Against the Clock: Immigrant welfare recipients face looming time limit (in National News) District 3 Dollars: Supervisor unveils allocations in new S.F. city budget (in Bay Area News) H-1B Workers Face Uncertain Future (in Business) The Vertical Ray of the Sun Reaches for New Heigts (in A&E) Lead Editorial: Do you know where Visitacion Valley is? (in Opinion)

Asian American Does Not Equal Chinese American

Dear Editor: This is in response to Ryan-J Shih’s letter “Identity Crisis?” (June 28), criticizing Emil Guillermo’s column and his own sense of identity as a Filipino American. No more than an hour before reading this letter, I was discussing with another Pinoy friend about the failure of many East Asians to acknowledge the fact that “Asian American” does not equal “Chinese American.” The concept of Asian American pan-ethnic solidarity is a flawed one when we constantly uphold a Sinocentric point of view.

Shih’s ignorance of Filipino and Filipino American culture, politics and sensibilities is transparent, and frankly, racist. I also find ridiculous Shih’s assumption that Guillermo’s desire to be “Mexican” is based on his surname. As much as Shih did not choose his family’s name, Emil did not either. Thanks to Spanish — not “Mexican” — colonization, “Guillermo” is a perfectly Filipino name. And again thanks to the Spanish, who simultaneously colonized Mexico and much of South America, it is no coincidence that Filipinos and Latinos do, indeed, share a converging phenotype.

Just as Shih attacks Guillermo’s “fervent desire to separate himself from the Chinese,” it is apparent that Shih’s diatribe stems from a fervent desire to homogenize the Asian American voice into one that dares not speak of the internal marginalization of communities in the API sphere, such as Southeast Asians, South Asians, Pacific Islanders, hapas, queer APIs — and yes, Filipinos.

Thank you, AsianWeek, for continuing to support a diverse and critical collection of voices (even that of Shih’s).

Chris Bucoy Brown
San Francisco

Most Endangered List

Dear Editor: U.S. government policy, which began in the 1800s to abolish native languages as an assimilation effort, was largely successful. Many languages died out abruptly. Even today, more languages vaporize as children, influenced by television, the Internet and eventually college, no longer see a need to retain a native tongue that cannot be used in mainstream society and has a limited number of speakers.

The battle for linguistic preservation is immense, especially with few native speakers remaining, the lack of funding for programs, and the dearth of support in schools. Adding to the problem are increasing numbers of parents who insist their children speak English at home.

The article “Death of the Mother Tongue” (June 28), about the Eyak language being down to one elderly speaker, is heartbreaking. Even in our own backyard, the Washoe Tribe near Lake Tahoe will not re-open its school this fall if funding is unavailable. The Indigenous Language Institute of Santa Fe, New Mexico, was founded in 1992 to promote public awareness of the crisis and help develop programs. The focus is on youth and the need for children to learn their language, which boosts self-esteem, while prolonging their culture. The organization’s Web address is www.ipola.org. Saving cultures is as vital as saving condors or redwoods, even if stories on cultural survival rarely appear in the mainstream press.

Eddie Foronda
San Francisco

Remembering Maria Ann Hsiao

Dear Editor: It saddens me to write this letter, but I feel I must do so. The death of Maria Ann Hsiao was senseless (“Remembering Maria Ann Hsiao,” June 21). This young flower will not bloom. I did not know Miss Hsiao, but I felt a loss in my heart. Please stop the violence in our society. Miss Hsiao wanted a world full of peace and love. I pray now she will get that.

Gerald Williams
San Francisco

Pursuing the American Dream

Dear Editor: I was astounded to read about the drive to force DryClean Depot out of business in northern Virginia (“Korean American Dry Cleaners in Fairfax Unite Against Competition,” June 14). The appearance of the said establishment has, according to AsianWeek reporter Ethen Lieser, ignited “fear and resentment” among the Korean American community. The clear implication is that DryClean Depot would deprive Korean Americans of their opportunity to “put bread on the table, educate their children and achieve the American dream.” The fact that an enterprising immigrant from Guatemala can make a viable business by charging just $1.75 for dry cleaning a coat, that might cost as much as $10 in one of the Korean American shops, is now apparently cause for protest and censure. And that, in my opinion, is nothing short of shameful.

I find myself asking the simple question, “Why?” Why, in a country that prides itself on hard work, self-determination and free will, would anyone believe that such an entrepreneur should not be allowed to pursue his version of the American dream? Could it possibly be because this person is Latino in origin instead of Asian? That’s certainly a hateful thought. Further, why would anyone believe that consumers should be forced to pay more than five times as much for dry cleaning? More to the point, does anyone in the “Korean American community” mentioned so often in the article, believe in the free market system? I’m certain that a large percentage does, and if so, do these people really feel it is the government’s job to bail them out of their difficult situation?

Sungkyu Yun, the executive director of the National Korean American Service Education Consortium, suggests in the article that the government should “handle the situation carefully.” I couldn’t agree more. And in my view, that means letting a truly free, competitive market take its course. Anything else is contrary to the principles that have made this country the immigrant’s destination of choice for centuries.

Tom Donald
San Francisco