The two terms are very similar, and can easily be confused. Some people don’t like the term expat, and prefer to use the word immigrant universally. Others think we should call everyone expats, and do away with the term immigrant. But what’s the difference exactly, and why do some people find the term expat problematic anyways?
Defining expat and immigrant
Let me first start by defining both terms. Merriam-Webster defines an expat, or expatriate, as “A person who lives in a foreign country”. While not very specific, this term has no suggestion of permanence. Let’s look at the definition for immigrant now: “a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence”.
That permanent residence part is key. The goal for an immigrant is to settle in a new country to take up permanent residence, often because they are trying to escape something difficult in their own home country, whether that be persecution or simply financial hardship. It’s not as dire as refugees, who often need to move suddenly and have little choice in the matter. Immigrants tend to plan their move more in advance. But nonetheless, the plan is to settle in the new country, whereas expats don’t necessarily plan to settle in their new country.
But what’s the problem with the term expat?
“The word expat is loaded. It carries many connotations, preconceptions and assumptions about class, education and privilege — just as the terms foreign worker, immigrant and migrant call to mind a different set of assumptions” explains Kieren Nash from the BBC. “Why are white people expats when the rest of us are immigrants?” asks Mawuna Remarque Koutonin for the Guardian, to which she answers “In the lexicon of human migration there are still hierarchical words, created with the purpose of putting white people above everyone else. One of those remnants is the word ‘expat’… a term reserved exclusively for western white people going to work abroad.”
An updated definition for our modern times
Perhaps that term used to hold that connotation back when travel was more expensive and less frequent, but with the globalisation of today I am of the firm belief that the term expat should not be a term reserved exclusively for western wealthy white people, nor should it ever have been.
Dr. Yvonne McNulty, an academic from SIM University in Singapore, shares this updated view of the word. “It’s not about the colour of your skin, and it’s not about the salary that you earn…Are maids expats? Yes they are. Are construction workers in Singapore that you see on the building sites expats? Yes they are…a business expatriate is a legally working individual who resides temporarily in a country of which they are not a citizen, in order to accomplish a career-related goal (no matter the pay or skill level) — someone who has relocated abroad either by an organisation, by themselves or been directly employed by their host country.”
The New Definition
Fortunately, more people are joining the fight to relabel the term expat. The founder of InterNations, Malte Zeeck, had to deal with the meaning behind the term expat from day one of his website launching. “Whether someone is an expat or not doesn’t depend on origin – it’s about the motivations behind their decision to move abroad..Just calling everyone who lives abroad an expat won’t really change some political and socioeconomic realities,” he adds.
While there are many types of expat with many different reasons to move abroad, for people that we today call expats… living abroad is rather a lifestyle choice than borne out of economic necessity or dire circumstances in their home country such as oppression or persecution,” Zeeck says. “That’s what differentiates them from refugees or economic migrants and not their income or origin. Immigrants are usually defined as people who have come to a different country in order to live there permanently, whereas expats move abroad for a limited amount of time or have not yet decided upon the length of their stay.”
The Bottom Line
So it ultimately should come down to your motivation of why you moved abroad. Was your intention to live in the new country indefinitely? If so, then you’re an immigrant, regardless of skin color or level of wealth. Did you move to a new country temporarily, with a time limit to your contract or without being convinced you want to stay forever? In that case, you’re an expat. It’s as simple as that. When I moved to France, it was on a contract that was 1-2 years in duration, but no longer than that.
I didn’t know when I moved to France that I would want to stay longer. Each couple of years I revisit my question of whether to stay in France or to move elsewhere, and for now each time the answer is to stay if I can. I’ve been lucky enough to find more job opportunities that allow me to stay in France legally, and I’ve enjoyed living here enough that I don’t want to leave yet. But my impermanent nature of taking it year-to-year really exemplifies, for me, the expat experience.
If I had moved to France because I wanted to live in France indefinitely, and that was always the plan, then I would call myself an immigrant. I have family that moved from Venezuela to Miami, to live a more stable and better life as the political and economic situation in their home country progressively collapsed. I would consider them immigrants, because they have no intention to move back to Venezuela. They’ve settled in Miami, permanently, and have created lives for themselves. And their ethnicity, skin color, or wealth has no importance on that definition.
So let’s take back the term expat. Being an expat is perfectly fine, not everyone is an expat. Nor is everyone an immigrant simply because they left their native country. There is nothing wrong with using the term expat as long as it isn’t used an a hierarchical, othering sense.
What are your thoughts? Do you find the term expat problematic? Has the term changed, or is it still the same? Let me know in the comments below!
