Rethinking transnationalism through the second generation Helen Lee School of Social Sciences, La Trobe University The concept of transnationalism was developed to describe the ties maintained by migrants with their homelands and, until recently, little attention was given to the question of whether these ties would be continued by the migrants’ children, the ‘second generation’. This article discusses the transnational practices of second-generation Tongans in Australia, using the research findings to reconsider some of the existing assumptions about what constitutes transnationalism. To fully understand second-generation transnationalism, three forms of transnationalism are described: intradiasporic, indirect and forced transnationalism. Taking these forms into account reveals a more complex picture of the transnational ties maintained by migrants and their children than has been drawn in previous accounts. INTRODUCTION Transnationalism is used in migration studies as a catch-all concept that refers to a wide variety of connections between migrant populations and their homelands. Most of the focus has been on those who migrated and only recently has there been any serious attention paid to the transnational activities of their children. 1 This paper draws on research with second-generation Tongans in Australia to raise ques- tions about the assumptions that often underlie discussions of transnationalism and the problems inherent in typologies based on the intensity of transnational engage- ments. By identifying three specific forms of transnationalism, referred to here as intradiasporic, indirect and forced transnationalism, the article considers several aspects of transnational engagement that have been largely neglected. Intradiasporic transnationalism, the ties maintained across different diasporic populations, can occur independently of the host–home connections that are the primary focus of transnational studies. Some members of those diasporic popula- tions do not engage in any direct transnational ties at all, yet their indirect involve- ment through practices such as contributing to family remittance pools, fundraising activities and church donations ensures that they remain enmeshed in transnational webs of connection, both intradiasporic and with the homeland. This indirect trans- nationalism can include involuntary involvement, or forced transnationalism, a term that also describes practices such as sending children and youth from the diaspora to the homeland against their will. Each of these forms of transnationalism can be found in the migrant generation, but they more commonly characterise the The Australian Journal of Anthropology (2011) 22, 295–313 doi:10.1111/j.1757-6547.2011.00150.x ª 2011 Australian Anthropological Society 295