Contexts--Globalization
Evelyn Hu-Dehart - "Introduction:
Asian American Formations in the Age of Globalization"
Hu-Dehart's
essay involves a look at Asian American identity as players in both external/internal
United States issues and global economics. Interestingly enough, Hu-Dehart
explains that these identities are both self-assumed and placed upon one as a
result of both historical and present demands. There seems to be internal
conflict with Asian American identity especially in our modern multicultural,
pluralistic United States. Asian American's in Hu-Dehart's essay, like many
others constantly struggle to prove their American-ness and at the same time
reinforce ties with the "home" country.
In
researching Asian American's role as an external player, Hu-Dehart refers to
this group as "transnationals and bridgebuilders on the Pacific Rim"
(9). The bridge that the immigrant has to their home country is not severed even
if their offspring What this means is that the role of being a transnational
participant is passed on from the immigrant to his/her offspring. An example of
this is the reference to Gary Locke who was the first Chinese-American governor
to be elected in the United States (Hu-Dehart 1-2). Locke was an example to
Asian American's that "minority success" was possible and to the
citizens of his ancestral home that one of their own had achieved status in the
host country (2). Critics of Locke question his role as a bridgebuilder even
though he does not speak his ancestral language.
Internally,
Hu-Dehart looks at Asian American's role in domestic politics as conflicted and
praised at the same time. An example of this exists when referencing Bill Lan
Lee, who was appointed to direct the Western regional office of the NAACP
(Hu-Dehart 21). Lee's legacy as an accomplished attorney fulfills the model
Asian progeny climbing up the ranks of the host country (not unlike Locke).
Challenges occur when Lee finds himself blocked from his appointment to the
U.S. Department of Justice by Senator Orrin Hatch (Hu-Dehart 21). This is clear
evidence that the receiving country still sees the Asian American as an
outsider, unfit for his or her position even if they are thoroughly qualified
for it.
Lastly
is the issue of Asian Americans as a singular group. To lump Asian American
success in both transnational and domestic realms as universal to all Asians
merely reinforces the model minority ideology. Hu-Dehart points out that many
(Southeast Asians) do not have the amount of cultural capital that many of the
dominant Asian groups possess. This glossing over of Asian American success
serves to de-racialize issues, implying that Asians have come up the ranks
politically and that the "problem" is no longer.
1. Is one's "asian-ness" and
competency as a transnational bridgebuilder require them to speak the language
of their ethnic home?
2. If not, then is the bridgebuilder
just a "familiar" face to be used in personal connections (guanxi) to
facilitate international relations?
3. As a bridgebuilder, someone who links
two different countries, has the Asian American really improved their status as
an "outsider"?
Gary Locke as an "inbetweener",
speaking on Internet Freedom in China:
E. San Juan Jr. - "The Ordeal of Ethnic
Studies in the Age of Globalization"
A
post 9/11 world where heightened national security and an where
neo-conservative rhetoric posits rationality is where San Juan Jr. places the
plight of Ethnic Studies. San Juan does not argue that the inception of Ethnic
Studies was a necessary one given a long history of racial inequality in the
United States.
However,
given the now almost 13 year 9/11 incident, racial profiling of Arab and Arab
Americans is rampant, with Ethnic Studies as the main ally for Arabs (San Juan
Jr. 273). San Juan Jr. calls for a revamping of Ethnic Studies as a field of
study in order to keep it progressive and on the forefront of social justice.
He argues that the field of Ethnic Studies has lost its "steam"
because ethnic pluralism and multicultural-ness have been accepted by the majority
rendering Ethnic Studies less useful than previous historical events which
called for it.
Further
arguments that San Juan Jr. presents for the necessity of reinventing Ethnic
Studies is when he asks the reader if institutionalized racism and covert
discrimination exist today (276). San Juan Jr. also mentions that post 9/11
conservatism sees pluralism as a threat to national security, fueling the
pressure for assimilation rather than the acceptance of multiculturalism in the
United States. Ethnic Studies has therefore lost its power as the steward of
disseminating information for social justice. San Juan Jr. suggests that Ethnic
Studies should reexamine its roots and formulate new methods to combat racial
inequality which still exists.
1. Has globalization reduced the efficacy
of Ethnic Studies, or is a result of the commoditization of education in the
United States?
2. If Ethnic Studies was introduced to
give the "Others" a voice, empowering those first underrepresented
groups, how and who receives the pulpit to express their concerns today? Are
they other ethnic minorities, or experts on the fields of these peoples?
Banning of Ethnic Studies in Arizona as
a result of neo-conservatism:
(written by Eldo and Jennine)
No comments:
Post a Comment