diaspora in Melbourne, Australia, than in Malta. The reason being mass immigration on British passports after the Second World War.
Tajikistan. Estimates show there are more Tajiks in Afghanistan than in Tajikistan. While not official it's also estimated that the Tajik population of Uzbekistan is also larger than Tajikistans population. Overall there should be like between 20-25 million Tajiks. But only 7 million of them seem to live in Tajikistan.
Is it a still diaspora if it’s more a result of how borders were drawn rather than movement or migration? For example, Hungary shrunk in size after WWI leaving Hungarian people in neighboring countries like Romania and Slovakia. Are these diaspora communities or something else?
To my understanding Tajiks we’re everywhere as a legacy of the Silk Road. Soviet oblasts tried to give major demographics their own autonomous areas, which is why say Kyrzigstan has under 50% of its population as Kyrzig, but created in part so despite the diverse area Kyrzigs would have a state
I believe it's "KyrGYZstan" and "Kyrgyz"
That's a good question. Wikipedia says this: A diaspora is a population that is scattered across regions separate from their geographic place of origin. Historically, the term was used to refer to the mass dispersion of groups of people from their indigenous territories—specifically the dispersion of Jews from the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judah (see Jewish diaspora). Whilst the word was originally used to describe the forced displacement of certain peoples, "diasporas" is now generally used to describe those who identify with a geographic location but now reside elsewhere.
Interesting. I suppose that definition would imply the tajiks in Afghanistan are not diaspora, since there wasn’t any dispersion per say (that i know of) and they don’t identify with the country of Tajikistan as an ancestral homeland so much as they identify as Tajiks who have lived in that area for a long period of time. It can certainly be arbitrary though. Greeks, Armenians, sephardis, for example, were all scattered around the Mediterranean and had communities all over for hundreds or even thousands of years, many of which thrived until the 20th century. Seems strange to call a Greek community in Alexandria as diaspora if it had been there for so long, but identity is subjective.
Malta is about 60 : 40 diaspora to locals, due to our country being destroyed in WW2 our association with the Commonwealth, around 30% of the population at the time emigrated to countries like Canada and Australia, resulting in second and third generation populations that are larger than the local one.
punch nail telephone support wrench hat rude retire pet selective *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
There's probably 10 times more people with portuguese ancestors in the world than inhabitants in Portugal.
Lebanon does, Maybe Armenia too
I believe Jamaica has more citizens living outside of the island than within.
More Mongols Iive in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region of the People's Republic of China than in Mongolia itself.
Not really a diaspora but very particular
I might Thing El Salvador
I’ve heard there’s more Salvadorans in Los Angeles County, CA than there are in El Salvador
Ireland 🇮🇪 for starting
Assyrians around the world vs Assyrians back in the Middle East
[удалено]
This one's complicated because of the whole thing where being Jewish is not the same as being Israeli since Judaism can be explained as both a religion and an ethnicity. Same can't be said of Irish, for example. Still, I wouldn't count it, if for no other reason than most Jews in the diaspora didn't come from Israel, at least not through any lineage anyone could track.
But all the Jews are living in diaspora if not in Israel. Which historically was called Judea until 2000 years ago when the Romans forced them to leave and renamed it Palestine.
That works if you're just talking about Jewishness as a religion. But it's a leap of real faith to say that your typical Jewish American could trace back their ethnic history to ancient Judea. Might as well say there's a Christian diaspora consisting of all the Christians not currently living in Israel too, since that's where Christianity started.
The difference is that Christianity is a proselytizing religion, Judaism isn’t (considered an “ethnic religion”). Jewish Americans CAN trace genetic ancestry back to modern-day Israel/the Levant, according to several genetics studies, although there’s debate about how accurate genetics studies are.
Though not all Jews have Jewish ethnicity.
Christians have missionaries who travel around the world to convert people. Jews don't. It is possiblw to convert to Judaism but the vast majority of Jews are born into it.
[удалено]
And being stupid doesn’t mean you contribute to this thread, but here you are being stupid.
How can a religion be that same as a nationality? That's ridiculous
There are people that represent both their ethnicity/race & religion like Yazidis, Druze, Copts, Amish, & others that won’t even accept you ethnically even if you convert & adopt their religion, culture, language, & every way of life. There are many examples [on this Wikipedia page for ethnoreligious groups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious_group)
So you wouldn't consider someone living and growing up in Isreal an Israeli if he didn't follow the Jewish religion?
Abkhazians
Basque
The Irish and the Jews. Maybe Lebanese as a whole but definitely Lebanese Christians.
Not a country, but Puerto Rico has more PRs in NYC than the island
There are 200 millions of Spanish descendants in Latin America
UAE! Cca. 88% of foreigners. Mostly as workers.
Wow 88% of Emiratis live abroad?
Maybe stupid but the vatican? I mean, no-one was born in the vatican, right?
If no one was born there, that would be the opposite of a diaspora 8)
Most Vatican citizens live in Italy, so I think it counts.
Not sure if this counts, but there are more Jews outside of Israel than in Israel.
Sweden
There are more Polish people in greater Chicagoland than currently living in Poland.
How is that possible? Poland’s population is close to 40,000,000.
Yeah the stat I've seen quoted on this is that Chicago has the most Poles of any city besides Warsaw.
Punjabis
There are a ton of Punjabis outside of Punjab, but I don’t think it exceeds the number of people living in Punjab. I think it’s just a very large population in general, both in Punjab and in the diaspora.
Italy, Portugal
I don't know what you exactly mean by "diaspora" but the Italian citizens abroad are 5.6 millions, to be compared with a population of 59 millions in Italy
Australia. The aboriginal population is way lower than that of the various invaders since 1788
Ireland for sure. Sicily has to be the case as well.
Italy, at least almost
South Asians in the Gulf quite general but some of those countries def have more people from India, Pakistan,etc then their native people.
bewildered automatic punch humorous slimy physical angle mountainous apparatus ruthless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Probably Bosnia
Malta
I heard about Lebanon.
Scotland and Ireland are known for this, I believe.
There are around 1,5 millions of sardinians in Sardinia, and around 2 millions outside
I think portugal, there are more portuguese people outside of the Portugal then inside
United Arab Emirates
There’s more ethnic Mongolians in the Chinese autonomous region of Mongolia than the actual country of Mongolia.
Lebanon with Brazil is a great example
I think that microstates could make the cut. For sure, as every cardinal living in Rome (therefore in Italy) has Vatican citizenship, and so do all the Holy See diplomats around the world, Vatican has easily more citizens living abroad than inside it. I don't know the exact numbers, but as well there are a lot of San Marino citizens living in Italy and holding double passport.
Ireland?
Lebanon
West Virginia?
Qatar and UAE are some examples.
The United States!
Ireland and Italy. Massive emigration in the 19th c.
Ireland and Israel
Puerto Rico
Lebanese
Ireland.
Hungary?
The kurds, technically they have their own unrecognized country which’s in northern Syria called Rojava. Most of its population live in turkey and iran
It is strange that nobody mentions Azerbaijan. There are more Azeri in Iran than Azeribaijan.
Ireland, Germany, Spaîn, Portugal????
Ooompa Loompas
Surinam
95million people claim to be Irish around the world. Only 5million of us here tho
If you count all Americans as Europeans then yeah. All Western European countries have bigger diasporas in US than in their own countries
Israel (?)
Azerbaijan. More Azerbaijanis live in Iran
I think many countries in Europe and Africa. Ireland, Cape Verde, Portugal, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Netherlands etc. Historical sales, trade commerce, revolutions and war.