Just when you think you can lose hope for the new generation of students coming up through colleges and graduate schools, the summer interns begin at your organization, and you realize that there are still folks with that fire in their belly for community work.
Our first intern started this week at my workplace, and she fit right in. Her personal story is one thing, but to see that a young person has so much energy, enthusiasm, and even the sheer will to learn is a really encouraging thing. I know friends who have become embittered about the excesses of young people, or even their disinterest or entitlement (I'm sure I've written about this here too). But I definitely feel like that's only one piece of the puzzle: there's hope out there. And it may be all the hope our community really has, if most of my generation is bitter now.
May 13, 2009
API* Heritage Post #13: The Next Generation
Dec 15, 2008
Let It Rest!
I'm so goddamn tired of hearing about - and being asked about - Sonal Shah. The drama, from all sides, is unnecessary and pointless: though I do believe there is still a need for true resolution. I didn't know much about her before her meteoric rise, I think she's either been given bad counsel or hasn't listened to good ideas about how to address the concern that she is tied to the Hindutva right, and honestly, she's coming across as kind of arrogant, even if there's nothing true in the statements against her.
I'm not interested in going after individuals in our community, but I do think that we must all be held accountable for inconsistencies in our past, and examples of poor judgment that may reflect on whatever position we're vying for in the future. I've said before that I'm naturally skeptical of people of color who are so ambitious in politics, because I think the community becomes their way of showing that they have a base, even if they don't really care for what that community thinks or is going through.
The growing number of South Asians in American politics is a natural phenomenon: there is a large segment of our 2nd generation that is well-educated, as the children of the "professional" immigrants who were allowed to come here after '65. But the real question is, what true cohesion is there between our different communities, and should I be made to feel guilty when I don't jump behind some of the jokers who are standing themselves up to claim that they represent more than their own self-interest?
Are these folks, particularly those who are really just opportunists looking to rise as fast as they can on the backs of others through "brown skin, white-collar affirmative action," worth our time and effort? And honestly, are they just looking for the rubber stamp of the "community" rather than a real engagement to win our support? Isn't that the old politics of race: "we're the same race/ethnicity so you should support me, no questions asked"? I guess that's kind of the Obama method, at least from the perspective of folks truly working for racial justice.
With this whole Sonal Shah thing - I think that even if we give her the benefit of all doubt and say that there's nothing shady with her past associations and affiliations, she has shown remarkably poor judgment with how she dealt with the initial questions in 2004 and how she's acted, both publicly and privately about this issue when it came up over the last few weeks. I truly don't know what to believe, and honestly, the vast majority of disinterested people (who don't have their career weighing on what happens with this flare up, or one of various axes to grind) just don't care.
Maybe I should post up my own advice to her, given that it seems like she's getting really awful counsel at this point, and you know, I should just want to help an ailing sister out. Because I can't imagine that if this thing got picked up by anymore mainstream media, the Dems would let it carry on for much longer, and her nascent political career would fade into a footnote, long before the root issues underlying this storm were ever really addressed in mainstream Desi America.
Those root issues include the very troubling infiltration of hard-right, political Hinduism into middle-class Indian America. The Hindu camps for school children, the programs that send kids over to India for unclear reasons, and the rhetoric that comes from groups ranging from USINPAC to the Hindu American Foundation should be enough to make us all worry a bit. We have enough homegrown extremism (militia, anyone?) in the U.S., thank you very much.
Aug 23, 2008
Proletariat Nonprofit Blues
As I prepare to enter the nonprofit world full-time again in the next couple of weeks, I'm reminded that nonprofit organizations have a tendency to undervalue and underpay their staff. At a former employer in the Asian American community, I had a starting salary of $20K out of college. It was my first gig, and I was thankful to have a job, but that's pennies in NYC, even back then. And I was told that there was nothing else they could squeeze out. Honestly, I find that hard to believe - adding even $500 as a "bonus" makes a big difference, at least in the valuation of your work.
Nonprofit staff work like crazy, get paid shit, and don't get the additional perks that firms and other places dish out. I remember what it was like. I tried, when I was in a position of management, to give those little perks to my staff (and the staff of other community nonprofits) when I could. Getting free tickets through board members and other friends of the organizations, trying to give certain unexpected times off or mid-day mixing it up (we had the whole staff go out to see a movie premiere in the middle of the day once).
Regardless, I've been in the field for a long time, and re-entering it now, I'm finding that salaries have not changed much since then. It's kind of sobering. This issue is much more pronounced for public interest lawyers (though I think organizers have it even worse). A new staff attorney at a non-profit in NYC may make something between $35K and $40K. The starting first year associate in an NYC firm will start, off the bat, with a cool $165K. The disparity is incredibly grim. And the American Bar Association isn't doing much to address it.
At least for social workers, the National Association of Social Workers has lobbied to create a base starting salary that groups have to meet to gain accreditation (I think). Something like that from the private bar would really help public interest lawyers out. But it's just not what is done. So as the cost of living continues to rise, we're forced to smile and say nothing (well, I guess we can say something, but there isn't much hope for change).
More broadly, I'm concerned that low salaries directly affect retention and internal development of leadership with the new generation of community workers. If you aren't making a lot, how long can you stay in the work, particularly with the pressures pushing against affordable housing and cost of living in city centers where most of these jobs remain?
Add to this what I've heard about the new generation (take it as you will, since it's from other older fogies like me): younger folks tend to be more impatient, and possess a sense of entitlement that gets in the way of taking their lumps or playing the game until the right opportunity arises... and I don't know what the leadership for Asian American nonprofits will look like in the future.
I certainly don't think it will come from people who were committed full-time to the "movement." Maybe that's not a bad thing - moving us away from that tendency towards the professionalization of movement work ("I need the MPP from Harvard to do community policy work"). Then again, it could mean that people who don't have the field experience or feel, could move in from the professional schools to take over (though these low wages may prohibit that from happening). What do you think?
May 13, 2008
Indian Fraternities and Sororities
This past academic year, I spent more time at a large public undergraduate college, where there is a pretty significant Asian American community. I got to interact with some of the college-aged South Asians - though they were primarily Indian American, of course. Although the school has multiple South Asian organizations, based on religion, ethno-national identity, and even cultural groups (singing troupe, dancing group) a lot of the folks were part of the ever-growing South Asian (really, Indian) "greek" life that seems to have blown up over the last 5 years.
I know that the first Indian fraternity started in 1994. It was called Iota Nu Delta (IND) and started at SUNY Binghamton. Their website is quite a trip. I particularly enjoy this call-out quote on the sidebar: “February 7th, 1994 would be the birth of an organization where eight great men laid the foundation for the entire South Asian Greek cpmmunity (sic)...”
Okay - where to start with these groups? I guess the first thing is that the groups were marginal at best when I was an undergrad, and even in the years following. We laughed at their initial steps, not realizing that they would grow and multiply. I think there are about 10 Indian/South Asian fraternities and sororities now, and the students I spoke with were very energized about their organizations - far more, in fact, than they were about being part of any traditional college organization organized around ethnic or ethno-national origin. Far more, in fact, than they were about attending workshops or taking classes that explored South Asian American history, organizing, and struggles in the U.S.
So what is it with these organizations? Speaking as an outsider, I guess I thought they were fairly harmless when I was first exposed to them. Just replications of the mainstream white "greek" groups, not really following in the footsteps of the Alphas or the other strong Black and Latino/a fraternities and sororities that really focused on service and building a different kind of community. Those groups really focused on academic excellence, built around a fundamental understanding that shit is fucked up and that the man is trying to push us down, so this is another site for political and personal growth, solidarity, and identity. Again, as an outsider, that's just what I saw, in comparison to the watered down animal house hijinks of the white frats and the vacuous self-absorption of the white sororities. I remember the Black and Latino/a organizations worked hand in hand with the political organizations - there were differences, but they were connected as well.
But it doesn't seem to be the case with the new Indian greek life. The organizations seem separate, the students seem like they are in their own worlds, and just when I thought the Long Island cluelessness that had seeped into the consciousness of so many suburban desi kids was the outer limit of their uselessness, these folks often push the envelope further. And I haven't seen an outpouring of critical thinking or even serious community service come out of these groups - it's just more of the same from the mainstream frats. With more of these organizations coming up, I wouldn't be surprised if they just get stuck in their own turf competitions, and fully check out of any other campus engagement.
I know, I'm old and I'm out of it. But these groups are no longer on the fringe where they exist, and honestly, political campus organizations have not caught up and created something that matches the powerful effect of the pledging process: particularly how the rites of passage make folks feel connected (artificial community development). Once they get the incoming students to pledge/join up, they don't need to explore different identities and ideas - they can stay in the comfort zone of these uber-cliques.
I'm genuinely fearful for the future: I wonder if even the Indian Student Associations of the American college scene (never mind the pan-South Asian groups) have the same pull they once did. Not to mention that these groups actually re-emphasize the "Indianness" of the whole thing - as campus South Asian spaces become more heterogeneous, the frats and sororities may reflect the circling of the wagons for the privileged middle class Indian kids from suburbia, whose picture of what brown people in college should be is being rattled by urban, working class, non-Indian, non-Hindu, non-conformists. Rather than find common ground, the mainstream folks have moved into different configurations and "safe spaces" where they can continue to push the falsely monolithic "Indianness" of their parents that's not as threatening.
And what will that mean for social justice organizations in the future? Does it limit their pool for recruiting and/or building consciousness, or were these folks the already/traditionally uninterested, so there isn't much loss related to this development? Are there other effects when the active South Asian population is so fragmented on campuses - so that you have the "cultural" groups that attract foreign students and folks who grew up around all or no South Asians, the growing greek groups, the religious groups (I have to post on this separately, because this is also a newer development that is interesting/troubling), and the (quasi-)political groups (do they even exist anymore?). How can these folks advocate together around common concerns for South Asian American communities (on campus and off)?
On a different angle, if pan-South Asian work looks like it's failing, will that move more of the progressive South Asians on campus to the pan-Asian and pan-POC spaces out of frustration and their own search for community? Maybe that's a good thing... I have no idea if this is also happening in non-South Asian, APA spaces in colleges: and I really don't think this is likely on the West coast, where the history of student activism is so rooted. But I could be wrong, of course...
Aug 18, 2007
Ego and Those Difficult Conversations.
There's something about a certain kind of gathering of uncles and aunties in which I can't keep my mouth shut anymore. Regardless of the deep and lasting friendships they've had with my parents, regardless of how they have been the support when I've been far or further away, I just can't help myself from almost visceral reactions when they say things I find offensive - which in these circles have ended up being anti-Muslim nowadays, vs. anti-black in the past. I think with their kids growing up and going through public high schools in their small urban areas (vs. the artificial (and white) suburbia of comfortable houses that many of my cousins occupy in New Jersey), the parents have at least had to curb the biases they learned through their white colleagues and American mainstream culture because many of their kids reject some/all of them.1 But they haven't been able to do that with the biases they brought with them from (and are perpetuated by contact still in) India.
So this atmosphere prompts me to launch into a diatribe of my own, vaguely throwing in a number of related but not logically necessary issues I feel like bringing up, with an audience of fairly patient older folks (for a time). Sparing y'all the details, I think it falls somewhere between a rant and a rail, with bits and pieces of what could become a cohesive manifesto, but if I have to be objective, my argument technique sometimes resembles that of a desperate person in a sinking ship trying everything he can to reduce the water in the ship, throw items overboard that he believes may make the difference, and wholly, haphazardly, being unable to take coherent, clear, unemotional steps (i.e. make points). Somehow, I was able to bring in factoids (and emotional stretches of the truth) about everything from Mountbatten's hasty departure and creation of Partition, to philanthropy in well-off Indian communities that doesn't address issues in our community at all, the Ghadar Party, the American genocide of native peoples, the many secret wars in central/south america, the massacre of sikhs in India, the use of "American" to describe only white people, the way that we're expendable to white people until they decide to hate us, questioning loyalties to nation-states, the tired use of the "forced conversions when Muslims came to India hundreds of years ago" as justification for widespread animosity/hatred towards all Muslims now (this is going to be another post on a possible short logic argument I just worked out).... the list goes on and on. What the hell was I thinking.
The combination of ego and some knowledge is a really dangerous thing, and I can see how easy it is to walk into the trap of being a self-righteous, belligerent liberal (or conservative) who just figuratively bludgeons people into submission (or, really just not caring or wanting to engage again). I think that rather than truly value the exchange of ideas and the opportunity to share knowledge or what you've seen with someone (in a more collaborative, integrative way), in these situations, it just becomes a contest to see how many zingers or "points" I can make. But that's useless in the big picture, and if I can't master the desire to shock over substance and dialogue, my ambition to be a constructive contributor and collaborator rather than just another close-minded egoist, is doomed. I sometimes get into these situations with my own friends, but it's usually with a very particular group, and for whatever reason, something triggered the deluge tonight. Discipline, beyond just thinking about these things, is a critically important tool.
Really, the whole point of having this kind of dialogue is so that you actually can get somewhere. When you bring in everything else, it just confuses things too much to get something useful out of the dialogue. If every conversation we have is just to further convince ourselves that we're right and the world is filled with dumbasses who don't get it or care, starting with the person we're talking to, well, that's pointless. But the conversation has to more of an exchange. It's just so hard to do without losing your cool.
[1] As a tangent, these kids are different from the kids growing up in enclave-like suburbia (like Long Island, where 2nd Gen Gujarati Americans grow up with only Indian friends, in their own little slice of 'burbladesh that takes the worst of both their parents' communalism and mainstream Long Island's neuroses about so many things). The different slices of 2nd Gen Desi America are far too complicated for me to deal with right now, but I know that the generations are incredibly different, even if they are only 5 - 7 years apart.
Regardless, I think a lot has to be said about how close these ties become between Indian immigrant adults who are bound by their shared experiences here. For my mom and some of her friends, you'd think they knew each other from childhood. For adults to create such strong friendships long after they'd gone through the typical places where we make our friends (neighborhood friends while growing up, school friends, etc) is remarkable. While I've met some people over the past years who have become quite close - you just naturally don't get that attached to new people, that quickly. And especially after marriage and kids - the ability of these families to come together and to forge such close friendships is really remarkable. I mean, I feel closer to these uncles and aunties than some of my own relatives. I guess that may be why I just feel free to shoot off my opinions?
Feb 14, 2007
Desi PACs: "Photographs And Checks"
Announcements from Presidential hopefuls have been titillating the media this month, and giving some hope to those who are sick of the comedy of errors that is our government. I thought I'd take a moment to review what has happened in the past, especially with South Asians and political fundraising/attempted king-making.
South Asians PACs have been around, with the first generation often focusing on nuclear treaties and H1-B workers (or India-Pakistan relations with the United States). There are quite a few of them, and they range from mildly annoying to downright nasty. The uncle generation has combined their preference for photo ops with their power of the purse to throw money at politicians who are happy to come out for a dinner or lunch, take a few pictures with the proud immigrants and walk away unmoved by the naive and generally unsophisticated (or unsavory) political suggestions that the PAC puts gently on the table next to the big checks. These folks have the money, but haven't usually used it strategically.
Fast forward to the second generation of desi Americans who have grown up here, and have spread out into political and policy positions. They're creating their own political fundraising organizations, PACs, and think tanks (at least in name). Everytime I turn around, there's a new PAC or think tank. And you'd think that these folks would be more nuanced about their approach towards the politicians. But it's more of the same, often with more flash but still some kind of deer-staring-at-the-headlights fixation with cameras and celebrity.
Perhaps they are vying for post-election jobs, notoriety, and sometimes the very photo ops that their parents were looking for before them, the name of the community is often raised without much substance. And where "civil rights" have become a safe bet to put softly on the table beside the big check, issues of pervasive poverty in segments of our community, or driving a harder line about moving the debate from "illegals" to fair treatment of immigrants regardless of status are not discussed. If we could just get the money and the consciousness about inequity together in the same room, we'd get somewhere.
But the problem is, to really have a true analysis about class and inequity, we can't think about just South Asians. These issues are not race specific - they affect our community also, as they affect many others. But in organizing by race group (or political coalition, if you will), are these folks basically making the discussion around broader inequity impossible?
If each group buys the time of the politician and lists 2-3 issues that it has identified as important to itself (such as the self-serving "more of XYZ group in your administration" ("...and here's my resume!"), are they all giving the politician an out to say "the issue of poverty/hate crimes/anti-immigrant sentiment is important, but your group is still a small percentage of the total population... and I have to work on issues that affect more people"? Rather than just ignoring the communities in need, are these PACs actually hurting the most vulnerable folks?
***
Anyway, so last election cycle, we had "SAKI" - South Asians for Kerry/Edwards (still not sure of where the "i" came from). They raised something like $2M, had a few gala events, made a splash, and the candidates didn't win. Not winning isn't the issue, to me. It's that the establishment, the DNC, wasn't pushed to think more critically about the way that it engages South Asian and other immigrant communities. So the conversation didn't move anywhere, and we're in the same position now as we were 4 years ago with the DNC and the parties as a whole. Pretty short-sighted, enit?
For more about desi PACs, here are a few articles (1, 2), but as usual, they don't seem to be very critical.
Now, we'll likely have groups rallying behind their favorite candidates again. My prediction is that we'll have a lot of good people give their money to X or Y candidate and trust that the people pulling the effort together will have their general interests, and "the community's interests" (whatever that could possibly mean) in mind. Without commenting on that until I see more, let's have some fun with acronyms:
South Asians for Clinton II (SACT). I like the sound of "sacked." I don't know why. I just like it.
South Asians for Barrack Obama (SAFBO). Well, they would be smart not to add his first name to the acronym, because the connotation is too uncomfortably close for everyone involved.
South Asians for Bill Richardson (SABR). Sabre? While I like it, there was once a group called South Asians Against Police Brutality that used a similar acronym, so I don't know.
South Asians for John Edwards (SAJE). Sage! Pretty cool.
South Asians for Arnold Schwarzenegger (SAAS). Sounds like a statistical software package. Heck, with some of his plans for Cali, including a move closer to universal health care and a strong push to cut greenhouse emissions, not to mention the effort he'd make to change the Constitutional native-born requirement for the Presidency, I might even write him a check. He'd move the conversation further than any of the other major candidates.
My favorite, of course, is South Asians for Al Gore (SAAG). I mean, come on. Tell me that's not too perfect? I can see the logo now, as well as the endless green buffets, long talks about how global warming could affect spinach farmers everywhere, and even some crazy crossover with the Screen Actors' Guild (isn't he a member now?).
Seriously though, if you think that Gore is not a viable candidate, read this article in Rolling Stone about their thoughts on the issue. I found it compelling, though unlikely.
***
Well, again, political season is upon us. And all I can say is that I hope someone real comes along to keep it fun. Like Randy of the Redwoods.
Of whom I can't find a single picture or link through Google. What a shame. I remember you, Randy. I think I would have voted for you, if I was of age at the time.
Nov 26, 2006
Keep it in the Family (3)
I feel a level of comfort that I still don't fully understand when I'm around certain cousins and nieces/nephews. It is so bizarre to me that the person who I am generally is not who I am in their company, and even the majority of my conversations don't reflect the things that I care about or focus on in the rest of my life. But yet, it feels like something beyond just small talk. But I wonder what they all think of me, given that what I do or what I'm studying doesn't really ever come up. I find myself incredibly boring in that context - but I guess that's why family is great: they don't seem to think the same.
And every once in a while, I get to connect on a different level. Last night, I reconnected with a cousin who really mattered to me while I was growing up, and with whom I felt very close. It felt nice to retouch that connection that we'd had from our childhood/adolescence. I don't know what happened along the way, but it was just nice to find some path out of the thickets that had grown between our lives.
I feel blessed that my immediate family are who they are, even though I have less patience with them than I should. But I realize after these family events, when I'm alternately pleasantly surprised that people even speak with me still, and thankful that there is so much laughter, so much joy. I just wish I could be a better presence for my many nieces and nephews... I wonder what they are learning through their suburban upbringing, and what they could learn from my mistakes and minor life lessons.
***
But I still have reservations about the way that my cousins are raising their kids. This new generation of suburban brown kids has a built-in guju posse in their cousins, but beyond the convenience of age-matched playmates while growing up, they also have the potential for a built-in superiority complex about Gujaratis in the broader food chain. And there's more than a little competition going on between their parents, although I have seen how much they take care of their siblings' kids.
I'm just not sure of what values the 1.5 generation in my family - many of whom came here as adults (in their early 20s) bring to the mix. For some cousins in particular, the biases, dogmatism, and small worldview from their parents are being passed along directly. For others, their exposure to the system in the United States is incredibly limited, and their kids are calling them out on some things - which is interesting, but then how are their parents dealing with it? Do the kids have the compunction to work through these aspects of their parents' personalities?
It's very hard to tell, and sadly, I see some of the pitfalls that I reference when I speak about the next generation of desi kids generally. My parents' generation worked very hard to enter the middle class in the United States, and our period of second generation kids has its own range of issues. But the technical class that entered the United States in the 80s and even 90s, have settled down and have kids. Their kids, while second generation as well, are being raised in more upscale neighborhoods, by parents who are more removed from their humble beginnings, and from the India that our parents knew.
Their perception of "making it" is reflected in the general movement in Bollywood films from depicting the social aspects of modernization as the fledging democracy took its first unsteady steps towards free flight as a nation, to the mass consumerism and coca-colonization that has taken invidious and perverse forms by interspersing "hip" English-language phrases, hyper-gendered and sexualized musical numbers that are supposed to represent some new freedom but just come off as parody, and vacuous plots, dialogue, and actors.
Name brands and status symbols abound, and the parents seem to be showering their noveau wealth all over the kids, who know little to nothing of discipline, of struggle, of the valuation of material items vs. honest work and thoughts. While the kids may be able to go through the motions regarding religion, how much of it is filio-piety, and how much of it is real engagement with the philosophy that drive the machinations of so-called faith?
Then again, that can be said for any group, I guess. I wasn't raised within some shroud of poverty or difficulty, but I also didn't have an entitlement complex when it came to material possessions or station in life. I overheard one of my cousin's husbands speaking with another about the kids, and how without the feeling of urgency that comes from coming out of a disadvantaged background, the kids will not have the same drive as people who come from India. I tend to agree with that. But the problem arises when the parents still refer to the same system to judge success and "making it" for their kids - what possessions they have, what their parents can provide for them, and where they end up in school and as careers.
Even the pursuit of education is not seen as an end in itself - the education is only a means to get the gold at the end of the rainbow. My expedition into a second career in public interest law, after working for a number of years and getting married, doesn't make sense in this calculus filled with derivatives and permutations of wealth and earning potential. Success is the nest egg you've built for yourself and the assets you can accumulate and pass down for the next generation.
Of course, I'm essentializing their experiences and lives after only brief encounters, but the threat of such moral bankruptcy still scares me. And more than anything, the clannishness can be suffocating. Expanding beyond the tiny concentric (or overlapping) circles of faith, language, and culture in which they find themselves could be a very good thing for their kids. But I guess, just like it was for some of us during our period, that's up to the kids to work out.
For me, I'll continue to offer up my own unorthodox opinions for anyone who takes the time to listen in my family, or read here.
Mar 3, 2005
Desis and Desi Organizations in Asian America
I've been thinking a lot about the current state of desis working in community-based settings around the nation, and specifically in NYC. The community infrastructure, at least through the lens of professionalized and staffed non-profit organizations, is still very limited, and not balanced around the nation. While there seem to be far more individuals entering the field, they are doing so without established channels for leadership development, nor even training and an introduction to the community. I fear that more folks are jumping in with hopes to create big waves and become the identifiable leadership before learning the ropes or engaging the broader social justice movement, and, to put it crudely, without paying their dues. There are always natural leaders in our midst, but without training in larger coalitions like Asian America, some folks have been questioning the value of these connections, either aligning with other interest groups, or going solo on a mission to make a brown voice heard above the cacophony of other groups.
When I began, and in the years before me, there was a very limited pool of South Asians who were interested in community-based work, and far from having South Asian-specific organizations in which to work, we took positions and interest in the pan-Asian mode of identity and coalition. There are a number of activists from that time, beginning in the late 80s on through the mid-nineties who took these positions and became more involved in the majority Chinese/Korean institutions within the Asian American communities in the East coast. These folks cut their teeth in the second wave of the Asian American movement (or whatever remained of it at that point), and were trained to recognize the commonalities between the communities, the uneasy alliances, and prospects for true coalition-building between the old order within Asian America and the new, more diverse young leadership.
Many of these desis came to more directly recognize the need for brown spaces, but not as an only resort. While the alliances between East and South Asians within Asian America are wrought with their own challenges, the need for political cohesion to form a critical mass of like-minded progressive/radical proponents for social change still seemed necessary, good, and worthwhile. Jump forward ten years, and the gap seems to be widening. I feel that the time at which it could have gone either was in the immediate aftermath of September 11th, but that's another post altogether. The point to remember here is that it wasn't always this difficult to have South Asians more involved in pan-Asian organizations and work, and it's a shame that in a city like New York, the principal pan-Asian organizations can't seem to hold onto their South Asian staff - with the holdouts who remain only biding their time, but seemingly uninvested in the bridging of the evident gap between the established communities and the new and emerging communities in the fragile alliance called Asian America.
On top of that, there are a lot of fledgling South Asian organizations that are forming, or splitting off from more established groups. With the funding landscape only becoming more and more difficult to navigate for new groups, specifically for agencies that work with communities that have come under so much scrutiny after the Patriot Act and other punitive measures have come into play. Foundations are stating overtly that they aren't interested in funding more South Asian groups - "why don't you learn to play nicely with one another?" is the general gist. So what to do? Some group leaders are coming together to talk about this soon, but there's so much mistrust, mixed history, and positioning going on that it's hard to figure out what's going to happen. Getting the groups to meet together isn't that difficult (unlike some communities), but getting them to work together in the long haul - that's a completely different, and far more difficult, proposition.
Not to mention that there seems to be a vacuum in the leadership structure, at least in New York City... where are all the progressive Desi men? But that's a future post...