Emil Guillermo: Will "Crazy Rich Asians" make us forget the "screwed over poor Asian Americans," and all the rest of us?
April 23, 2018 7:03 PM

Yes, we know Asian Americans are not a monolith. But pop culture is about to give us all a facelift.

This is fair warning if you are one of the baby boomer Asian Americans, offspring of the early pioneer immigrants, both before and after 1965. 

If you were a descendent of legendary civil rights plaintiffs like Yick Wo or Wong Kim Ark, you represent four or five generations of ABCs (American born Chinese), and you have the scars to prove it.

If you are American Filipino like me, whose father arrived in 1928, same diff. 

You might even be asking if your Asianness is wearing off. Aren't we just American yet? 

Well, no. In the white tilt of the Trump administration, foreignness is an issue. And as I said, we are about to get some new media treatment that will almost surely overturn the dim sum cart.


In August, the movie version of Kevin Kwan's book, "Crazy Rich Asians," is due, and judging from the just-released trailers that came to my inbox on Monday, it could modernize the view of Asian Americans.

But not necessarily for the good.

If you don't know Kwan's wildly successful book series, maybe it's time you do.

Kwan was born in Singapore, came to America at 11, went to the University of Houston and Parsons School of Design, and then went to New York to work with Interview magazine and Martha Stewart. Soon after, he began his own consulting business working with household names. But it's his writing where he's made an impact, telling the story of rich Asians who come west for school, then return to their privileged Asian life style--totally different and alienated from their Asian homeland.

Kwan tells mostly their story. 

This is different from those of us born here to immigrants, get a western education because, well, we're here. Some of us get elite educations, and then can find ourselves totally alienated.

Same thing, sort of. We just don't have to travel as far. We're already home.

The title of Kwan's book signifies the main differentiator, as the "Crazy Rich Asians" are in a wealth stratosphere of their own. Whereas the ABC types might be comfortably upper middle class as doctors, lawyers, or professionals. They may be in the 1 percent, but are they "crazy" rich? Likely not. At least not to the point requiring psychotropics.

But "crazy rich" is the media image about to hit the big screen come August.

These Asians are in a $ league of their own, and not to be confused with real Asian Americans.

Indeed, they are global capitalists, modern jetsetters, a kind of Asian wealthocracy. 

Can they even relate to the nine Korean American waiters and waitresses for whom AALDEF recently won a wage theft judgment of $2.7 million against Ji Sung Yoo, owner of the Kum Gang San restaurants in New York City? 

The crazy rich Asians probably relate more with Yoo, the restaurant owner, but probably don't even consider him that crazy rich if he wasn't able to get away with defrauding some low wage Korean American waiters and waitresses. (Two Latino bussers were also included in the judgment.)

If you ask me, Asian American life is a whole lot closer to the waiters and waitresses who worked 12-hour shifts without break for six to seven days without overtime pay. The restaurant owners even kept some of their tips, and ordered them to do extra work on a local farm to harvest vegetables. If the workers didn't comply, they lost their jobs. Those who threatened to sue faced deportation. They sued anyway

Last week, a federal judge stopped the owner from hiding his assets and forced him to pay a $2.7 million judgment for the workers.

They don't become crazy rich, right away, if ever. They still have to collect it from the restaurant owners. 

But what they got is something much rarer for an Asian American to get in America. They got a taste of justice for the unfairness they were forced to endure.

These are the hard-working Asian Americans who are about to be eclipsed by this new image that comes out of "Crazy Rich Asians" in August.

Don't get me wrong. I wish Kwan and his movie all the best. 

The movie trailer looks like a Full Employment Act for Asian American Actors, and I'm all for that ,dabbling in a little stage work myself (Amok Monologues coming to the Orlando Fringe in May). 

The movie has "Fresh Off the Boat" star Constance Wu playing an American-born economics professor who gets involved with a crazy rich Asian, played by Henry Golding, a Malaysian/Singaporean. Wu is the Asian American we know and love, and she sets up the class dichotomy of the movie. Ken Jeong is in the house, as well as Michelle Yeoh, and even Filipino American Nico Santos, the flamingly funny Mateo in NBC's "SuperStore."  Even "Silicon Valley" star Jimmy Yang is in it. It's a who's who of underutilized Asian American actors.

But what was Hollywood going to do? Cast whites in yellowface? 

So there are good points about the film. In general, I'll reserve judgment until I see more than just a trailer. Will it become "The Joy Luck Club" for a new generation of worldly jet-setting Asians--who knows? 

Still, this image of the  crazy rich worries me. 

Most Americans already have such a monolithic view of Asian Americans. They don't even see the Asian American poor in our communities. 

We know how the Asian American STEM/Tech millionaire thing is already pervasive.  But a STEM millionaire is just middle class compared to the Asian crazy rich. 

The immigrant prince who comes west for school then goes back east to the homeland as a new kind of hybrid Asian may lead to a whole new reaction. And the evolution of a whole new stereotype.

Is this what has become of the "Model Minority"?

*     *     *
Emil Guillermo is an independent journalist/commentator.
Updates at www.amok.com. Follow Emil on Twitter, and like his Facebook page.
The views expressed in his blog do not necessarily represent AALDEF's views or policies.

Posted by:Emil Guillermo | 0 comments

Emil Guillermo: Comey's prime time Trump dump, and a response to US strikes on Syria
April 16, 2018 10:23 AM

If Donald Trump thought he could control his fate with bombs bursting in air over Syria, he was sadly mistaken.

He forgot about the importance of one of his old time slots--Sunday night---and the significant  power it holds over the American people. Prime-time was enough to elect Trump president, and in modern politics, it may be enough to remove him.

ABC exclusive.jpg

On Sunday, former FBI director James Comey regained the upper hand in the court of public opinion. He  knows how to give good testimony. Comey doesn't have a perfect case, but he has a better story. He knows when Trump asked the vice president and others to leave the room during a meeting for a one-on-one with Comey; it was prescient for one thing and one thing only:  to ask Comey to let the investigation against former national security advisor Michael Flynn "go." 

Let it go. You know, like from "Frozen." 

Comey said Trump's exact words were, "I hope you can let it go."

When asked by ABC News if it was obstruction of justice, Comey did more to Trump than what Trump and allies did to Assad on Friday night.

"Possibly. I mean, it's certainly some evidence of obstruction of justice," Comey said.

"But to kick out the vice president of the United States and the attorney general, who I work for, so you could talk to me alone, something was up," Comey said. "He's asking me to drop the criminal investigation of his now-former national security adviser."

Trump and Comey.jpg

"If he didn't know he was doing something improper, why did he kick out the attorney general and the vice president of the United States and the leaders of the intelligence community? I mean, why am I alone if he's -- doesn't know the nature of the request?" Comey said.

Trump, of course, denies it. But Trump's record on the truth, based on the Washington Post's Fact Checker (more than 2,000 false or misleading claims in a year), on that videotape ("Access Hollywood" anyone?), or on your own visceral sense of the man, the best an American TV juror in the middle-brow court of public opinion could say is, something's rotten here. And it's not Denmark.

It is, of course, a "He said, he said." 

Add that to the "He said, she said,"  Stormy Daniels, Karen McDougal, and the others claiming unprotected sex or unprotected harassment, and Trump is inundated in pronoun battles. 

Or as some of my grammar fluid gender anarchist students would say, it's a case of "they said, they said." 

But Comey said much more than that.

He's the former FBI director, and while I know the FBI isn't a band of saints, they know exactly how bad real bad guys are.  Comey even compares Trump to a mob boss in his new book, "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership," now simply the Cliff Notes to this ABC interview in the land of the unread. Trump's not a reader. He knows the value of a prime time "You're fired." That makes Comey's Sunday as close to a death blow as it gets, especially when Comey, the former top law enforcement official in the land, calls Trump "morally unfit" to be president.

And Trump tweets that  Comey is a "slimeball"? That sort of response only proves Comey's point. The president has lost all moral leadership in our country when he can't even summon up the high ground of his office.

And Trump Tower doesn't count. 

Should he be impeached? 

Comey said he'd rather the American public take him out at the ballot box. I've said the same. We should undo our own mess. 

Besides so far, the only one I've seen defending Trump has been the RNC, which denounced Comey's comments saying they "denigrate the millions of people who voted" for Trump.

That's why the ballot box is important.

But there are some who have ADHD and can't wait.

I personally dislike impeachment as a political move, but Trump has lowered the bar when it comes to the presidency. He's diminished the country and the office.

That's why I'm surprised at the tepid response to the Syrian strikes. You want a reason to impeach? The missles on Syria give you a reason.

The first batch last year, I called Trump's "cruise missile Viagra." 

Last Friday's strike, with Great Britain and France along for the ride, was like his anti-depressant, a "go away pill." If the reports are true about Trump's anger over Comey's leaked book, and Trump's own personal attorney under investigation for the Stormy Daniels matter, not to mention Urinegate, I think Trump figured he could make it all go away by rattling a sabre and seeming presidential.

But Americans didn't care. 

In fact, many think how Assad used chemical weapons on his own people was wrong. So it didn't spoil their weekend.

The strikes should have. And Trump should have taken the matter first to Congress.

"It's a clear-cut violation of the United Nations charter," Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, told me by phone over the weekend. "It's a violation of the War Powers clause of the U.S. Constitution. It's a violation of the War Powers resolution enacted by Congress. This constitutes a Nuremberg crime against peace, and an aggression in violation of the Rome statute of the U.S. criminal court definition. So there's no legality at all that I can tell, just wanton and naked aggression. . .It's clearly illegal and all these actions by President Trump are certainly impeachable as well."

Boyle said someone in the House of Representatives should be drawing up impeachment papers now.

Because there is a case for peace and it begins with the rule of law. 

That there's not the hue and cry suggests that the hawks are in charge and no one wants to challenge Trump on this. That's how bad Assad is. He's worse than Trump and provides cover. No one doubts the attack.

My friend Rod Mc Leod, a former Jones Day partner, and now a Filipino American living in Israel, sent me this e-mail after the attacks.

People forget the history of chemical use by Assad against his people. Obama threatened a missile attack but pulled back at the last minute when Russia said they would take Assad's chemicals. There was even a US ship that was sent to incinerate such base chemicals. But Assad agreed to never use them again.

Well, Assad was a ruthless liar. He used chemicals many times, until a year or so ago, Trump sent his 59 cruise missiles as a warning. Now Assad did it again. And Russia is trying to cover up for Assad by vetoing a chemical inspection and accusing the Western powers of jumping to conclusions.

Bottom line, Trump did the right thing.

Most of the U.S. agrees. 

But not Boyle, and frankly, not me. 

Trump attacked last year and Assad didn't learn. What does a second strike do?

When Trump is for pulling out of Syria one week, then bombing it the next, it only shows the U.S. has no Syria policy. And that's the problem. A "humanitarian" missile strike only stirs up the region resulting in more death, and a crisis that Boyle says is worse than the start of World War I.

If the U.S. is involved, it needs a plan. And it must go through Congress. U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley saying the U.S. is "locked and loaded" isn't a plan. 

Forget about the geo-politics for now, even though that says a lot about where to find the moral basis (or lack thereof) for U.S. action or inaction over Syria. Greedy modern nations still must have their oil. But if it leads the U.S. into military action, a president must take the case to Congress. 

If he doesn't, that's impeachable. Obama feared that in 2013, and wisely didn't act. Not in Syria. And even Bush the First feared impeachment in his day and didn't go all the way into Baghdad in the first Gulf War.

Donald Trump doesn't seem to fear impeachment. But he's getting it from all directions now. From Stormy and the ladies, to Cohen, Mueller, and Comey. 

Trump's too busy to be our president. And too small to be above the law.

*     *     *
Emil Guillermo is an independent journalist/commentator.
Updates at www.amok.com. Follow Emil on Twitter, and like his Facebook page.
The views expressed in his blog do not necessarily represent AALDEF's views or policies.

Posted by:Emil Guillermo | 0 comments

Emil Guillermo: Comey's "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership"--Time to get on the same page
April 13, 2018 4:42 PM

From an Asian American perspective, there are certain times when we find ourselves faced with issues bigger than the concerns of our collective ethnicities--Chinese, Indian, Filipino, Korean, et al. 
In other words, the Asian part is less important than the American part in our umbrella phrase of unity.

That's true now as we find ourselves needing to come together as a whole country, to rid ourselves of all distractions and cynicism, and focus on what the hell is happening to American democracy.

It's time for us all to be on the same page, folks.

Or maybe that doesn't matter so much, as long as the book we're all reading is James Comey's "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership."


The book sounds the alarm and selects the natural disaster metaphor for our current political situation. It's not an earthquake, hurricane, or deluge of molten volcanic lava. (I prefer pestilence, but why bring in other species?)

And it's definitely not stormy, though Time magazine and Ms. Daniels would disagree.

From Comey's lookout, the Trump presidency is a "forest fire." 

Those of us in California, America's most Asian American state, know how treacherous a burning forest can be. 

"We are experiencing a dangerous time in our country," Comey warns, "with a political environment where basic facts are disputed, fundamental truth is questioned, lying is normalized and unethical behavior is ignored, excused or rewarded."

"Tell me something I don't already know," you ask?

That's the problem. Most of everything in Comey's book would have decimated presidencies past. But Trump? This is how far out of the norm he is, and why we should be concerned, lest we allow Trump's diminished sense of democracy to become the modern standard. 

Of course, one particular allegation is getting all the attention from Comey's leaked book, no pun intended.

As you may have noticed from the New York Daily News front page, referring to Trump as "PEE-BRAIN," the book gets down and dirty. It again brings up those unverified allegations of a certain dossier that Trump was involved watching prostitutes urinating on themselves in a Russian hotel in 2013.

How much worse is that than unprotected sex with women not his wife?

Trump has denied it all. But Comey talks about Trump's concern and inability to let go of the matter, which the president called the "golden showers thing." 

Comey wrote how Trump wanted him to discredit the report for Melania's sake. "He just rolled on, unprompted, explaining why it couldn't possibly be true, ending by saying he was thinking of asking me to investigate the allegation to prove it was a lie. I said it was up to him."

Yellow journalism in the Trump era. Sells books.

But can it save our democracy, and will any of this make a difference?

We've already had "Fire and Fury," Michael Wolff's fly-on-the-wall tale making an initial splash earlier in the year. 

It left us agitated, but ultimately inured. 

Sadly, we've become accustomed to the political disruptions tweeted daily by Trump, so much so that no one seems to care. Normal? Shouldn't be.

But Comey's book is different. It's the memoir of a real insider, the former FBI director, a Republican, who, you'll recall, is often scorned by Democrats for reopening the Clinton email investigation a month before the 2016 election. He found nothing, of course, but his actions essentially handed the presidency to the Republican, Trump, who loved him until he didn't. 

Hated by both Republicans and Democrats? Comey's a guy we can trust.

Showing such equanimity is tough on a guy like Comey, who wrote of feeling nauseous that he may have influenced the election. His public thoughts on the matter at the time, combined with the prospects of a probe into Russian meddling, ultimately bothered Trump, who fired Comey last May.

Some called that the key example of obstruction of justice. Is it the beginning of our real constitutional crisis to test if the president is above the law? 

We're supposed to know the answer to that question already.

The Comey firing even brought on a satirical New Yorker cover that made Comey for a moment an honorary Asian American, cast as Dr. David Dao, the Asian American dragged down the aisle of an United Airlines jet in 2017.


Given Trump's record on the truth (more than 2,000 falsehoods or misleading claims in the first year of his presidency, according to the Washington Post Fact Checker), I have no reason to doubt Comey's memoir.

Trump has already responded to Comey's book in his customary rhetorical style, calling Comey a "liar and a leaker" and an "untruthful slimeball" in a Friday the 13th tweet. 

Call it morning in America.

It shouldn't be normal that among the trending words for the day in Merriam-Webster's website is "slimeball."

Nor should it be normal for the president, when asked about his porn star matter, to refer the media to his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, only to find the lawyer raided by the FBI a few days later. Reportedly, Cohen, under criminal investigation, is considering taking the 5th. 

And this was a week that began with a Syrian attack on its own people, with many of us waiting to see if Trump would respond as he did to a similar attack a year ago-- with more U.S. missiles. 

No missiles so far. Just a threatening notice to Russia and Syria on Twitter that missiles were coming, "new and smart." 

The commander-in-chief tweeting potential U.S. military action? Not smart. Not normal.

In the state of Trump, we've come to expect it. The Comey book is likely to make Trump angrier at the world than Melania is angry with him. 

Comey's on his publicity tour next week as the book is officially released Tuesday. Will the president try to dwarf it with a surprise move somewhere?  Syria? North Korea? Or will it be an all-out Trumpian domestic blitz: the ouster of Mueller, Gates, Sessions? One? All? But not EPA's Pruitt? Oh wait, Trump's just pardoned Scooter Libby, the former Cheney chief of staff who was convicted, fined,and jailed for obstruction of justice and perjury. One leaker and liar Trump likes. But it sounds like Trump's telling his loyalists being grilled by the Mueller investigation, not to mention his personal fixer Cohen, to stay loyal, The Donald will take care of them.

But who will take care of The Donald? Voters?

In times of crisis, Trump has often sought out the campaign trail stop to pump up and vent. Nothing like dividing the country and stirring up his base of white nationalists.

That's where he'll likely take his anger out on us--DACA recipients, immigrants, people of color.

If we're all on the same page, how can any red-blooded American look the other way and continue to back Trump much longer?

*     *     *
Emil Guillermo is an independent journalist/commentator.
Updates at www.amok.com. Follow Emil on Twitter, and like his Facebook page.
The views expressed in his blog do not necessarily represent AALDEF's views or policies.

Posted by:Emil Guillermo | 0 comments

Emil Guillermo: The striker who became teacher - Podcast with Daniel P. Gonzales on how ethnic studies was birthed at San Francisco State University
April 2, 2018 6:32 PM

Over the Easter weekend, Donald Trump was resurrecting his anti-immigrant rhetoric in tweets and off-handed comments. First, he blasted California for issuing pardons to a group that included three Asian Americans subject to deportation. Then he tweeted he's changed his mind on DACA and that he would end NAFTA to force Mexico to pay for his fantasy wall. He topped it off with a comment how people were crossing the border to become eligible for DACA. 

Mr. President, DACA is for young arrivals who came years ago. He'd know that if he didn't revise history with every utterance or tweet.

Enter the scholars and historians of ethnic studies. They know all that what we're seeing from Trump is nothing new. There's a pattern in history from the way Chinese were excluded, to the rescission politics regarding Filipino colonization and military service. Trump's DACA stance is fairly typical.

But Dan Gonzales doesn't think ethnic studies scholars are as tuned in politically as they should be.

Gonzales was one of the coalition of students that included Blacks, Latinos, and Asians in 1968 at San Francisco State. One of the demands of that strike--said to the longest student strike in the nation's history--was the formation of a college of ethnic studies.


Gonzales never left and became a fully tenured professor of Asian American Studies at San Francisco State University. He was a speaker at the Association of Asian American Studies held in San Francisco this past weekend, and urged the scholars to be more connected to what's happening in today's politics.

"We need to have our faculty invested in the political nature of ethnic studies, and they have to include it within their own teaching practice references to political process," Gonzales told me on our podcast, Emil Amok's Takeout. "They have to understand the politics of the campus and be able to guard against well in advance issues that could be an existential threat to the cause of ethnic studies or any of its member departments."

And how do professors do that today?

"Be skilled enough to be able to organize well and form alliances with other colleagues on campus," Gonzales told me. "Because that's the only way you get anything done. And the best way to protect your own best interests is to form good, strong alliances based on principle. That's what we need."

Spoken like a strike veteran who helped lay the strong foundation for a college of ethnic studies--not just a department, not just for a program, or a few classes--but a whole school at SFSU, 50 years ago.

Listen to the podcast here and read more about Dan Gonzales in this March 31 blog post.

*     *     *
Emil Guillermo is an independent journalist/commentator.
Updates at www.amok.com. Follow Emil on Twitter, and like his Facebook page.
The views expressed in his blog do not necessarily represent AALDEF's views or policies.

Posted by:Emil Guillermo | 0 comments

Emil Guillermo: Census citizenship question? Only to harass people of color. Plus, Ass'n of Asian American Studies meets in SF 50 years after historic strike
March 31, 2018 5:54 PM

Why all the hubbub about a citizenship question in the 2020 Census? 

The truth is the government already has all the information it needs.

Every ten years comes the official Census. But that doesn't mean government workers for the next decade pass the time by twiddling an abacus.  

Each year there's a release of what's called the American Community Survey, or ACS, which is quite detailed and tells us things like how many different kinds of Asians there are.
Note how in the latest ACS, Chinese are at 4 million, Asian Indians at 3.8 million, and Filipinos are at 2.8 million. (Third! And almost all of my fellow Filipinos are Catholic. Come on gang, let's get those numbers up for next Easter, which thankfully won't be on that day that tests belief, April Fool's Day.)

The really valuable numbers to compare and contrast are the overall Asian alone numbers (17,556,935) versus the Asians "in combination" number, which heralds the HAPA, at 20,901,780. 

Another question the ACS asked was how Asians transported themselves to work. Out of 8.6 million who answered, 5.7 million people said they drive alone, versus 938,340 who used public transit.  Another 337,260 said they walked.  

These are among the array of numbers taken by inquiring Census folks in the ACS. And since 2005, the question of citizenship has been asked.

So how many citizens are there in the U.S.?

Every year it's asked in the ACS and the latest numbers are, of 323,127,515 Americans, 274,384,971 are born-here U.S. citizens.

Add those born in Puerto Rico or U.S. Island areas, and those born abroad to American parents, and the total grows to 279,388,170.

Add to that pot of citizens another group, those who passed the test, took their oath, and  naturalized (21,238,372), and the total comes to 300,626,542 citizens.

How many are "not a citizen"? 

ACS, which updates this yearly, says 22,500,973.

About 7.5 percent are not citizens.

What more do you need to know? We already should know that we don't need a multi-billion dollar wall, nor do we need to spend millions to make census-taking into junior ICE agents.

And that's the insidious nature of the proposal by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, no doubt done to ingratiate himself with Donald Trump. 

You have an update on the citizenship question every year in the long-form ACS. (I filled it out one year and couldn't believe how complicated it was.) But to add the citizenship question to the ten-year short form serves no purpose, except to harass and drive away more people of color from participating at all in the national count for fear of deportation.

Given that Trump and his base are trying to make sure that America puts off being a minority-majority country for as long as it can, an undercount is very desirable. 

In minority heavy states like California, Texas, Florida, and New York, an undercount  would tend to cut federal dollars, gut Democratic support, and realign congressional districts. It's a Trumpian trifecta, with the cherry on top---the preservation of a white majority and the delay of the inevitable state of America where the minorities are the majority.

Trump has already attacked states like California, which adopted sanctuary policies to counter vigorous ICE enforcement. He's flip-flopped on DACA to keep 800,000 dreamers and their families at the highest anxiety level. 

Just look at Trump's venom this weekend with a scathing tweet critical of Governor Jerry Brown for issuing 56 pardons and commutations, including five to immigrants who faced deportation including three Asian Americans: Sokha Chhan, Daniel Maher, and Phann Pheach. I wrote about Maher's case here.

With Trump's obvious disdain toward immigrants, what could be better than enlisting the Census to createmore fear and harassment in communities? Ross/Trump are at a xenophobic high point. Find the foreigners. Root them out. And send a chill throughout America.

Asian American studies folks know all about this sort of thing.

Dan Gonzales, Professor of Asian American Studies at San Francisco State University's College of Ethnic Studies, was at the AAAS meeting in San Francisco, and he had an idea for a compromise if Ross/Trump insisted on the citizenship question.

"Anonymize the census return," Gonzales told me, offering what he thought could be a plausible, though unlikely, compromise. He's still  suspicious of the proposal given the  administration's dealings on DACA.

Gonzales said he noticed something when more Latinos were opting in to DACA in large numbers compared to Filipinos and other Asian Amerian groups. ICE officials made a push in the community to get more to sign up for DACA. After ICE made numerous presentations, Gonzales said he told them bluntly it came down to one word: "Trust." 

Can you trust Ross/Trump on the Census citizenship question after DACA?

Gonzales isn't surprised not as many signed up after ICE did outreach to Asian American communities. He points out that the Asian visa overstays don't have the same problems as Latino DACA recipients. The government doesn't have their records.  

But Gonzales still fears an undercount of Asians and says the only way out of the citizenship question may be an overhaul of Congress in the midterms.


Gonzales is a unique member of the AAAS attending this year's meeting in San Francisco. He's one of the few who was there for the SF State strike 50 years ago that spawned the move toward ethnic studies. It was a watered down demand compared to the call for Third World liberation studies. But unlike other schools, all the different groups--Asians, Latinos, and Blacks--were united into an integrated school. Gonzales explained that was intentional to build something that could withstand institutional threats and challenges. It's the difference between how SFSU and other AAS programs around the country.

Coincidentally, one of Gonzales's  former graduate students, Prof. Theo Gonzalves, who recently moved from University of Maryland Baltimore County to the Smithsonian, is taking over as president of AAAS.

Hear Gonzales talk about: the SF State Strike; how its College of Ethnic Studies was born out of the strike; how the school continues to thrive compared to elite schools with small AAS programs; all that and the future of the AAS in an upcoming edition of Emil Amok's Takeout.

*     *     *
Emil Guillermo is an independent journalist/commentator.
Updates at www.amok.com. Follow Emil on Twitter, and like his Facebook page.
The views expressed in his blog do not necessarily represent AALDEF's views or policies.

Posted by:Emil Guillermo | 0 comments