# data[].attributes.body
I believe that this article is the worst written article I've ever witnessed with my own two eyes. It is extremely biased for the only sake of being just that. There are no logos here and that's only one of the reasons why I can not take any of the information seriously.

I get a very strong feeling that the author tripped and fell the morning he/she had to write an article, and decided to just rant for 500 words.

The second problem I had when reading this article was that "expat" always came up as something strictly "western white" and that everyone else has to be called immigrants.

The problem with this statement is that it's primarily wrong. Yes, the definition of an expat is correct. But the reason that asians, africans etc. get the tag immigrant is often because they had to move to another country to flee from terrorism and war. The term expat is for people who goes around the globe working. People who have to travel to another country and live in said country to work. This phenomenon called working is of course not only applied to white heritage. But more often than not, other races have had to free their home country for safety.

The main problem with the article is that is it way too one-sided and one-minded to be takes seriously. There isn't really any statistics or data provided. The first and only person the author interviews is an african-american who hates the fact that he gets called an immigrant when he in fact is an expat. This is entirely correct, if used correctly in the article. HOWEVER, the author uses this as the main argument and complaint in the article.

# data[].attributes.body
The article tells some weak points which makes me disagree on what the author writes.
I believe that his view on racism is very critical and describing with harsh words makes it worse that it already is.
Simon wrote on his reaction on this article that this author has misunderstood what an expats is. I agree on that, because it is not a person going to another country or moving to another country that defines "expats".  The word expat is like Simon wrote a person that is temporarily residing in another country for a reason.

Not all but some here are immigrants, for example Christina (our english teacher) or me are immigrants. We are not from Africa.

# data[].attributes.body
The author is very aggressive in his way of writing, and I am not sure if that is a good thing in this case. What he is saying is probably true, but in my opinion, he has not succeed trying to convince the readers. The arguments are not strong enough and it makes the article seem u. If this is a big issue, the article did not underline that in a make much difference.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the article to some extent. I think they exaggerate a little but they have a point with what they say. These small things that not many people think about are things that upsets people and can potentially create conflicts. I understand that people are upset considering how different groups of people have been treated in some historical events. If we don’t fix these little things now it could lead to a bigger problem later on.

# data[].attributes.body
This article feels extremely one-sided, and it is clear that the author has some very extreme opinions. I don't know whether or not only white people are called expats, but he tries to make it seem as if all white people are in on this, to ensure that only we are allowed to be called expats.

The author uses a blog written by the WSJ to make a point, but it is in my point invalid as the blog recognizes the double standard which to me shows that they are aware of this and not just trying to ignore it.

The author has many different claims of racism and unfairness in the article, but fails to deliver any concrete evidence that this is true, but is instead based on the author's own opinion and thoughts.

Furthermore, I find it very offensive that he blames this issue on white supremacy, meaning that all white people are white supremacists since he says that we are the ones hindering others from using the term expat.

After a quick google I found that the author has made many similar articles to this one, bashing down on europeans and north Americans, calling us racists and supremacists. In my opinion this ruins his own arguments even more, as it shows that he is clearly pushing an agenda and does not want to publish any facts.

# data[].attributes.body
The article clearly express anger at the fact most white people living abroad are called expats while people of collar are defined as immigrants. The reason for this the author claims is racism towards people of colour whom white people don’t want to be compared with. Not only is this argument in itself racist but the words expat and immigrant are not interchangeable. They are are different words describing the different situations, expat refers to a person temporarily living abroad for various reasons, immigrant means the person permanently take up residence abroad. The article completely disregard the reason more people of colour are defined as immigrants in western nations is that most of them by definition are immigrants. On the the other hand hand it’s less common for people in the west to emigrate and more common to temporarily work abroad by definition expats. It’s not racism but logic.

# data[].attributes.body
The article clearly shows some strong opinions. To me it was a little bit surprising, but also interesting, as this is not an issue I’ve heard about before. I’m not very familiar with the term “expat” or how it’s used, and so it’s difficult for me to say if it’s a real problem or not. If it is a true problem though, it of course isn’t good. As the article says it would be a double standard which is unfair. At the same time, if this article was aiming to alert people to an issue that exists, I’m not sure it does a very good job. It is not filled with that much information or explanation, it mostly feels like a rant.

# data[].attributes.body
So this article has a couple of points I agree with however, I dont agree with most of it.

In my experience I have heard of very few Swedish people living abroad that call themselves expats, in fact in my old class almost everyone considered themselves immigrants.

A portion of us white people probably call themselves expats, however this has nothing with a "white supremacist ideology" to do, its more of a historical thing.

If you look at it from a historical perspective, most immigrants has has emigrated as refugees, escaping war and poverty. Immigrants has become associated with war and poverty, and therefore when someone from a developed nation emigrates they are not considered immigrants.

If Europe got a mass war and millions of Europeans fled to lets say Asia, im almost certain that they would not be considered expats.

To say that all white people are expats, and that everyone else is an immigrant would also be wrong. A good example of this would be the mass European emigration to America in the 1800's, where everyone was considered an immigrant.

Also what does white people calling themselves expats have to do with them enjoying the "privileges of a racist system" based on the "white supremacist ideology"?

I would also like to point out that, while the article might not directly say it, it paints the picture that most, if not all, white people are terrible priviliged racist human beings. And while I dont deny that they dont exist, I think its disgraceful to drag us all over the same ledge.

And as a last point, I think this should be in the "Opinion" section, not the "News" section.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the writer of this article has misunderstood what an expat is. It is not simply a person going to another country, or moving to another country, or working in another country. An expat is a person who are TEMPORARILY residing in another country for a specific purpose, a common reason is being sent there by their organisation / company. To say that expat is a fancy word for white immigrants is wrong.

The reason that people from Africa, Asia, or the Middle East (..etc) who moved to Europe, the US, or anywhere else, are called immigrants is because they moved for other reasons than the reasons that define an expat.
It's simply more common for Europeans to go to another country for expat-reasons. This is because of economical differences, not because of race.

The article is right in a sense, because there are people calling themselves expats incorrectly, but this is most likely just a misunderstanding of the term.

All in all no one knows what expat means and it’s apparently because of racism

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the writer has a reason to think this way, and that there is some truth to it. I can believe that many people may experience feeling downgraded by the wrong use of the word “immigrant”, and that they don’t know how to address it. However, the writer seems to forget to mention the fact that many people actually use the words “immigrant” and “expat” in a correct and respectful way, which makes the article seem very one-sided, and the writer somewhat closed-minded. The writer also does not include much proof in the article, which makes it less believable as well.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nelly
I don't entirely agree with the message of the article. This article is quite biased and it only sees the issue through one perspective. “The guardian” is a british newspaper and I would claim that the writer sees the issue from a one sided mindset. I also think that it's way too absurd to make general claims about people based on their skin color. That makes it seem like everyone with the same skin color shares the exact same background, experiences and privileges. I only think that the writer considered a “british” or possibly a “european” perspective which is unfortunate. For example Uk's population is primarily white (people with european decent) while that's not the case in many other countries. I also think that the article is based on personal opinions rather than actual statistics and data.

# data[].attributes.subject
Nelly
I don't entirely agree with the message of the article. This article is quite biased and it only sees the issue through one perspective. “The guardian” is a british newspaper and I would claim that the writer sees the issue from a one sided mindset. I also think that it's way too absurd to make general claims about people based on their skin color. That makes it seem like everyone with the same skin color shares the exact same background, experiences and privileges. I only think that the writer considered a “british” or possibly a “european” perspective which is unfortunate. For example Uk's population is primarily white (people with european decent) while that's not the case in many other countries. I also think that the article is based on personal opinions rather than actual statistics and data.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that this article is the worst written article I've ever witnessed with my own two eyes. It is extrimely biased for the only sake of being just that. There are no logos here and that's only one of the reasons why I can not take any of the information seriosly.

I get a very strong feeling that the author tripped and fell the morning he/she had to write an article, and decided to just rant for 500 words.

The second problem I had when reading this article was that "expat" always came up as something stricly "western white" and that everyone else has to be called immigrants.
The problem with this statement is that it's primarily wrong. Yes, the definition of an expat is correct. But the reason that asians, africans etc. get the tag immigrant is often because they had to move to another country to flee from terrorism and war. The term expat is for

# data[].attributes.body
This artical is extremely po
orly written in the sence that it doesn't provide any actual statistics, any personal anecdotes from people that has experienced this form of 'racism'.

# data[].attributes.body
Expats and immigrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
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".

What is an expat? And who is an expat? According to Wikipedia, "an expatriate (often shortened to expat) is a person temporarily or permanently residing in a country other than that of the person's upbringing. The word comes from the Latin terms ex ('out of') and patria ('country, fatherland')".

Defined that way, you should expect that any person going to work outside of his or her country for a period of time would be an expat, regardless of his skin colour or country. But that is not the case in reality; expat is a term reserved exclusively for western white people going to work abroad.

Africans are immigrants. Arabs are immigrants. Asians are immigrants. However, Europeans are expats because they can't be at the same level as other ethnicities. They are superior. Immigrants is a term set aside for 'inferior races'.

Don't take my word for it. The Wall Street Journal, the leading financial information magazine in the world, has a blog dedicated to the life of expats and recently they featured a story ' Who is an expat, anyway? '. Here are the main conclusions: "Some arrivals are described as expats; others as immigrants; and some simply as migrants. It depends on social class, country of origin and economic status. It's strange to hear some people in Hong Kong described as expats, but not others. Anyone with roots in a western country is considered an expat ... Filipino domestic helpers are just guests, even if they've been here for decades. Mandarin-speaking mainland Chinese are rarely regarded as expats ... It's a double standard woven into official policy."

The reality is the same in Africa and Europe. Top African professionals going to work in Europe are not considered expats. They are immigrants. Period. "I work for multinational organisations both in the private and public sectors. And being black or coloured doesn't gain me the term "expat". I'm a highly qualified immigrant, as they call me, to be politically correct," says an African migrant worker.

Most white people deny that they enjoy the privileges of a racist system. And why not? But our responsibility is to point out and to deny them these privileges, directly related to an outdated supremacist ideology. If you see those "expats" in Africa, call them immigrants like everyone else. If that hurts their white superiority, they can jump in the air and stay there. The political deconstruction of this outdated worldview must continue.

Mawuna Remarque Koutonin is the editor of SiliconAfrica.com, where this blog was first published. Join our community of development professionals and humanitarians. Follow @GuardianGDP on Twitter. Follow @siliconafrica on Twitter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why are white people expats when the rest of us are immigrants?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
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". What is an expat? And who is an expat?