Michelle Wang-Aoki and Deporting Cambodian Refugees: Youth Activism, State Reform and Imperial Statecrafts Blog

Aoki Film

The film Aoki discusses the Asian American activism challenges the dominant mainstream and is resistance toward authority. The Asian American activism was led by the leader, Aoki, was born to parents who experienced brutality during the Japanese internment camps and anti-Japanese racism. Aoki grew up in Oakland and was surrounded in a neighborhood with gangs. Moreover, Aoki was an early member of the Black Panther and was inspired by many grassroots organizations. The Asian American Pacific Islander (API) Movement, three months strike at UC Berkeley, that Aoki and many API activists participated was resistance toward authority and advocates for human rights. In the end, this movement encompasses the Pan-Asian group and focuses on coalition building. Aoki and the API activists’ work connect back to the Laotian women’s activism toward environmental justice working together to address disparities but also focusing on solidarity and coalition building. The API Movement was not only a march for the API community but was a movement for POC (people for color) focuses on solidarity. In the end, Aoki and many API activists’ work challenges the stereotypes toward Asian Americans “Asian Americans excel in STEM” “Asian Americans are reserved and lack interests toward governmental affairs”  as there are many Asian Americans striving to make better changes in working with communities.

Deporting Cambodian Refugees: Youth Activism, State Reform and Imperial Statecrafts

In “Deporting Cambodian Refugees: Youth Activism, State Reform and Imperial Statecrafts” Soo discusses that Boran was a Cambodian refugee who fled the Cambodian genocide to the United States” (737). This goes back to notions of citizenship and how immigration relates to the concept of neoliberal capitalist state. Because the United States is a hegemonic force, it is also a neoliberal capitalist state that focuses on morals that can benefit the dominant mainstream as this can oppress unworthy citizens, immigrants, people of color, and refugees. Even though many Cambodian American refugees receive assistance from the United States government, the community is still at risk and treated as second class citizens with limited opportunities. Even though the Cambodian American community is at risk, it is powerful that the AYPAL pan-ethnic Asian Pacific Islander coalition empowers the youth to learn about social justice issues. Many AYPAL youth learned about the struggles and risks that their community encounters. This can create a bridge for activism and more changes to thrive as the younger generation continues to advocate for better changes in their communities.  The work that the AYPAL youth does relates back to the Laotian young women’s activism as this highlights the activism of Asian American youths and continues to challenge the stereotypes that “Asian Americans excel in STEM.”

Question: Growing up, did you participate in youth empowerment organization groups? If not, did you believe there a space that allowed for reflection on the barriers that your community encounters?

tues 5/2

It is surprising to find that that American implicitly runs on Neoliberal capitalism, not just capitalism (“privatization and personal responsibility”). This type of system is what foster negative stereotypes among people of color (e.g.  criminals, evils, lazy, victims of their own problems, etc.). It important to be aware of this, as a female immigrant of color, since it explains why many people of color today are facing so many issues within their communities and White supremacy. What it is harmful is the fact that this system can use this ideology to deny public services (e.g. welfare) to low-income families and deport marginalized people (e.g. men of color, legal or illegal immigrants). In additionally, the government can justify their Institutions of surveillance, criminalization. Incarceration, and detention as an act of protecting American citizens from terrorists and aliens. In my opinion, this system exists to centralize the federal government (owned by white supremacists) and lessen the power of the common people. How do we know? On the smaller scale, the democracy system is ignoring the voices of youth, belittling their political power since they are not qualified to vote. On the surface, the practice of democracy disguises itself as an open practice of “the people,” however, it is an entity comprising formal presentation and bureaucratic channels targeting voters, which means that it supports the establishments more than the people.

However, on the positive side, the deportation campaign demonstrated by AYPAL had inspired many youths of color, including me, to be involved in social justice movements and I realized how important it is to educate myself and be aware of today’s current events.

Film: Aoki

Overall, I felt quite empowered knowing that the Asian American Communities do exist despite the low quantitative aspects. I remember a guy in the film said that there were only 25 active members because the rest were busy studying. This is sad, but it is a fact. I could have been those Asians who prefer to study instead of doing rebellious/crazy activities. This scene had made me realized how the education institutions can break our rebelliousness and sense of agency. Additionally, it is not surprising to see Author who led this movement was influenced by his struggles (e.g. Japanese internment camp and resided in ghetto neighborhoods). I am glad that the leader was not from a middle-class Asian American, which does not represent Asian Americans who have been through the racial and class struggles. Lastly, I learned something “new,” which is how Richard emphasized on using militant to fight against the police to prove that Asian Americans are weak and to gain trust from other minority communities. The part where an Asian lady who swung her purse filled with two bricks against the policies was so hilarious; it made me realized how “we” are not weak (stupid stereotypes) and this small lady had inspired me to do that too if (e.g. be militant) when I get involved with future protests. (depends on the context though)

Journal 6 Gandhi

Gandhi talks about the evils that machinery has influenced on India. He talked about machine-made clothing and how we should stop wearing it or gradually stop wearing it. He doesn’t want India to participate in the colonizer resources. James talks about how there are political conflicts in sports that go unnoticed. I think that in a way using the resources that a higher power made is like hegemony. By utilizing the same things as the higher power makes it seem okay in popular culture. I feel like it’s a way of containment. It’s hard to resist something that also provides for you. I think this can relate to some family situations. A son or daughter might not want to listen and do what their parents tell them to do, but at the same time they are under the parents’ household and power. The son or daughter might find it hard to resist the parents if they keep using the resources provided by the parents.

Journal #6: "Beyond a Boundery" by C.L.R. James and "M.K. Gandhi" from Hind Swaraj

James's passage immediately reminded me of Peter Weir's "Dead Poet's Society", a movie based at an English boarding school. While the passage also deals with a boarding school, that is not why I connected the passage with the movie; that is simply a coincidence. What is not is the fact that it is an environment full of students who were expected to perform very highly in school, who were brought up with a certain strict mentality, and who eventually find ways to revolt. (honestly, who ever thought of sending their kids far away to a preppy school? If anything, this gives them more freedom to goof off. James was a train ride from home, allowing him to resist his parents. Neil lived far from home, allowing him to practice acting to a extent. Nonetheless, I digress.)

James's escape from all the studies, math, and scholarships was cricket. He claims that things change on the field, saying that everybody lets go. However, most boys still followed the rules. James, previously a goody too shoes lookin, decided to be like whatever. He soon applies this to his school work and is put as risk of losing his scholarship and ruining his family's reputation. Honestly, I think James reached a point where he did not give two shits. He used to lie and sneak his way around to play cricket, but eventually, he just went to cricket and took the consequences. I think this is because he finally realized how much of a façade his life is. This ties back to Foucault's idea of truth. James claims that "everything (emphasis added) began from this basis that Britain was the source of all light and leading...[that] success was to have succeeded in approaching that distant ideal...[that is] impossible." His life (he keeps mentioning eight years of it) was wasted trying to fulfill an unreal expectation set upon by his parents and society, a truth that would dictate many of his life choices until he became aware of this truth. He then set his own truth, or rather just didn't care, and thus lived his life like whatever.

I found the Gandhi pamphlet to be interesting. Here we see a conversation in a pamphlet between Gandhi and a critic. Essentially, Gandhi is saying that the English need to leave and take their culture with them. Gandhi is setting this idea that people of different cultures cannot coexist within one civilization. This reminds me of Wole Soyinka's "Death and The King's Horseman", a play that shows the clash of people from British and Yoruban culture in Nigeria. The message of the play is that people from two differing cultures cannot exist without constant conflict of interests. This is Gandhi's message in this passage. Gandhi is okay with the British people, but not with the culture. He would be willing to let the British stay if they accepted and lived by Indian culture, something that he sees as a real possibility, something that the reader, and myself, do not see as a real possibility. However, it seems that he focuses more on just plainly kicking them out. He thinks there is a possibility of coexistence, but he knows that the British will not accept Indian culture and thus, thinks they should "leave his house." Gandhi thinks there should only be one culture in India, a non-progressive idea! Gandhi, the world leader of peace, says that we should not accept different cultures in a society.

I also thought it was really funny how the reader rekt Gandhi by pointing out that the pamphlet will be printed by British machinery. Ha.

Journal Entry #6: James & Gandhi

                          The message behind Gandhi’s writing was to inform the public that to get completely rid of the culture imposed through Britain's dominance, they must strip every aspect of the culture they have become accustomed to. Although I don't agree with what he was suggesting because it was not practical, I like his logic around certain issues. When questioned how they will do it, if it has never been done before, Gandhi responds, "To believe what has not occurred in history will not occur at all is to argue disbelief in the dignity of a man" (page 202). His use of analogies and tricky language conveys not only his message but also how his mind really works through logic. My issue with his approach is that to eradicate a whole population's culture is not so easily done as he claims it is; there are a lot of things people become accustomed to that are not the most beneficial but with no alternative continue to do it. A prime example of this in the contemporary Western world would be the phenomenon of capitalism. Just like capitalism, the culture imposed on Indians was through hegemonic forces. By the time there was any effort to try to push back, both were far too ingrained into society for anything to be done about it. As far as how I felt about what Gandhi was saying, I was not in total agreement with it. 

            As for the reading by James, I don't have as much to say. His reading was a bit more boring, seeing as what took him a really long time to discover was probably more obvious to others a lot more quickly. The racism and injustice that was imposed was extremely evident, but I can understand how James was taught that British culture is the best and most elite in contrast to others. If you are raised through that mindset, it can take a long time to finally emerge outside of that and see what reality actually is.

Benefit or Disadvantage?

         Machinery is something many of us depend on to do tasks we find too hard to do. Some of us have a Keurig to help us make coffee, treadmills to run in the privacy in our homes, and even machines who take up our time distracting us with videos, post our friends send us, and who we let run our lives. Gandhi said machinery has only brought evil, he has a point but there are things machinery has done to help us in ways besides distract us and make us lazy.

Machines have been used to save people’s lives and save us time to do great work.  Although these things also backfired on us since in saving us time, it has made us lazy and dependent on machines. We constantly spend money on the newest things because we feel like we need it, we don’t pay attention to what is going on around us because our faces are buried in our phones looking at what Trump has done and shake our heads.

Machines might be the cause of our country’s disarray since all we do is be in the comfort of our homes and judge people through television and phones but not actually do anything to change the world we live in and instead prefer to be looking at what the Kardashians are doing. Why not be less dependent on our machinery and actually do stuff ourselves and go out and change the way the world is working instead of trying to change it with our glares and frustrated sighs directed at our device? Until then, we will have to deal with the way the world is right now.

          Question: Has machinery brought us any good, other than saving lives and saving time?

Journal 6 - Hind Swaraj and Beyond a Boundary

In Gandhi’s “Hind Swaraj”, he expresses his concerns over British rule over India and explains that in order to become sovereign, the citizens must also free themselves from British and modern European culture. This is interesting since it opposes Vergera’s notion of the falsity of “cultural authenticity.” Gandhi believes that the British and Indian culture should remain two distinct aspects, but like Vergara states, I do not believe that the two cultures should stay separated. It is true that the British culture permeated through India’s society faster through their colonial rule, which complicated Gandhi’s goal of sovereignty, but I also believe that British culture would have ultimately spread to India one way or another. As we have discussed in class, culture is dynamic and does not revolve around one fundamental idea. It changes its form as people become interested in new trends, so I don’t believe that Gandhi’s stance on freeing themselves from modern European culture is practical. Gandhi does acknowledge that his ideas are difficult, especially “Swadeshi” which is home rule. However, he believes that it is still possible to live independent of machinery because the movement will slowly gain popularity as leaders take the initiative.

“From Beyond a Boundary” by CLR James describes his growth and self-realization in growing up in a school system verses joining the school system. His experiences epitomize how second generation children feel, as they are brought up in American culture but their immigrant parents still retain their own culture. Not only does this parallel the second generation’s struggles, but his narrative also reflects the hegemonic culture. By playing cricket, he learned to “play with the team, which meant subordinating your personal inclinations to the good of the whole” (207). He understands that to play the sport, there was self-imposed discipline, which is exactly how hegemonic culture begins. The concept of working together without conflict is so ingrained in our values that we lose sight of questioning common practices. 

resistance vs oppression. Stephen Duncombe and CLR James

In the chapter by C. L. R. James, he talks about a situation where an individual has to choose between to states of being. He refers to them as “the rebel’ or “a Puritan.” In the reading, it discusses a lot about the imposing of cultural oppression or imperialism. When more thought is placed on this concept, there really is only the two responses of obedience and rebellion. This is weighed out by cost and effect. The subject of the reading experienced a great deal of oppression, however there were also consequences if he were to ack out against them. This is another form of oppression. While there may be a major negative effect from the oppressive system, there has to be a choice to determine if opposing that system is will produce better results. In the second reading, it discusses the need to oppose the British rule through different ways. The most interesting line is, “we shall gradually do away with it.” Although this line refers to machinery, it can be applied to both readings. The cost of opposition can depend on the degree in which something is imposed. For those who cannot openly rebel, there are subtle ways to oppose cultural oppression such as boycotts and refusal of minor rules. This represents the idea of everyday resistance. The resistance of opposition may not happen in a short period of time, but with little actions it will happen eventually. 

Beyond a Boundary and Hind Swaraj

BEYOND A BOUNDARY:

In cricket, James was taught to practice the British ideals of fair play and perseverance.  While in today’s society, being a good sport is seen as an admirable trait, it essentially seems to be an exercise in repressing what James calls “personal inclinations”.  The code under which the cricket players operate can thus be extended to the British’s control over the West Indies, in which those being imperialistically ruled can be compared to personal inclinations whereas the code represents the erasure of these personal inclinations, or people.  In other words, the practice of this code is an example of how culture oppresses.  By becoming self-aware of how easily he consumes English practices, James begins his own form of protest against this cultural oppression. 

HIND SWARAJ:

Essentially, the use of European machinery and the consumption of its products represent a kind of hegemony.  In agreeing to continue to economically support this method of making things, India is also agreeing to continue to be dominated by British rule.  Gandhi’s call for India to forsake machinery and take up the loom again brings us back to Baudhillard’s method of fighting hegemony, which was to withdraw the consent that fueled hegemonic rule in the first place.  Furthermore, through Gandhi’s argument, we are able to see that something as simple as the use of machines are multifaceted in that they wield social, economic, and political power over those that consume it.

Journal 6

A01

In Hind Swaraj by Gandhi, the editor was convinced that violence was not the Indian way of fighting injustice for India’s Independence. The editor knew that violence was not the answer to break from European culture, but to commit to “Swaraj” - to learn to rule themselves. I think the editor makes a convincing argument because he stands against the “eye for an eye” way of thinking. He wanted to fight for India’s freedom in a peaceful, yet effective manner. I think this approach is rare in the present day because there are so many violent protests that involve harming people not involved. When violence is used to “fix” something, matters often get worse and communities become further separated. The editor stated “If they (the English) wish to remain in India along with their civilization, there is no room for them. It lies with us to being such a state of things.” Here, the editor sends a powerful message of unity within their own community in order to promote change. He’s against the English’s invasion into their land and their attempt in implementing machinery. He knew that machinery would end up changing India’s culture significantly.

Journal #6: Cricket and India

In this article, C.L.R. James recalls his schooldays in the prime of English colonialism. The main focus of the article centers around the subculture that is cricket. Immersed in English culture, where a top education and being a student was the primary goal for all, James started to realize that the ideals he was taught was not the end all be all, when his chances of playing cricket was jeopardized and he started to take on, what Robert Kelley would consider, everyday forms of resistance to protest that. He point out how he was initially a studious child, who would not bend any form of rules, because that’s what he was taught in school, but he then begins to turn the other cheek and realizes that there is so much more to life than just school and that there were things to be passionate about. This is a great, yet, subtle example of hegemony and our compliance to be ruled almost blinds us sometimes from reality and the truth and those who realize are the ones to challenge authority and develop the tension between culture and subcultures as James does when it comes to cricket.

The article from M.K. Ghandi on the other hand takes a different approach on English

colonialism in India. Ghandi, rather than taking on everyday acts of resistance, wants to flush out

western society completely and directly. He says that in order for India to regain self rule, swaraj,

they must abandon all westernized things that they have accommodated to, such as machines, and go

back to how they used to do things. Admittedly, Ghandi’s approach to regaining swaraj, is a bit

extreme. He says that when it comes to stopping the use of machines and needing things made by

machines, if they could do without it before they can do without it now. He also made a point about

how those who wish to participate in his movement are free to do so and those won’t don’t have to,

but all he’d need is a small group and others will surely follow which resonates with the last reading,

in regards to the Laotian community who came together to stand up to their government and improve

the conditions that they were subject to. This form of unionizing against a higher power, transcends

culture and is united by a collective determination to fight any form of oppression.

Journal: Hind Swaraj and Beyond a Boundary

In the reading of Hind Swaraj by Ghandi talks about how the introduction of machinery had helped enslave the people India because people are now viewed as replaceable and not valued quite as much as they were in the past. The skilled work that they would be payed a lot for isn’t as efficient as that of machine that doesn’t need food, rest nor pay. He talks about a government in the form of Swaraj where India can rule itself and that only the corrupt within India are able to save themselves from their own selfishness. Although he makes good arguments about why the machines are oppressing India I believe that the machines can be simply used in a different manner whilst allowing people of India to be free. In Beyond a Boundary by C.L.R James he writes about how Britain has brainwashed the children in the classroom of Britain being the most important thing in the world. However with this mindset it prevents these children from thinking freely and being allowed to explore. In both readings the Elite class of India and Britain have different ways of controlling their people, but they don’t care as long as they benefit from this way of thinking. In the enslavement of people in India they’re essentially making a physical cage while the British government uses the education system to make a mental one, but in the end both are used to serve the same purpose.

M.K. Gandhi, From Hing Swaraj and James "From Beyond A Boundary" Blog

It was interesting to learn there has been a struggle in India to be freed from dominance. India has been oppressed and conquered over the years by imperialism and Western powers. In “M.K. Gandhi, From Hind Swaraj," Gandhi states “home rule for India.. if the Indian people are to be free of English political and economic rule they must also free themselves from British, and modern European, culture” (200). India has been oppressed and dominated by the “Western machines and materialism” and India loses its own values and cultures. It is important for the oppressed group to stand up for themselves and counteract the dominant force and hegemony. This relates back to the idea in order for changes to occur there must be a collective action from the mass group. The people of India must resist against the hegemonic notions as this can prevent corruption and Britain from colonizing India. Resistance allows the mass group to challenge the authority in power and eventually the mass group will be recognized for their own values. Throughout history, colonized territories such as Guam are afraid to claim their own values due to dominance. In order for values and ideas to be preserved, oppressed groups will need to resist.

“From Beyond A Boundary,” James discusses “the debate of cultures of resistance versus cultures of oppression.. “everything began from the basis that Britain was the source of all light and leading, and our business was to admire, wonder, imitate learn” (205). Even though there were cultural oppression and a struggle towards resistance toward sports area, family, lifestyles in the British realm, there weren’t any questions toward how the British see the world. I believe this is because individuals are expected to instill and respect the cultures they have been given. It is often difficult to go against the notions and cultures that one has been raised as this has been a tradition and notion that has been accepted for years and many individuals fear what could happen in the future if issues were to be challenged. This goes back to the concept that there are many different cultural perspectives and ways for individuals to perceive society. It is important to know that individuals can perceive the world and influenced due to their surroundings such as class and social identities. Social classes allow individuals to perceive the notions of cultures and truth in society.    

Question: Do you believe that social classes can factor how individuals perceive the truth in society?

"Beyond a Boundary" & "Hindi Swaraj"

C.L.R. James' realization that all they have learned in their life leading up to this point has been in the ideal of British intelligence, is very true in the sense that since the British controlled the education and all the activities held in Trinidad at the time, they had influence over what the youth will perceive as normal. The thought that whoever is the conqueror/imperialist has the ultimate influence on the people of a certain area makes one realize that they may have been "brain-washed" their whole life as they were only taught through the lenses of the victors. The same idea applies to history books and stories in general, as it is the victors who usually write the books to tell the heroic tales of themselves while the losers are usually quietly trying to recuperate from their loss. James' perspective on how organized sports like cricket and soccer requires everyone on the team to give up their own individualistic ideals in order to cooperate together for the greater good is similar to how everyone agrees to get along between the colonies and the colonizers in order to reach a goal that the colonizer wants, though the colonies might not realize that they are cooperating through oppression of their own individual selves. This makes me think of a lot of team based activities that I have done in schools, such as group projects or marching band/PE sports, and how in order to reach uniformity, everyone must cooperate and give up their own ideals of what the team should do and instead conform to the rule's standards to win. 

From Gandhi's perspective on the Indian people, it is clearly seen that he believes that the whole country can be relieved of this oppression by all cooperating together and forcing out the Western/British influences that it has "poisoned" India with. Through his eyes, overthrowing the British and forcing them out of India will be the ultimate solution to allow for India to progress faster in the world without being hindered by the oppressive forces of the British powers. This need for liberation from the British reminds me of how powerful imperialistic nations are in their reach of influence on those that they colonize because they can control the beliefs that the colonies hold without having much resistance by them because in their experience, colonial uprising is very rare and in a country so big, they do not really see the whole country being able to unify as one to kick out the British. The success that Gandhi later on puts up with shows just how strong a people can be in order to rebel against the oppressors, that they can create the outcome that they want even if history has not ruled in favor of their doing so. 

Avoiding Becoming White

An interesting point that is made in "From Hindi Swaraj" is the argument that, to truly be released from the oppressive hands of European imperialists, we must also completely reject their cultural influences. The author takes one of Mahatma Gandhi's famous quotes about this, "'If the master's house is to be dismantled, it cannot be done with the master's tools" (200). Although the foundation of this argument is that one should avoid erasing the influence of their culture, and that is a seemingly obvious concept, the real conflict begins with the idea that "white culture" is something founded completely by white people. If one were to consider American culture White culture, it should be noted that culture that we would now consider as something belonging to the United States has been melded and influences by the foreign populations that built the pillars of this country. Hip-hop, commonly seen as a genre created by Americans, would never be considered a white invention. I make this distinction because the argument that one must not fall victim to the ways of the white people, the Americans, is a complicated thing to say because the culture has never really belonged to them. It is a mixture of all the ethnicity's that populate the region. I am essentially saying that people of color cannot be criticized for following trends that seem white that are popular in American and European society, because white people have no pure culture.

James C.L.R & Gandhi M.K

James C.L.R & M.K Gandhi

In James article “Beyond Boundary” there speaks of the struggle between cultures of resistance and cultures of oppression within the educational system and sports. There is a sense of power that keeps people oppressed similar to how James felt being oppressed from keeping up with his grades and being a “well rounded” student while doing sports. This idea reflects a lot about the concept of power and truth, where as those who have power and are able to create this set of public “truths” for those to go forth by it seems that everyone else in the public has to follow those set of ideals. This is not the most ideal because it would lead to more oppression by those who are seen to be not following the “truth”. A similar idea presented in the article by Gandhi in regards to the context of India during the British imperialism, he suggested that those who were oppressed were physically and mentally enslaved by cultural conformity to believe that they are suppose to do what is being told of them to do just to conform around the society they are in. I really liked how Gandhi puts into perspective the fact that we are who we think we are not but what people force or tell us to do. Our minds are so powerful that even if we are not who we think we are, we will still see it as what our mind wants us to see in perspective of. It shows that in society if we are to allow those who oppresses us to do so, they can eventually take over our thoughts, our morals and become our sole reliant for our future. I think that both articles served a very meaningful purpose as to how we are ultimately the ones in control and in order to keep in control we must know what not to believe.