The views and opinions expressed on this site and blog posts (excluding comments on blog posts left by others) are entirely my own and do not represent those of any employer or organization with whom I am currently or previously have been associated.
Academic Version: Applying my personal experiences and academic research as a professor of Sociology and Asian American Studies to provide a more complete understanding of political, economic, and cultural issues and current events related to American race relations, and Asia/Asian America in particular.
Plain English: Trying to put my Ph.D. to good use.
Each year, Toys R Us gives the first baby of the new year a scholarship of $25,000. This year, the first baby born in the new year was a Chinese American. After initially being declared the first baby of the new year, officials learned that her mother was an undocumented immigrant and her title and scholarship was stripped and given to the next baby instead. However, Toys R Us officials have decided to reinstate the award and give out two scholarships:
After coming under fire for denying a Chinese-American infant a $25,000 prize in a New Year’s baby contest because her mother was not a legal U.S. resident, Toys “R” Us Inc. said Saturday evening that it had reversed its decision. The company said it would award each of the three babies in the grand prize pool of the “First Baby of the Year Sweepstakes” a $25,000 savings bond.
Toys “R” Us, which opened its first mainland China store less than a month ago, changed its mind after Chinese-American advocates protested and the story was reported in ethnic newspapers and The New York Times, among other outlets. “We love all babies,” the company said in a written statement Saturday. “Our sweepstakes was intended to welcome the first baby of 2007 and prepare for its future. We deeply regret that this sweepstakes became a point of controversy.” . . .
Chinese-American advocates had complained that the toy company’s decision smacks of second-class citizenship. They said the prize should was supposed to be for the child, not the mother.
I commend Toys R US for doing the right thing by recognizing their mistake in initially rescinding their award and instead, to award it to the rightful winner. At the same time, it’s rather disappointing to read about the racist and xenophobic reaction of the other family that were noted in another article, who claimed that they were “100% American” and that the first baby should have been disqualified.
As I’ve said before, racist reactions like that are founded on the antiquated idea that only Whites qualify to be “real” Americans in this country and that all non-Whites should be viewed as outsiders and “wannabe” Americans. Alas, that kind of mentality is apparently still alive and well in this country.
In recent years, China has opened up over a hundred “Confucius Institutes” in 50 countries around the U.S., including several in the U.S. (the latest one is at the Univ. of MA at Boston). The goal of such institutes is to promote the learning of Chinese language and culture and academic exchange with host universities. But as the Christian Science Monitor reports, others feel there might be ulterior motives to China’s Confucius Institutes:
In fact, the CI is only one initiative in a large-scale charm offensive that China has launched in recent years. Education, culture, foreign aid, the Olympics – all these “soft power” tools aim to attract people to China’s rising status rather than intimidate them, say analysts. . . .
The institutes are joint ventures, almost always housed within a university. A partner school in China sends teachers; the local school provides office space and staff; China also gives institutes in the US grants ranging from tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, which the local universities usually match. . . .
But as CIs in the US start up, some university faculty members remain skeptical of their presence on college campuses, raising concerns about the potential for political interference from the Chinese government. . . Some professors fear that China will try to silence other viewpoints taught on campus. “It’s very important to keep [CI and CEAS] separate,” says Ms. Gerbert of the University of Kansas, to avoid any academic interference with, say, research on human rights in China.
I’ve made no secret of my suspicions regarding China’s motives for recent educational policies. However, I think this situation is different because they are now on American turf — geographically, culturally, and politically. In the academic world, faculty and administrators are fiercely independent and will not tolerate “outsiders” even trying to dictate to them how such academic programs are run.
Therefore, I think the suspicions regarding such Confucius Institutes are valid, but probably a little overblown. Even if China were to try to unduly influence these academic programs, they would not get very far at all.
In the recent 2006 midterm elections, Asian Americans made themselves prominent at the polls and on the ballot. As the Orange County Register reports, that election saw the largest number of Asian American candidates ever in the populous southern California county:
The Nov. 7 election featured the highest number of Asian-American candidates in the county’s history, political observers say. Of the 28 candidates who ran in city council, school board and other races, 13 emerged victorious.
Not only are the numbers record-breaking, but they reflect a trend and a “political coming of age” for Asian-American voters and politicians, said Duc Nguyen, program manager for the Orange County Asian and Pacific Islander Community Alliance. “People are beginning to realize that it can be done,” Nguyen said. “And they are also starting to realize the importance of civic participation and representation.”
Nguyen attributes those results to a spike in Asian-American voters, a push by local groups to get more Asian-American voters to the polls and the availability of translated voting material that simplifies the process for those who may not be fluent in English. Nguyen’s group, along with the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, released a study in October that showed a 68 percent increase in the number of Asian-Americans who voted in 2004 compared with 2000.
As I’ve mentioned before, these results from Orange County are just another example of a larger trend toward more political participation and civic integration among Asian Americans. However, what makes Orange County unique is that it contains perhaps the largest concentration of Asian Americans in the country and that it is also a very racially/ethnically diverse and relatively affluent constituency.
In other words, Orange County is a tough test for any politician, not just Asian Americans. For politicians to succeed, they have to appeal not just to their core constituents but also to the larger voting population, which is what makes the emergence of Asian American politicians in Orange County notable.
While all of these posts are in local and state assembly government for now, it will be exciting to see how long it takes before Asian Americans — particularly Vietnamese Americans — go on to become mayors of prominent cities and perhaps eventually, to high-profile statewide offices . . . and maybe even beyond.
Liberals like me have been generally ruthless in lambasting President Bush and his policies these last six years. This time however, I must congratulate him for (finally) doing the right thing by approving funds to preserve ten of the camps in which a large portion of 120,000 Japanese Americans were unjustly and illegally imprisoned during World War II:
The money will be administered by the National Park Service to restore and pay for research at 10 camps. The law is intended to help preserve the camps as reminders of how the United States turned on some of its citizens in a time of fear. . . . President Bill Clinton called for the preservation of the camps in 2000 and signed a memorandum seeking recommendations on developing more opportunities for the public to learn about the internment.
The law signed by President Bush will give grants to nonfederal organizations for historical, research and restoration work at the sites named in the legislation, as well others selected by the head of the Interior Department, which includes the National Park Service. The National Park Service already operates facilities at two of the 10 camps: the Manzanar National Historic Site in California and the Minidoka Internment National Monument in Idaho.
Co-sponsors of the bill included the two current members of Congress who spent time in the camps as children: Democratic Reps. Mike Honda and Doris Matsui of California. Matsui was born in the Poston camp in Arizona.
Is there a political motive behind this approval — is President Bush trying to curry favor among Asian Americans with this particular move? Maybe, but whatever the motive, there seems to be bipartisan agreement that it was the right thing to do. Now maybe we can talk about that Iraq War thing . . .
