From: ajh@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Hu)
Subject: Re: What is Asian ?
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:34:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.144407.2047@ucbeh.san.uc.edu> vallamn@ucbeh.san.uc.edu writes:
>
>
>wenz@ucs.orst.edu (Wen Zongyao) writes :
>
>>In article <1992Nov5.135700.2034@ucbeh.san.uc.edu> vallamn@ucbeh.san.uc.edu
>>writes>
	[Dialogue on whether or not Arabs are Asians deleted.]
	[Comments on Islam and similarity of Middle Eastern and
	 Indian cultures deleted.]
>
>The similarities between Indian and far eastern cultures that 
>are seen in countries like Thailand, Indonesia, and Combodia are because 
>of the Indian culture spreading eastward, ( I do not know the kind 
>of culture existed there before the Indian influence - maybe someone 
>can enlighten me on this ). But I can say that there was very
>little far eastern cultural influence on India.  I would welcome
>any arguments with facts indicating otherwise.

	Yup, Buddhism seems to be an absolutely enormous cultural influence
	from India over all of East Asia...

>
>Alan Hu writes that the Indians are *like* native speakers of English.

	Oh dear, I thought I had written that Indian immigrants to
	the US are usually native or near-native speakers of English,
	whereas immigrants from East and Southeast Asia usually are not.
	I did not intend to imply that Indians resemble English speakers,
	but aren't really, nor did I intend to let my Southern
	Californian up-bringing show through by saying that
	Indians are, like, way totally awesome like English speakers,
	you know?  :-)

>Alan, it is not as if the Indians do not have any cultural adjustments
>to make.

	Yup, that was the point of my post.  Indian immigrants face
	many of the exact same cultural adjustments in the US that East
	and Southeast Asian immigrants face, hence the inclusion
	of Indians with the people you insist on dubbing "Orientals"
	under the collective term "Asian American".

	The first Indians to migrate to the United States came in
>the 1950s and later, whereas the Chinese were here much much before
>that.

	This is incorrect.  Large numbers of Sikhs were imported to
	supply cheap agricultural labor around the turn of the century
	after cheap Chinese labor had been cut off.  Like the early
	Chinese-American community (but unlike the Japanese-American
	community), this was essentially an all-male society, so they
	did not establish a lasting major community in the US.  Again,
	the experiences of the Indian immigrants closely parallels that
	of the other Asian groups.
	
	The second wave of Asian immigrants, both East and South
	Asian, didn't take off until after immigration reform in 1965
	increased the ridiculously small quotas that had existed prior.

	For example, the number of Indians in the U.S at the time of
>WW II is negligible.  And knowing the language will not necessarily
>mean that Indians would be more welcome in the _American_ society
>than the far-easterners. 

	Yup, unfortunately that's all too true.  All the more reason
	to unite as Asian Americans.
>
>You are right in that the way the notion of race is perceived is
>an important factor in inhibiting generalizations ( such as all
>people from Asia being referred to as Asians ).  This is also
>probably the reason why Indians feel they are different from 
>East Asians.  Indians are still considered foreigners, even 
>if they are citizens, as they have not been around for a *long* 
>time.

	Yup, same as other Asian Americans.

	This is because the Indians refuse to be identified as 
>anything other than an Indian.

	That certainly may be a factor.  Other factors are the
	historical notion that "American==White".  Hence, East
	and Southeast Asians are assumed to be chinks, japs, or
	gooks, whereas South Asian and Middle Easterners get to	
	be evil rich Arab (pronounced A-rab) Iraqi oil
	sheiks, or maybe they're the same as those Mexican wetbacks
	'cause they're all dark-skinned.  [Sarcasm, of course, but
	no smileys.]

	Seems to me that we've all got a vested interest in
	redefining "American" to be equal to "American" rather
	than "white"...
				So when there is an asian american
>newsgroup with all-oriental( please, no offence intended ) posters,
>the Indian obviously feels that there is nothing he has to say
>in a *different kind of* asian newsgroup.  

	Again, agreed.  And I think this situation is a pity,
	as we clearly agree that there's great similarity in
	the felt experiences of Asian Americans, regardless of
	where their ancestors came from.

	There was talk of creating a group for South Asian Americans,
	and I recall some group-naming arguments.  Does that exist?
>
>
>Nalini Mohan Vallampati
>University of Cincinnati
>Cincinnati, OH 45219
>

					--Alan Hu
----------
I am not Arthur Hu.  I am NOT Arthur Hu.  I AM NOT ARTHUR HU.

I am not a neo-conservative writer for AsianWeek.  I did not go
to MIT.  I do not conduct phone surveys.  I am not married.
I do not believe in Dan Quayle's family values.

Arthur Hu is a fine person.  So am I.  We are not, however, the same person.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.asian.american:10028 soc.culture.bangladesh:5788 soc.culture.indian:36654 soc.culture.pakistan:16545 alt.discrimination:4611