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.
A common and popular theme in this blog and the entire Asian-Nation site concerns the issue of assimilation into American society. Many Asian Americans, along with other groups of color, still navigate the many forms, levels, and outcomes associated with what it means to become assimilated as “Americans” in this country.
With that in mind, Diverse Issues in Education reports on a new study of assimilation among various racial/ethnic groups that finds that immigrants today assimilate faster than earlier immigrants, but that some groups inevitably assimilate faster than others:
Newcomers of the past quarter-century have assimilated more rapidly than their counterparts of a century ago, according to a conservative think tank. However, the report from the Manhattan Institute indicates that Mexican immigrants are not assimilating as fast as other groups. . . .
In an article for The Boston Globe, [the study’s author Prof. Jacob] Vigdor said many Mexicans do not have much incentive to assimilate because they strongly expect to return home and they can function in Spanish-speaking populations in the United States. In addition, those without legal status lack a path to citizenship and better jobs.
This new report is not likely to sway many opinions when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration because both sides can legitimately claim that the results of the study support their own positions.
That is, critics of rights for illegal immigrants are likely to argue that since Mexican immigrants, particularly those who are here illegally, are less likely to assimilate, we should continue efforts to exclude them because ultimately, the results show that they aren’t interested in becoming American.
On the other hand, supporters of more rights for illegal immigrants will contend that there’s an important cause-and-effect issue here — many illegal immigrants can’t assimilate because they don’t have the resources or rights to do so. With that in mind, if we allow them to become citizens, they will eventually assimilate into the American mainstream.
As I’ve stated before, I belong to the latter group and favor giving illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship, although not at the expense of others who have been waiting for a immigration visa for years and even decades.
To alleviate this bottleneck, we need to expand the levels of immigration to the U.S., especially considering that immigrants produce many tangible benefits for American society and its economy. I realize that this is a controversial idea, but as a sociologist and an immigrant myself, I firmly believe it to be true.
Previously I’ve written about two particular trends among Vietnamese and Vietnamese Americans — the first is how many Vietnamese Americans are increasingly relocating back to Viet Nam in order to open businesses and get a piece of Viet Nam’s fast-growing economy. The second trend is the burgeoning high-tech industry in Viet Nam, as it tries to catch up with its “Asian tiger” neighbors such as Taiwan, South Korea, and of course, China.
For decades, the Vietnamese who settled in Silicon Valley, which has one of the largest Vietnamese populations outside the Southeast Asian country, and the leaders of Vietnam eyed each other with suspicion, if not hostility.
Now Hanoi is luring them back as the country embraces a pro-business path similar to its neighbor, China. In April, government officials held the latest in a series of seminars in Ho Chi Minh City focused on encouraging even more Viet Kieu (overseas Vietnamese) to return.
Particularly the younger generation are responding by taking the 15-hour flight across the Pacific to launch start-ups and head up operations for multinational companies. They all want a piece of Vietnam’s hot economy.
Most software outsourcing companies here were founded by Viet Kieu. Overseas Vietnamese hold high-level positions with companies like Intel and venture capital firms. The government reports Viet Kieu entrepreneurs invested about $90 million last year. . .
While Vietnamese enjoy greater personal freedoms, returning Viet Kieu are mindful that they must stay clear of local politics. The government prohibits any debate about its one-party system. . . . These days, Viet Kieu are as likely to be wined and dined by Communist Party officials as to be spied on. . . .
For the most part in Vietnam, pragmatism has replaced anger. Officials know Viet Kieu have critical business experience, technical know-how and vital overseas connections, all of which are desperately needed in this emerging economy.
The article does note however, that there is still some emotional tension among Vietnamese Americans — especially concerning the older generation — about doing business with the communist government.
Nonetheless, this economic and cultural trend is inevitably going to increase in the years and decades to come, even if Viet Nam continues to be controlled by the communists.
This trend is also another example of the globalized nature of the evolving Asian American identity these days. That is, as we move forward into the 21st century, these kinds of transnational economic and cultural ties and networks are only going to become more prominent and significant among many Asian Americans.
Just as important however, is that in facilitating these kinds of transnational, global ties, Asian Americans are not turning their backs on their American identities. In fact, they are strengthening them by leading American society and its economy forward into the globalized marketplace.
In other words, for good and for bad, the U.S. needs to adapt to globalization. As this story shows, Vietnamese Americans are leading the way — for the benefit of both Viet Nam and the U.S.
One of the basic foundations of this site and blog is that having a strong Asian American identity has many benefits, individually and collectively. As I’ve said many times before, having a strong pan-Asian identity allows us to connect our similar histories and experiences, and let us draw upon our collective resources and speak with a louder voice in American society.
But on the individual level, does having a strong Asian American identity help or hurt someone’s ability to handle racism and racist incidents? As Diverse Issues in Education reports, that question is at the heart of a new study released by a team of Asian American psychologists:
Asian American adults, ages 18-75 years old, were questioned about any negative feelings they may have had in the previous 30 days. Participants were also asked about their perceptions of racial and ethnic discrimination, how often they felt discriminated against because of their ethnicity and how close they felt their feelings were to others in the same ethnic group.
For participants born outside the United States, embracing their ethnic identity did not guard against the ill effects of discrimination on psychological wellness. However, for Asians born in the United States, ethnic attachment did affect whether discrimination made people feel more distressed.
“Among adults in their 40s, feeling strongly about their own background can counteract the negative effects of discrimination,” says Dr. Tiffany Yip, the report’s lead author and an assistant professor at Fordham University.
More analysis from the report showed that U.S.-born participants in their 30s and those above the age of 50 who described themselves as having strong ethnic identity had more mental distress from discrimination than those participants with a weaker ethnic attachment.
So there seems to be a mixed bag of results here. The study apparently shows that among foreign-born Asian Americans, having a strong ethnic identity did not seem to produce any benefits in terms of helping them deal with racial discrimination.
For U.S.-born Asian Americans, the study notes that there seems to be a U-shaped curve in regard to how a strong ethnic identity affects racial distress — the negative impacts of racism are high among those 30 and younger and 50 or older, but low among those in their 40s.
In reading the article more closely, the authors argue that this pattern is likely the result of “life cycle” factors. That is, those between 18-30 are generally trying to “find their place in the world” and establishing their careers and as such, incidents of racial discrimination can be very jarring for them as they seek to achieve some personal stability.
On the other hand, among Asian Americans 50 and older, the authors argue that they are likely to be in a phase in which they’re preparing for old age and retirement and are seeking to minimize stressors as much as possible. In this context, incidents of racial discrimination can also be quite upsetting.
But for those in their 40s as the authors argue, racism does not produce as strong a negative result because they tend to be more settled personally and professionally and have learned effective coping skills to deal with incidents of racial discrimination — such as relying on their strong Asian American identity.
Ultimately, the study does not suggest that having a strong Asian American identity is some kind of magic bullet that automatically insulates someone from racial distress. Instead, the take-home message is that, combined with where you are in the general “life cycle,” having a strong Asian American identity is like having another set of tools and resources that you can use to better deal with the negative impacts of racism.
For me personally, I would much rather have such tools at my disposal than be blissfully ignorant about why racism exists against people like me. In other words, at least for me, knowledge — and my Asian American identity — is power.
The careful rules that dictate male-female interaction and courtship quite simply can’t be applied in the US as they are in predominately Muslim countries. . . . The result: US Muslims are pioneering ways to read Muslim rules in ways that make sense in an American context. . . .
Though it may seem old-fashioned in a US context, finding a partner without your family’s help bucks most Muslim traditions. . . . the concept of dating for fun simply does not exist in Islam. Any potential match is judged, pursued, or abandoned based on marriage potential.
In the US, however, many Muslims – especially Arabs – have re-interpreted parts of the courtship process to allow for something closer to the American way.
The article goes on to describe various ways that old traditions and contemporary circumstances clash when it comes to finding a spouse among Muslim Americans. Even though such cultural changes inevitably cause some degree of unease on both sides, these examples illustrate how Asian Americans — that includes Muslim Americans — are slowly forging their own identity that combines elements from both cultures.
As I’ve written about before, these new forms of assimilation are great examples of how increasing American and international diversity, globalization, and transnationalism are changing the landscape of how racial/ethnic minorities identify themselves in 21st century American society.
That is, we used to be limited to the rigid dichotomy of “American” versus “non-American.” But with the world changing all around us, I would argue that we now have more opportunities and more power to assert an identity that, if we want, combines both the the traditional and the contemporary.
This new identity can also include the idea that our “foreignness” may actually be an asset, rather than a liability, since it directly reflects the demographic, political, and economic changes taking place all around us. As we assert these new forms of being an American, we will undoubtedly encounter resistance from more “traditional” Americans.
Nonetheless, these institutional changes taking place all around us are real and they are only accelerating. In that context, as Asian Americans, I think we should take the initiative to lead American society forward into the 21st century.
If you’ve been following the Democratic presidential nominee campaign even just a little bit, you already know that for good and for bad, Obama’s candidacy has thrust the issue of race into the national spotlight, front and center. But within this context, one of the issues that we haven’t heard much about is the opinions and attitudes of “ordinary” White voters and whether or not they will vote for Obama.
In other words, the question before us is, just how much as American (specifically, White) society changed? Or to put it bluntly, have Whites become less racist? Well, as CBS News reports, several incidents involving his campaign volunteers have called into question whether or not many White voters are in fact, more racially tolerant these days compared to say, 50 years ago:
For all the hope and excitement Obama’s candidacy is generating, some of his field workers, phone-bank volunteers and campaign surrogates are encountering a raw racism and hostility that have gone largely unnoticed — and unreported — this election season. Doors have been slammed in their faces.
They’ve been called racially derogatory names (including the white volunteers). And they’ve endured malicious rants and ugly stereotyping from people who can’t fathom that the senator from Illinois could become the first African American president. . . .
“The first person I encountered was like, ‘I’ll never vote for a black person,’ ” recalled [one Obama volunteer canvassing in Indiana]. “People just weren’t receptive.” . . . One caller, Switzer remembers, said he couldn’t possibly vote for Obama and concluded: “Hang that darky from a tree!” . . .
On Election Day in Kokomo, a group of black high school students were holding up Obama signs along U.S. 31, a major thoroughfare. As drivers cruised by, a number of them rolled down their windows and yelled out a common racial slur for African Americans. . . .
Obama has won five of 12 primaries in which black voters made up less than 10 percent of the electorate, and caucuses in states such as Idaho and Wyoming that are overwhelmingly white. But exit polls show he has struggled to attract white voters who didn’t attend college and earn less than $50,000 a year.
I see this as a classic case of whether the glass is half-full or half-empty.
That is, should we focus on the fact that Barack Obama has waged the most successful presidential campaign of any person of color in American history and is on the verge of being the Democratic nominee for President, or do we focus on the fact that a significant percentage of Whites, particularly working class and non-urban Whites, flatly refuse to even consider voting for him simply because he’s Black?
This is not just an academic question that only intellectuals care about — this question goes to the heart of the current state of American society and the level of racial prejudice that still exists in this country. I’ll leave it up to you to decide for yourself how you want to interpret these sentiments against Barack Obama.
What I will point out is that this question about where do we stand as a nation on the question of race, is not going away any time soon because it is a question that symbolizes a much larger epoch in American history and is a question that will become more politically and socially salient as American society becomes increasingly diverse and globalized.
We are reaching a crossroad in American history. The path that we choose to go down will ultimately determine the fundamental nature of the American identity and our unity as a nation.
You might remember my previous post that described criticisms over the upcoming Martin Luther King Jr. memorial statue in Washington DC. That initial controversy centered on the fact that the sculptor was not African American, or even American — he was Chinese and that critics charged that King’s legacy was being “outsourced” to China.
The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts thinks “the colossal scale and Social Realist style of the proposed statue recalls a genre of political sculpture that has recently been pulled down in other countries,” commission secretary Thomas Luebke said in a letter in April. . . .
The centerpiece is to be a 2 1/2 -story sculpture of the civil rights leader carved in a giant chunk of granite. Called the Stone of Hope, it would depict King, standing with his arms folded, looming from the stone. At 28 feet tall, it would be eight feet taller than the statue of Abraham Lincoln in the Lincoln Memorial. . . .
Its general design was approved by the seven-member federal commission that year, based on drawings of the Stone of Hope that showed a more subtle image of King, from the waist up, as if he were emerging organically out of the rock, the commission said. . . .
The team wants to hold on “to the power and inspirational image” of the current version, [the memorial’s executive architect] said. The sense of confrontation in the sculpture is not a coincidence. “We see him . . . as a warrior,” Chaffers said yesterday.
“We see him as a warrior for peace . . . not as some pacifist, placid, kind of vanilla, but really a man of great conviction and strength.”
It should come as no surprise that such national memorials are inherently prone to historical, cultural, and political disagreements and controversy. We only have to remember the initial storm of criticism surrounding Maya Lin’s design of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial as a classic example of that.
Nonetheless, in my opinion, this latest controversy over the actual look and pose of the statue represents another form of being “colorblind” in 21st century American society. As I recently wrote about, the dominant norm and discourse in American race relations these days seem to be implicitly based on being “colorblind.”
In theory, it’s great to not treat people differently based on their racial/ethnic identity. But in practice, ignoring people’s racial identity means ignoring their different histories, characteristics, and community needs and instead, relying on the simplistic idea that we now live in a true meritocracy where racism no longer exists and everyone is on a completely level playing field.
In that context, I am not surprised that the federal commission (undoubtedly composed predominantly of Whites) found the current pose too “confrontational.” Apparently, they do not want the statue to remind people that the Civil Rights Movement was a struggle and that many people actually died in the process of “confronting” racism.
They would rather pretend that everything is perfectly fine now and that as a “colorblind” society, we don’t need to dwell on the past and be reminded that a little over 40 years ago, it was perfectly legal and normal to treat people of color as inferior, subordinate, second-class citizens.
In other words, in wanting the look of Dr. King’s statue to look less “confrontational,” what the federal commission wants to do is to avoid confronting the racism that Dr. King fought against and that still subtly pervades the mindset of American society today.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is what it means to be colorblind these days.
If I may, I’d like to deviate a little bit from my usual topics and today, talk about what it means to be a “hero.”
These days,we see plenty of examples of superhuman feats that are described as “heroic.” Whether it’s the latest comic book action character getting translated into a movie or the TV show “Hero” about people with strange, magical powers, the term “hero” gets thrown around a lot these days.
But what does it mean to be a “hero” in ordinary, everyday life? Well, here’s the one of the best (and most tragic) examples I’ve seen — Dad Died Saving His Little Girl:
With an out-of-control car bearing down, Joseph Richardson grabbed his 4-year-old daughter and held her up out of harm’s way. It was his last act — and one that apparently saved his daughter’s life. . . .
Richardson was walking his daughter to a McDonald’s for burgers at 6:40 p.m. Monday when a 1990 Chevy Cavalier jumped a curb and careened towards them, police said, citing witness accounts. He grabbed his daughter just before the car slammed the two into the fence, police said.
Mr. Richardson, even before you gave up your life to save your daughter’s, it sounds like you made quite a difference in the lives of people around you. For all that you’ve done for your community, your family, and especially your daughter, you are truly one my heroes.
Following up on my earlier post on celebrating APA Heritage Month by describing some demographic and socioeconomic facts about the Asian American community, I pass along a couple of other links that others have sent to me in recognition of APA Heritage Month.
First, the Asia Society recently produced the following YouTube video that illustrates the different ways that various notable Asian Americans around the country identify as Asian American and what it means to them to claim that identity (they also have extended clips at their YouTube channel).
Second, a reader sent to me the following message about a Vietnamese American officer who served in Iraq:
To highlight the Asian Pacific American Heritage Month of May, I have just completed an article about Vietnamese-American James Van Thach. He volunteered to serve in Baghdad, Iraq since April 2006 as a Military Advisor.
He has finally after 2 years reached back to the United States on April 9, 2008. On April 1, 2008, the Republic of Iraq bestowed him the Honorary rank of Staff Brigadier General in the Iraqi Army.
I just completed a follow-up interview with him on April 15, 2008 and would like to release this article to your news agency so that you may share it with your readers.
Thank you very much for your time.
Respectfully,
Tommy Nero Sullivan
Founder & Chief Executive Officer
Ventures International Promotions
VIP Promotions/NYC
Many Asian American bloggers have been covering this event and I’d like to do my part to help publicize it as much as possible as well: the National APIA Presidential Town Hall, to be held on May 17. Below is the press release from the organizing group, APIAVote:
APIAVote to Host Historic Presidnetial Town Hall: Presidential Candidates Invited to Discuss Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Issues
Over 2,500 AAPIs nationwide will attend the first ever APIAVote Presidential Town Hall on May 17th. APIAVote has invited Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Barack Obama, and Senator John McCain to discuss issues and policies important to AAPI communities.
What: First Asian American Pacific Islander Presidential Town Hall
Hosted by: Asian Pacific Islander American Vote (APIAVote), in conjunction with the 9th Annual Convention of the National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development (National CAPACD).
Why: To provide an unprecedented opportunity for presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John McCain to discuss their views, positions, and proposals on issues affecting AAPIs.
When: Saturday, May 17, 2008, 3:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
Where: Bren Events Center, University of California at Irvine, Mesa Road and West Peltason Drive, Irvine, CA 92617. Simulcast in selected cities and venues. Please see website for updates.
Who: (Invited) Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), Senator John McCain (R-AZ)
This is truly going to be a historic event and I encourage everyone to participate by attending in person, attending at a simulcast hosted locally, or by watching the live stream on the Internet.
Here’s another request from a student asking for participants for an online research survey:
———————————————
Dear Asian-Nation Visitors,
My name is Hsu Ling-Hui, a Ph.D. student at the University of Texas at Austin, Department of Communication Studies. I would like to invite you to participate in my dissertation project. The study explores the factors that influence impression formation of human beings. Your contribution is very important to the research, and you may win $500 for doing the survey! Thank you very much. Please read on!
Title: Impression Formation (Part I) & Cultural Adaptation of American College Students (Part II)
The purpose of this study (Part I) is to investigate the elements that influence people’s impression formation, both the internal state of a perceiver and the external situational demands.
Although unrelated to this researcher’s study, Part II of the research is to contribute to a large-scale anthropological project on general adaptation of immigrant children at American colleges. The current focus is on cultural adaptation of Asian American students to dynamic campus environment.
To be eligible for the current study, you must meet the following criteria.
a) You are a student and above age 18.
b) You are an Asian American and your country of ethnic origin is China, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, or Vietnam.
c) You were either born in the U.S. or immigrated to the U.S. before age 12.
It takes around 30 to 40 minutes to complete all questionnaires in the study. As a participant, your name will be entered into a raffle to win a $500 award. Two awards will be given away. Winners will be drawn at the end of the data collection and notified (around July 2008).
To ensure accuracy, the study has four links:
Link 1: if the Last Number of your Social Security Number is 0, 1, or 2
Link 2: if the Last Number of your Social Security Number is 3, or 4
Link 3: if the Last Number of your Social Security Number is 5, or 6
If the Last Number of your Social Security Number is 7, 8, or 9, please click any of the above three links (Links 2, 3, or 3) to access the survey because Link 4 has been filled up.
If you may, please extend my survey invite to your friends. Your help is greatly appreciated!
Yes, it’s here once again — today marks the start of Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. Like many other people of color, I am thankful that the federal government has officially “recognized” us for distinction, but on the other hand, would feel a whole lot better if Asian Pacific Americans (APAs) were so completely integrated into the American mainstream that we wouldn’t need to be singled out for our contributions — they would already be part of the American mainstream.
14.9 million
The estimated number of U.S. residents in July 2006 who said they were Asian alone or Asian in combination with one or more other races. This group comprised about 5 percent of the total population.
3.2%
Percentage growth of the Asian population (either alone or in combination with one or more other races) between 2005 and 2006, the highest of any race group during that time period. The increase in the Asian population during the period totaled 460,000.
3.6 million
Number of Asians of Chinese descent in the U.S. Chinese-Americans are the largest Asian group, followed by Filipinos (2.9 million), Asian Indians (2.7 million), Vietnamese (1.6 million), Koreans (1.5 million) and Japanese (1.2 million). These estimates represent the number of people who are either of a particular Asian group only or are of that group in combination with one or more other Asian groups or races.
49%
The percentage of single-race Asians 25 and older who have a bachelor’s degree or higher level of education. This compares with 27 percent for all Americans 25 and older.
$64,238
Median household income for single-race Asians in 2006, the highest among all race groups. Median household income differed greatly by Asian group. For Asian Indians, for example, the median income in 2006 was $78,315; for Vietnamese-Americans, it was $52,299.
1.1 million
Number of businesses owned by Asian-Americans in 2002, up 24 percent from 1997. The rate of increase in the number of Asian-owned businesses was about twice that of the national average for all businesses.
47%
The proportion of civilian employed single-race Asians 16 and older who work in management, professional and related occupations, such as financial managers, engineers, teachers and registered nurses. Additionally, 23 percent work in sales and office occupations, 16 percent in service occupations and 10 percent in production, transportation and material moving occupations.
33.4 million
The projected number of U.S. residents in 2050 who will identify themselves as single-race Asians. They would comprise 8 percent of the total population by that year.
213%
The projected percentage increase between 2000 and 2050 in the population of people who identify themselves as single-race Asian. This compares with a 49 percent increase in the population as a whole over the same period of time.
Feel free to read my article on APA Heritage Month to get some ideas about how you can celebrate it in a more meaningful way while still having fun.
In the wake of the recent increased attention and criticism against China as it prepares to host the Summer Olympics, the New York Times summarizes how there’s been a boisterous and growing backlash against western-style “Sinophobia” and all things perceived to be anti-Chinese by Chinese students studying in the U.S.:
Since the riots last month in Tibet, the disrupted Olympic torch relays and calls to boycott the opening ceremony of the Games in Beijing, Chinese students, traditionally silent on political issues, have begun to lash out at what they perceive as a pervasive anti-Chinese bias. . . .
At the University of Washington, students fought to limit the Dalai Lama’s address to nonpolitical topics. At Duke, pro-China students surrounded and drowned out a pro-Tibet vigil; a Chinese freshman who tried to mediate received death threats, and her family was forced into hiding.
And last Saturday, students from as far as Florida and Tennessee traveled to Atlanta to picket CNN after a commentator, Jack Cafferty, referred to the Chinese as “goons and thugs.†(CNN said he was referring to the government, not the people.)
The student anger, stoked through e-mail messages sent to large campus mailing lists, stems not so much from satisfaction with the Chinese government but from shock at the portrayal of its actions, as well as frustration over the West’s long-standing love affair with Tibet — a love these students see as willfully blind. . . .
Rather than blend in to the prevailing campus ethos of free debate, the more strident Chinese students seem to replicate the authoritarian framework of their homeland, photographing demonstration participants and sometimes drowning out dissent.
The NY Times article does a very good job at describing the recent international history that frames much of the current climate of criticism against China but also the students’ role in speaking up loudly and forcefully.
In my previous post that I linked to above, I wrote that, for good and for bad, I’m trying to maintain an objective and moderate stance on these issues. The boisterous backlash of Chinese students does not change my position, which is still that both sides have a democratic right to express themselves and to criticize the other side.
However, those rights also entail knowing the limits of such criticisms and counter-criticisms, namely implicit and explicit threats and displays of intimidation and violence against others.
The NY Times article described how some pro-Chinese protests have crossed that line, and it’s at that point where I agree with the reporter’s statement that “the more strident Chinese students seem to replicate the authoritarian framework of their homeland, photographing demonstration participants and sometimes drowning out dissent.”
In other words, for the Chinese students to make a difference and to change people’s negative impressions of their homeland, engaging in and perpetuating the same kind of repressive techniques aimed at silencing opponents that their government is criticized for is not the way to go.
As Mahatma Gandhi once said, “Be the change that you want to see in the world.” With that in mind, if the goal is to change the world’s perception of China from negative to positive, then China’s supporters need to act positively, not negatively.
