I wanted to share an article with you from The Economist called "The Others". Although the article takes liberties with some facts (philosophers abroad), sketches too broadly at times, and does not address much about the expat experience, I feel it at least tries to address the issues of being/feeling foreign. Having lived and traveled out of the U.S. for ten of the last twenty years it is something I know. Read the article and tell me what you think. Some comments I have to make:

The writer states, "It has long been true in America that nobody can be foreign because everyone is foreign." Well, we know this writer isn't American, since there has been and still is a clear fear of the foreigner here. Hell, natives down here in South Carolina consider other Americans to be foreigners sometimes. What he was really saying was that one doesn't feel like a foreigner in America (this was a compliment I think), because of immigration's affect on the country (historical and current). Of course the reference point must be NYC, because I guarantee you there are parts of this country that would make any urbane Brit from London feel downright foreign (once again, the state I now live in).

The writer also states, " To get a strong sense of what it means to be foreign, you have to go to Africa, the Middle East, or parts of Asia." No you don't. His perspective here is terribly limiting, yet I know what he means. He means the areas that are rough, isolated, or culturally resilient in the face of globalization. Obviously if you go to Cape Town or Jo-burg, Beirut or Istanbul you are in cosmopolitan cities, regardless of the fact that you are in Africa or the Middle East. Again, to pick on South Carolina, if you ended up in the most rural areas of this very rural state you would get a strong sense of what it means to be foreign, much more so than, say, a Japanese tourist visiting Cape Town.

With a topic like this broad strokes don't always do it.