A migrant’s identity is rarely neat. It moves. It stretches. It changes shape depending on where you stand and who is asking the question.
Most migrants arrive in a new country with a decision already made. We work here. We raise children here. We learn the codes, the humour, the rules, the small unspoken habits. We call the place home in every practical sense. Yet outwardly, we still carry a racial identity that others read before they hear our accent or our story. You may feel Australian, but you are often first seen as Indian, Chinese, African, Middle Eastern. Identity is lived inwardly and judged outwardly.
This tension deepens over generations. Fiji Indians are a good example. Many know little about India beyond food, stories and fragments of memory. Some have never been there. Yet the label sticks. Fiji Indian. Even after migrating again, even after raising Australian-born children, the identity remains layered. Their loyalties are not split by choice but by history. They did not design this complexity. They inherited it.
The same pattern exists elsewhere, even if it is spoken about differently. Irish Australians and English Australians often go looking for their roots, tracing family lines and stories back across oceans. Some carry a quiet belief that their forefathers built this nation, that their connection runs deeper. But even here, the story fractures under scrutiny. Not every Anglo person in Australia descends from convicts or settlers who arrived centuries ago. Some arrived as children. Some arrived in living memory. Yet race often collapses these distinctions into a single category of belonging.
This is where logic starts to fray.
Take a simple comparison. A white child arrives in Australia at age three. A brown child arrives at the same age. Both attend the same schools. Both grow up speaking the same slang, absorbing the same references, singing the same anthem at assembly. Yet according to people who argue identity through race, one will always be more Australian than the other. One carries inherited legitimacy. The other must keep proving it
Take a simple comparison. A white child arrives in Australia at age three. A brown child arrives at the same age. Both attend the same schools. Both grow up speaking the same slang, absorbing the same references, singing the same anthem at assembly. Yet according to people who argue identity through race, one will always be more Australian than the other. One carries inherited legitimacy. The other must keep proving it.
That is not an argument about culture or values. It is an argument about blood.
It defies common sense, yet it persists because it feels intuitive to those who benefit from it. It offers certainty in a world where identity has become complicated. It allows some to stop asking questions.
Those questions, however, do not disappear. They surface in politics. They surface in sport. They surface in moments of public emotion.
When a large rally for an Indian prime minister took place in Sydney, many migrants were asked why they were there if they were Australian. The question came with genuine confusion. If this is home, why cheer for another country’s leader? There is no clean answer. Emotional attachments do not dissolve on arrival. For many, it is closer to the way some Britons still feel toward the monarchy, even after generations abroad. History leaves residue.
Figures who deliberately provoke around identity make many uncomfortable. That discomfort is often the point. Sometimes the questions they raise are crude. Sometimes they are harmful. Sometimes they are asked in bad faith. But the unease they generate reveals something real. It exposes how unresolved our thinking still is
Cricket exposes the same fault line. Support shifts. Cheers are divided. Migrants are asked to choose. Yet choice is not always the right word. Sometimes it is habit. Sometimes it is memory. Sometimes it is grief for a place left behind.
Children complicate the picture further. Migrant parents are often asked how they teach loyalty. If you wave another flag or support another team, are you confusing your children? It sounds reasonable on the surface. But children are not confused by multiplicity. They are confused by denial. They grow up navigating layers far better than adults do, until adults insist those layers must be flattened.
Melbourne makes this impossible to ignore. It is a city built on temporary lives. International students, permanent residents, people who have chosen to work here without seeking citizenship. Allegiance is not uniform. Some feel deeply Australian without paperwork. Some hold passports without emotional attachment. Identity does not move in a straight line toward a final destination.
Yet these questions are almost always aimed in one direction. Non-white migrants are asked to explain themselves. White migrants rarely are. No one asks whether the US President felt more German than American. In countries like the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, national identity has been stitched so tightly to Anglo history that whiteness disappears into the background. It becomes the default. Others must justify their presence against it.
These are not new problems. They are ghosts of the last century, still wandering through modern language. We are only in 2026. It would be naive to think they are close to fading.
Australia sits at a crossroads not because migrants are confused, but because the country is still deciding whether it can live with complexity. Identity here will never be singular again, if it ever truly was. The sooner we accept that, the less power these debates will have to wound
Figures who deliberately provoke around identity make many uncomfortable. That discomfort is often the point. Sometimes the questions they raise are crude. Sometimes they are harmful. Sometimes they are asked in bad faith. But the unease they generate reveals something real. It exposes how unresolved our thinking still is.
When someone forces the question of who gets to be Australian, I find myself asking it too, though from a different place. What does loyalty actually mean? Is it measured by emotion, by paperwork, by ancestry, by behaviour? Can it be shared? Can it change over time? Or is it fixed at birth?
I have the same right to ask these questions as anyone else. The difference lies in where the answers lead. One path narrows identity until it excludes. The other accepts that belonging in a migrant nation will always be plural, uneasy and unfinished.
Australia sits at a crossroads not because migrants are confused, but because the country is still deciding whether it can live with complexity. Identity here will never be singular again, if it ever truly was. The sooner we accept that, the less power these debates will have to wound.
The harder path is reflection. The easier one is accusation. History suggests we keep choosing the easier road, until it stops working.
Support independent community journalism. Support The Indian Sun.
Follow The Indian Sun on X | Instagram | Facebook
Support Independent Community Journalism
Dear Reader,The Indian Sun exists for one reason: to tell stories that might otherwise go unheard.
We report on local councils, state politics, small businesses and cultural festivals. We focus on the Indian diaspora and the wider multicultural community with care, balance and accountability. We publish in print and online, send regular newsletters and produce video content. We also run media training programs to help community organisations share their own stories.
We operate independently.
Community journalism does not have the backing of large media corporations. Advertising revenue fluctuates. Platform algorithms change. Costs continue to rise. Yet the need for credible, grounded reporting in a multicultural Australia has never been greater.
When you support The Indian Sun, you support:
• Independent reporting on issues affecting migrant communities
• Coverage of local and state decisions that shape daily life
• A platform for small businesses and community groups
• Media training that builds skills within the community
• Journalism accountable to readers
We cannot cover everything, but we work to cover what matters.
If you value thoughtful reporting that reflects Australia’s diversity, we invite you to contribute. Every donation helps us maintain the quality and consistency of our work.
Please consider making a contribution today.
Thank you for your support.
The Indian Sun Team
