Whither the Asian American Coalition?

2007 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 585-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Spickard

This article offers a brief history of the Asian American coalition and suggests how possible new directions for the coalition in the future may affect the scope and preoccupations of Asian American history as it will be written. ““Asian American”” was an idea invented in the 1960s to bring together Chinese, Japanese, and Filipino Americans for strategic purposes. Soon other Asian-origin groups, such as Korean, Vietnamese, and South Asian Americans, were added. The article considers four groups who some people have suggested have strategic links with the Asian American coalition——Pacific Islander Americans, multiracial people of part-Asian descent, international adoptees from Asian countries, and Arab and other Middle Eastern Americans. It examines whether and how each group might be considered part of the Asian American coalition, and what impact their inclusion might have on the writing of Asian American history.

Author(s):  
Simeon Man

The introduction begins with a question many racial minorities, whether directly or indirectly, faced in the 1960s: do you want to join the army or go to jail? The question, I contend, not only reflected the austerity of racialized life in the United States at the time but also broadly reflected a governing logic that emerged globally in the post-1945 age of decolonization. The introduction lays out the book’s central arguments by explaining three important concepts: the “decolonizing Pacific,” “soldiering,” and “race war.” It situates the book within Asian American history and U.S. history, and it suggests the need to broaden our conception and approach to these fields by engaging with global histories of empire and decolonization.


2007 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 605-610
Author(s):  
THOMAS BENDER

The new research here reported is extending Asian American and American history into the Pacific, complementing recent Atlantic world studies. Such extension fundamentally challenges the dominant east-west movement of American history. These essays offer (or reveal the need for) greater conceptual clarity in defining terms in the field and the scope of the field's international dimensions. This new work highlights the importance of including a comparative aspect of transnational and global approaches to American history. While Pacific-wide or global developments may share a common history, there are also very specific local histories that demand distinction and invite comparison. Collectively, the essays gathered together suggest a more capacious definition of the field.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document