perhaps Manmohan requested to meet the Indian-Americans appointees. Do you know if this photo includes all of them? Maybe some of them refused.

abhi,

based on empirical data from a past life, i can safely assert that a bunch of those people really WANTED to be invited to that photo op.

when there was a state dinner a few years ago for a similar visit, every brown appointee, hill rat, association staffer, non-profit slave, lobbyist, donor...ad infinitum wanted THAT invite. my mentor, the least brown person i know, donned a sari for the occasion (the one and only time she did).

it's not as relevant to invite german-american appointees when the chancellor visits b/c most of the people who are part or all german aren't 1st or 2nd gen like us. we're closer to India. it's that simple. as my mother is fond of saying, by the time i have grandchildren, they won't be indian at all. and they won't have photo ops like this.

....for the same reason you guys blogged the Indian PMs visit and not the German Chancelor's !!!

Yeah, it might be a bit overreacting on your part. Who would have thought that the children of immigrants would be working in the White House or Congress? The Irish, Italians, and Jews faced alot more resistance from the powers that be. The pictures show far the U.S. has come in terms of opportunities for immigrants and their children.

Hi,

From my experience here in US, the jewish Americans, Italian Americans, and Irish Americans will be more than eager to pose with the leader their country of origin. I think you are over-reacting.

It is not uncommon for Jewish Americans to refer as "we" when they talk of Israel, even if they have never been there or perhaps once or so.

Kush

Yeah,
I mean in all honesty I would probably have said yes as well after a moment of internal conflict :) I guess I am just bothered that it has the feel of such a dog and pony show.

you're overreacting, but everyone is right, the analogy with jewish americans is better. i'm not indian, but like it or not in most of america "bangladeshi american" get's a blank stare, so i'm a de facto one according to whites (which is what many people here would argue matters in many ways, re: the "i'm not a muslim, but white man don't care" thread), and i don't personally think it is a good move in terms of assimilationism (americanism) to emulate the jewish community's double-loyalty* (a portion of the jewish community at least, many jews don't give jack about being jews or israel). i can understand how indian americans are concerned about the ISI sponsoring terrorism in pakistan, etc. and the impact that anti-outsourcing legislation might have on their relatives. it's human nature. so if the shoe fits. the downside of creating a coherent and organized subculture that can speak with a relatively steady and clear voice is that people will treat you as a block and not view you as much as individuals.

* zionist jews have a lot of media and marketing talent, as well as the implicit toleration of evangelical christian americans, so their bi-patriotism is accepted in a way that i think is going to be harder for any other group.

Can you say building constituencies? How many times have you heard that Indians are among the wealthiest groups in the United States? You don't think the Bush crew wants to peel them off the same way they're trying to peel Latinos off with "immigration reform"?

I think you're overreacting in thinking this is an Indian thing, but I don't think your cynicism is unjustified--it's electoral politics on the natioinal level, after all.

I hear Abhi on this one. Second-gen peeps are Americans first. Sure they maybe of Indian descent, but is that grounds for posing with the PM? And also what goes if one of your parents is Indian and the other is not?

If it were me, I would be conflicted too.

Abhi, I think I know what you mean, I had mixed reactions when I saw this picture. On one hand, I can totally imagine how these people would want to pose with the Indian prime minister. On the other, it's almost as if the Indian-Americans were herded together to pose for this photograph for the impression it would create of the administration.
THAT irks me, imagining someone saying, "Ooo! Find all the Indian-Americans in the administration and get them together for a photograph with Manmohan Singh."
I'm probably over-reacting.

i don't think a picture would exist with all the brownies and bush...but this was appropriate i think.. just to justify the diversity of his appointees.. its cheesy yes...but hell... it's brownie power in full force :)

After MTVDesi, it is DesiCurrent:

Gore: New TV Channel Won't Be Partisan

The young staff of reporters, producers and hosts includes Gotham Chopra, son of self-help guru Deepak Chopra and Laura Ling (Channel One News, MTV).

Photo-op: 5 minutes.
Future NRI/GOP contributions: Priceless.

Guest list below:

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash4.htm

German-Americans are better integrated into America than us Johnny-Come-Latelys. It's more of a show on the administration's part to show that we are indeed not marginalized in the government sector. However, I wonder, too, if placing us apart like this does not call attention to the fact that we are somehow different.

This from a person who enjoys her Indian ancestry but doesn't like the concept of race. *shrug*

I wonder if Americans think Deepak Chopra's son has anything to do with Batman.

For all you MIA fans, she's just been nominated for the prestigious Mercury Music Prize. Dizzee Rascal won 2 years back and MIA's been compared to him. Talvin Singh won in 99, up against Nitin Sawhney. But this year the Kaiser Chiefs will win. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the picture, I'm sorry.

Why dont Indian Prime Ministers ever wear a suit ? Vajpayee used to wear a ridiculous lungi and Manmohan Singh here is not in a suit either.
The only other foreign heads of state who dont wear suits are from the Gulf Sheikhdoms or from Africa.
How many media personalities or business personalities in India wear lungis to office ?
Image is very important in the media age. Even Musharraf wears a suit and not shalwar kameez when travelling abroad.

I guess I am just bothered that it has the feel of such a dog and pony show

It's politics, is it ever anything but?

It is not uncommon for Jewish Americans to refer as "we" when they talk of Israel

As the descendent of Jewish immigrants, I beg you to differentiate between Jews and ZIONISTS. They're not the same thing at all. Only Zionists would say "we" when referring to Israel.

You sow multiculturalism, you reap multiculturalism......on the one hand you want desis to identify with being desi, and then, when the larger culture recognizes desis as a group, it's bad? Can't have it both ways. I mean, everyone runs after the diversity tag these days - right and left both ( I even had a student I was interviewing use that word: "I want to come here because of the diversity of cases you see at this hospital". I never used to hear that word, and now I hear it all the time. Interesting phenomenon).

So now you have politicians say, oh, look how I've nominated a woman, latino, etc, etc. And then they tally them up at the end: I nominated 20 minorities! So, I nominated 50! I win! (and I say this as someone who is pleased to see a diverse group of people being recruited to public office. But politicians will be politicians, their share the same DNA whatever end of the spectrum they occur on.)

Do you suppose if this had been a picture with John Kerry and the same constitutients you would have felt the same thing?

(Not a snark, abhi, a genuine question. I think about that myself sometimes - how I'm willing to let things slide for someone I would might vote for and not for someone else. Come on, admit it, SMers. We all do it to some extent....it's a tough thing to fight, isn't it? Our own nasty preconceptions)

Ok, since GW isn't in the picture, I should amend that to: what if it wasn't Singh in the middle, but the American President? Then I suppose I would agree with you: cheesy, cheesy.

Ugh. I'd be a lousy politician. I'd insult everyone, tell them what I really think and never get any votes....it must be quite hard to do, really, for all that we make fun of politicians.

Oh, wait he is in the picture! Ha! I didn't even recognize him. I really do need those reading glasses I'm supposed to get.

Could it be that the 2nd generation Indians have 'shame' associating with India and as a result may be more eager to be called Americans, then other groups??

Dont take this as my assesment/judgement of 2nd generation americans.

In God father II I remember a scene where Italian Americans in a street are celebrating a festival and waving Italian flags. (The scene when DeNiro goes to kill the 'Boss' of the neighbourhood). I brought that up to show that the Italians may not be as eager in their second gen.

with the big caveat, of the fact that time is different now and Indian Immigration pattern is different than from other say Italian in early to middle last century.

MD does make a good point about you are a Desi if you identify yourself as such.
But regardless of who is at fault, I do agree with Abhi that his picture is a little insulting and a testament to the fact that the Second Generation Indian Americans have not yet cut their umbilical cord to India.
Also this has nothing to do with the Germans being here for longer than the Indians. It has all to do with the ability of the Europeans to melt completely in the American melting pot within a generation and also the tendency of the American general populace to accept the European immigrants as Americans.
How many people mention the fact that Albright or Kissinger were first generation immigrants who had spent over a decade in their native countries before they moved over to the US.
If Fareed Zakaria becomes the Secretary of State, can you imagine the number of stories about him which will mention the fact that he immigrated from India ?
Compare that to Albright and the fact that she immigrated to the US when she was 13.
Ok some of you will say that Albright does not have an accent. So what about Kissinger ? He has a much thicker German accent than Fareed. How many times do media stories mention the fact that Kissinger spent over a decade in Europe before he moved over to the US.
I think in the end its all about 'appearance'. Indians have a different color and look different. We will always stand out. 3rd or 4rth generation Indian Americans (presuming there is no outmarriage) will still stand out as much as a FOB from Patiala who came over day before yesterday.

Interesting Guest list.

A Tata. An Ambani. Plutocracy lives.

David Brooks from NYT (Bangalore is Flat! India is Flat! My wife is Flat!)

Fred Barnes from the Weekly Standard.

Sam Brownback

Brandon Chiller, a St. Louis Rams linebacker and his father Ram! (A Ram playing for the Rams, this has to be a joke.)

Tom Delay and Thomas Abraham Councilman from Sugar Land TX (SugarLand has the highest 5 of Asians of any non coastal US county)

Dough Feith (The stupidest Motherfucker in the world)

Journalist Raghubeer Goyal (reward for asking stupid questions?)

Bobby Jindal

Mrs. Indra Nooyi, President and CFO, PepsiCo Inc (Don't forget to give the President the middle finger)

ChristinI B. Rocca

Dentist Shabbit Hashim (Indian Muzlims represent)

The Rev. Dr. Bernard Malik, President, Federation of Indian American Christian Organizations of North America

Dr. Rajwant Singh, National Chairman, Sikh Council on Religion and Education (A sikh, a Muslim and a christian walk into a bar...)

Farooq Kathwari, CEO of hotel chain (we only need one Muzlim, please go back home)

And lots of Indian Doctors. Dick Cheney need not worry all that Mango ice cream will clog up his heart.

Dough Feith (The stupidest Motherfucker in the world)

I disagree. Douglas Zionist Feith might be a crazy Mo Fo but he has nothing on Sam Brownback.
Sam Brownback is a Medieval Cave Man from Kansas who plans to run for the presidency in 2008 and is the darling of the religious right.

What do you Indian Americans (I'm a Brit) think of Bobby Jindal? From what I've read - which is admittedly nothing that recent - he's a tit. What are your views?

And how do I get invited to one of these here shindigs? I'm not important or rich. Or American.

Could it be that the 2nd generation Indians have 'shame' associating with India and as a result may be more eager to be called Americans, then other groups??

um, no.

It was Thomas Friedman who had gone bonkers with his The World is Flat thingy and not David Brooks. But Brooks is as nutty as any other so called opinion journos.

Ummm
Al Mujahid - When Vajpayee was in America, he wore a suit. So did Narasimha Rao. And I do believe...that Singh is wearing a SUIT. He's wearing what is known as a Nehru Coat - which is very fashionable to wear, and very unfortunately misappropriated by Dr. Evil. But it's still an f-ing suit. And I'm curious - why the fuck does he have to wear a suit? You should read The Little Prince by Antoine Saint-Exupery (or something). I'm pretty sure you're mentioned in it.

David Brooks from NYT (Bangalore is Flat! India is Flat! My wife is Flat!)

I think you're confusing Brooks with Friedman.

Surprising that Blackwill was left out. I know he resigned in disgrace but still...I'd imagine he's one of the key persons responsible for the Bush administration's extraordinary handling of India at this critical time in US geopolitical history

Al Mujahid - When Vajpayee was in America, he wore a suit. So did Narasimha Rao.

Ok. My bad.

Ikram,

"Farooq Kathwari, CEO of hotel chain (we only need one Muzlim, please go back home)"

Kathwari is not a CEO of hotel chain but CEO of Ethan Allen. That over-priced furniture store. He has Jihadi tendancies. His 19 year old son was killed in Afghanistan for Jihad He also ALLEGEDLY funds Kashmiri seperatists.

PS: I hate to refere some thing that has 'Daniel Pipes' reference but I dont have time for more research.

PS: I hate to refere some thing that has 'Daniel Pipes' reference but I dont have time for more research.

Dont worry about it. He has an Arabic name and hes Muslim. As Friedman wisely noted last week, if you are a Muslim, you are a suspect unless proven otherwise.

Text of Dr Manmohan Singh's address to the Joint Session of Congress.

Yes that’s a MAJOR over reaction from your part. After all Mr. Singh is well respected person and it will be an honour for sure.

Why wouldn't you want to pose with the PM of India?

...Just because he is from India and so were my parents?

Uhh yes.

Does one have to be rid of ALL ties with the country of origin of parents/whatever in order to just BE American? I mean, you can go to absurd lengths with that logic, purging yourself of any Indian influences in search of a state of "pure" Americanness...I find the implications for identity and all the attendent anxieties revealed by this post troubling. American identity isn't so tenuous that a mere acknowledgement of immigrant stories and histories has the power to unravel it...

Without wanting to re-open the can of vermiculation that is the identity debate (although not sure if it closed at any point), are any of you familiar with the Tebbit test?

I agree with Abhi, Saurev in comment #8, and others who said something similar. This smacks of something pretty cynical.

Here's my litmus test -how important are those staffers? Are they South Asia speciliazing policy wonks? Constitution parsing legal experts? Key advisors on GW's latest social-welfare reform bill?
If they are, then fine, great. (And no doubt they all wanted to be there. You don't decide to work for the White House and turn down anything with the president, no matter who the other guy is.)

But I think most (not all, just most) of those happy brown faces were drawn from the secretarial pool, mailroom, ranks of junior staffers to unimportant congretional districts...the make-me-coffee-and-xerox-this echelons.

In which case, yeah..it's pandering to the Indian PM, opportunistic re desi donors, and rather patronizing overall.

Also, if I'm not mistaken, this group is from various South Asian countries, yeah? If the Italian President came over, would they invite Spanish, Portugese, and French staffers cause he's "from their part of the world"? Don't think so.

I could be wrong, but this *is* the same administration that flaunted a rainbow of diversity ON stage at its convention for the cameras, conveniently ignoring the sea of white below.

Yes, I confused Freidman and Brooks. I apologize for calling David Brooks' wife Flat. She is not Flat.

I screwed up the Feith quote too. It comes from from General Tommy Franks, who called Feith "the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the earth". I apologize to Feith's mother.

I like the Nehru jacket (top half of a Shirvani). Much better than a western suit. Even better than that is the Safari Suit. All Indians should wear a safari suit whern visiting the USA.

That MIM is freaky. Anyone with a Muslim name is monitored by these freaks. I'm changing my name -- maybe something like Hank.

"But I think most (not all, just most) of those happy brown faces were drawn from the secretarial pool, mailroom, ranks of junior staffers to unimportant congretional districts...the make-me-coffee-and-xerox-this echelons."

First off, that is awfully presumtious of you to try and guess their professional background. And if they are secretaries and junior staffers, why can't they have their picture taken with Bush and Singh? Or are such courtesies extended only to our social betters?

It is certainly better than the treatment meted out to the staff of the Four Seasons in Boston when Narasimha Rao was PM. On his visit (1994?), it was rumored his staff asked the hotel management that no black employees be assigned to the PM's suite. But hey, I guess it's always easier to get on Bush's case for pandering (but if the Dems do it, it's called outreach).

Let's not turn this into a Republican/Democrat thing. Pandering is a bipartisan sport.

"Surprising that Blackwill was left out. I know he resigned in disgrace but still...I'd imagine he's one of the key persons responsible for the Bush administration's extraordinary handling of India at this critical time in US geopolitical history"

Blackwill wrote an extensive essay on the new India-U.S. relationship in the current issue of The National Interest.

"The India Imperative"
http://www.nationalinterest.org/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=1ABA92EFCD8348688A4EBEB3D69D33EF&tier=4&id=9EA0A265EC604928ADC70093025778D1

Bong breaker, the Tebbit test was whether an immigrant who chose to live in England would support England or his country of origin in a game of cricket. Luckily for our "South Asian" friends here, the intersection of major competitive sports played in the U.S. with those in the sub-continent is a null set...unless the crew here is willing to include Japan in South Asia, in which case there is baseball :)

Dick Cheney yawns...

Hmmm...

Well, face it, Abhi. German-Americans (or any Euro-Americans) are still a lot more 'accepted' because of similarities in looks/culture etc. Brownies look different and that DOES make a difference. You didn't have German-American internment camps during WWII, did ya?

But then again, posing with the Indian PM does not necessarily mean he is 'their' PM. It does seem that 2-gens are in a unique position of being diplomatic liason between the 2 countries, and I can see why there would be a few people who wouldn't mind performing that role.

Ok, I'm a 1-gen, so my opinion does not count for much, but I do have many ABC friends who are glad to attend events of the China or Taiwan embassies.

However, one of my colleagues is half-chinese, half-irish, and she always goes on and on about the irish half of the family, and very little about the chinese half. I asked her about it and she's like: 'It's a question of the foreignness which is somehow closer to mainstream here'. Primarily, according to her, US is a derivative of Euro/Greco-Roman values and culture, so that is always going to be more acceptable.

Let's not turn this into a Republican/Democrat thing. Pandering is a bipartisan sport.

In this context, I agree, given the community we're talking about. But they two parties generally pander on different things, based on what their consultants tell them their weaknesses are. In surface level ways, greasy Democrat politicians are more likely to do a "Michael Dukakis on the tank" and greasy Republicans are more likely to pander to racial minorities.

This smacks of something pretty cynical.

It's a political photo-op. It's inherently cynical, but it's probably the least cynical thing the Bush Administration did all of that day.

Not to send us off on a tangent but while we are contemplating let me ask this question: The last time the Chinese President came on a State visit to the U.S. were the Chinese American appointees called in for a similar picture? I don't know the answer. They are more similar to us in that many Chinese Americans are only a couple generations removed from China. I wonder if the fact that China is Communist would play in to such a photo-op decision.

Incidentally there is a funny story involving the Chinese President, the Secret Service, and my brother during the Clinton admin. :)

Not to send us off on a tangent but while we are contemplating let me ask this question: The last time the Chinese President came on a State visit to the U.S. were the Chinese American appointees called in for a similar picture? I don't know the answer.

A more entertaining question is if Mr. Prime Minister will round up all the American backpackers in the Delhi area to pose with Mr. Bush if/when he comes to visit :)

Do you think they presented PM Singh mithai? And what will they be having for dinner? If I were on a state visit, that would be much more important to me than anything else :)

I think I should go eat lunch.

Why the assumption that we would want to pose with “our” Prime Minister?

i think it's the natural Indian tendency to pose for any and all pics regardless if you're supposed to be in it or not. I know when I go to Delhi and I am about to take a picture, there are 20 ppl in the background in proper pose and no smile. It's almost as if I can stop time w/ a camera...literally ppl will stop doing what they do and all face the lens...so I'm assuming this is an evolved trait that we carried across the pond in our Indian genes.

Mathematiker, that's the one and indeed you're right, for Americans it ain't too hard. But I wonder if the US had a handy cricket team...?

Anyway, it seems a bit off topic now so I'll say my piece about the Tebbit test another time. Just my two cents (pence?) on the South Asian/Desi/Indian American debate/argument/palava.

Not to follow up on that tangent but to answer Abhi #48, my take is that politics & ideology certainly do come into the picture. The Chinese president is head of a (nominally) communist country, and thus it is unlikely for 'traitors' who migrated to the Land of the Capitalisy Free would be welcome around him. Definitely not 5/10 years ago - but maybe it's not the same now. There is no 'betrayal' involved in migrating from India to USA...ummm this is just a misinformed "1st-Gen"'s take on that...Curious to know what other people think of that.

Democrats don't need to showcase diversity, it's right infront of their eyes.

It's a bit silly to constantly use analogies to other ethnic groups. Apples and oranges. Ofcourse there's not going to be a mass rollout of German Americans when the Chancellor's in town. Cuz when was the last time you heard someone refer to themselves as German-American. Exactly. Because unless you've been isolated in some genetic ghetto, your grandparents have probably mixed with other white mutts. Ergo you're an American. As for Jews (non-Zionists), the ones that I know don't have any connection to Israel, why should they?? Then the question arises of more recent Asian immigrants. Maybe a Chinese-American wouldn't feel kinship with a Chinese leader. But I can certainly think of other white ethnic communities that still have a deep rooted connection to lands where their forebearers came from. It's pretty clear everyone in the photo-op wanted to be there. If you're an underpaid staffer that was asked to come, and you somehow feel ethnically marginalised get some balls and speak up.

I'm a little puzzled no one has mentioned the obvious, which is that pictures like this are purely a fundraising ploy designed to get Indian American $$$$ into the coffers of the RNC during the next election go-round.

I have my suspicions that even the pomp and circumstance of the state dinner is oriented to that. It allows Bush to make Indians think he's pro-India, even as he continues to work with Musharraf on terrorism (or be played by Musharraf, depending on your perspective).

It wouldn't work with German Americans for reasons about half of the 53 comments above have already explored.

Guests and menu at the White House dinner given by President and Mrs. Bush for Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Mrs. Gursharan Kaur, as released by the White House:

Chilled Asparagus Soup
Lemon Creme
Chappellet Chardonnay Napa Valley 2003
Pan-roasted Halibut
Ginger-Carrot Butter
Basmati Rice with Pistachios and Currants
Herbed Summer Vegetables
Trio of Celery Hearts, Leaves and Roots
Hartford Court Pinot Noir Arrendell 2002
Salad of Bibb Lettuces
Citrus Vinaigrette
Lotus Blossom
Mango, Chocolate-Cardamom and Cashew
Ice Creams
Mer Soleil Late 2001

Uggh... chilled asparagus soup! I dunno about all y'all but I'd be ordering room service as soon as I got back to my hotel room.

a few points

there is a lot of talk here about german americans because of an offhand comment earlier.* germans americans are a diverse immigrant stream.

a) ben franklin complained about the unassimibility of germans early on ("pennsylvania dutch" are germans, deutsch ~ dutch, see, anglo-whiteys are so ignorant).

b) there was a stream of immigration after 1848 than pretty much ended before 1900. much of this was before 1871, when germany became a unified nation. this an important point when comparing past immigrant streams and modern ones, germans arrived as germans, but also as former citizens of baden-baden, bavaria, prussia, austria. their 'dual' loyalty was weak because they didn't have a national state they were emigrating from.

c) nevertheless, german language schools were relatively prominent as late as WW I. during this period many german language schools in the USA were closed, and there was a wave of anti-german hate crimes. many german americans changed their names to be more more "american." (ie; i had a gf whose family went from reichmann to richman, frankfurter became hot dog).

so, you have a 60 year period where the majority of german americans were integrated into the US mainstream. that's about 3 generations. you've had 4+ generations since then. so, when someone says that "german americans" are the most numerous group in the USA in terms of ancestry, they mean people who are 1/4 german, or 1/2 german, or 3/8 german. and often the more knowledgable people will say "my ancestry is prussian" instead of german because that is how their grand-parents and great-parents will have heard it from their "german" grand-parents.

the contrast with browns is obviously that almost all of our families emigrated from well crystallized nation-states and went through the period of ethnogenesis induced by modernity. yes, there was goethe and mozart and beethoven, and german nationlism did flower after 1848, but i think the analogy is sketchy because when german americans arrived they really had relatively weak ties to the "old country" which was formed after their departure (usually, most germans arrived between 1848 and the civil war, beer replaced hard liquor in the 1850s as the national beverage). in some ways, this resembles italian americans, who tend to associate regionally because the nation of italy was only 1-2 generations old when they left for america (remember, regional dialects of italian are almost unintelligible with standard italian derived from florentine).

does race matter? i think it does. we are "visible minorities." but aside from the biological realities (i think there are some), i think there is a lot of (though not total) wiggle room in the sociological interpretation. when the first syrian immigrants arrived in boston the 18th century the local observors noted that barring the chinese, they were the most exotic and alien people to show up on america's shores. now, arab americans have a phenotypic overlap with european americans, but there is still a difference. but people like ralph nader and casey kasem pretty much "pass" as post-ethnic (though casey kasem is an ethnic activist for his druze community in his spare time). unlike jewish americans, arab americans (the vast majority have of whom have been christian) have assimilated pretty well on society's terms. one primary reason is that like the german americans above, they have weak ties to their nations of origin, many arrived from the general region of "syria" before it had been separated fully into the nations of syria, lebanon, israel and jordan.

the tie-in with arab americans is that if brown people intermarry with other groups, many of the first generation who have one white parent will probably fall in the rough physical range of "arab american." barring name, they will likely be able to walk around without eliciting any wonderment at their physical appearence. so, i predict that 3-4 generations from now, more of the descendents of people chattering away on this message board will be blonde than know what chutney is (aside from what the american milieu would inform).

* full disclosure, my last two girlfriends have been german americans, and my history minor mostly consisted of german history courses (early modern)

Where is the Tandoori Chicken in the Menu ???????

he Chinese president is head of a (nominally) communist country, and thus it is unlikely for 'traitors' who migrated to the Land of the Capitalisy Free would be welcome around him.

the emigrant community of chinese from taiwan and much of southeast asia would not be pro-PRC, but i've heard that the PRC does have a lot of support and ties to the young people in the chinese american community (which causes tensions with the anti-communist generations). and remember, chinese is communist-in-name-only. ideology doesn't mean jack, it is becoming close to a ethnic-nationalist state from what i can see.

* full disclosure, my last two girlfriends have been german americans

How tall were they ?

Razib,
I was going to mention the Pennslyvania Dutch, it should be said in the 20th Century considering who we were facing in the two world wars the P.D. didn't bother to correct the misnomer. All in the name of assimilation. Just as other European arrivals de-ethnified their names as soon as they got off the boat. Literally.
The nation-state argument is a very salient one. It certainly explains why my parents are more nationalistic to their country (India) than my grandparents, who had much more provincial cooncerns.

pennsylvania dutch" are germans, deutsch ~ dutch,

I'm off on a tangent here..... Speaking of the Penn Dutch , I visited an Amish community in rural MN this Sunday. They still live the same way their ancestors who sailed over from Deutchland in the 19th century did. They spurn anything modern - no electricity, no automobiles, no mechanized farm implements. They still wear dresses and hats right out of 'Sleepy Hollow' (actually it loked older than the 'Sleepy Hollow' styles), speak archaic German (even their schooling is in German), trot along merrily in horse-drawn buggies, and the men have bushy beards, no moosh, and a very unusual hairdo, sorta like a hat.

But hell, it was an amazing experience - the whole atmosphere was one of innocence, and uncorruptedness, and being one with nature. They are apprently people who thought the Protestant Reformation hadnt gone far enough in renouncing materialism, and so decided to settle in the New World and live as ascetically as possible. Have to say they are doing a remarkable job till now.

How tall were they ?

5'7. y?

yes, al mujahid...WHY? :)

How tall were they ?

5'7. y?

yes, al mujahid...WHY? :)

Because a lot of Germanic women are over 5'10 which makes it difficult for us brownies to date them.
My Germanic wife is 6'1 and when she wears high heels she towers over me and my family.

height differences between groups (on average) probably explain why men of various groups have a harder time getting dates outside their group. and why women often do not (asians).

I wonder what people of Indian descent who came over from countries like Fiji, Guyana, Kenya, SA, etc. would say to posing with the Indian PM and how it would affect their sensibilities.

the mentor i mentioned wayyy back in comment TWO is an american-born fijian. she happily went to the state dinner, etc. she saw the invitation as a privilege, the same way her indian-american colleague did.

i'm pretty sure people from the diaspora would be happy to pose for a pic-- it's not as much a question of self-definition as it is a very washington/political thing to do. all of those people in the above photograph got a copy of this and framed it for their office-- i know, b/c when i took my interns around in the summer of 2002, such pictures were proudly pointed out as we toured the hill.

beyond that, my dad didn't put up my graduation portrait, but he professionally-framed my pictures with willie brown, gov. pete wilson etc. that's a brown thing to do. put brown people in washington and the proclivity to photo-op with anyone of substance is squared.

i think, re: diaspora, it depends on the part of the diaspora. east africans, mauritians and fijians have all retained relatively pretty close ties with brownland (saying 'india' is pretty weird because the india many left was british india, which includes pakistan and bangladesh). my readings suggest that west indian browns from trinidad and guyana tend to be more distant because there hasn't been much back and forth. many trinidad indians (for example) have converted to western christian traditions and do not know any indian languages. i knew one guyanese brown chick as an acquaintance, and she did express irritation about how people expected her to know about india all the time since her grandparents were the last to remember "that country."

razib, your analysis is really useful, but it omits the changed circumstances around race in general in the United States in 2005 vs. when Germans or Irish or other communities were in the same position as Indians--and more broadly, desis--are today. I'm not really sure what those changed circumstances are, but it would be hard to deny, at the very least, that race had a different role in American society mid 19th century or early 20th century than it does today (e.g. maybe partly mitigate the "physical visibility" issue for upper class / middle class desis).

i predict that 3-4 generations from now, more of the descendents of people chattering away on this message board will be blonde than know what chutney is (aside from what the american milieu would inform).

Given migration flows, the changing statuses of India, the U.S. (and other countries and regions), economics, etc., 60-80 years is far too long time to usefully project into the future like that.

But in the near future, the rate at which desis marry other desis might increase from the data you presented on that other thread because of increasing community spaces (like SM, SALGA, etc.), increased desi population, the increased prestige and power of South Asia's societies, etc. Anecdotal experience: in the bangali community i come from, the 2nd gen people who came of age in the 70s and 80s married mostly White people, but people near my age (i'm 27) are more frequently coupling with other desis than i remember the older folks doing (I think--I'm wearing my pro-intramarriage aunty goggles).

My hunch is that there's a sharp change in people's life experiences from folks 1/2 a generation older than me to people my age. Maybe it's social (i.e. life in ethnic enclaves in queens vs. life in ny suburbs) or wealth or birth order or parents' age or something else entirely--i'm not sure.

height differences between groups (on average) probably explain why men of various groups have a harder time getting dates outside their group. and why women often do not (asians).

Height difference plays an important part. However the widespread emasculation of Asian men in the popular American culture hasnt helped their cause either.
Combine that with the conventional notions of what passes as 'good looking' in the US and its no surprise that the outmarriage rate in Asian men (2nd generation) is abysmal when compared to the outmarriage rate of Asian females.

If you look at campuses around the country, Asian FOBs (South and East Asian) get no play from the white american women (and black/hispanic women too for that matter) when compared to the play FOB Arab or FOB Latinos get (excluding the mexicans) from the American women.
The more caucasoid looking men get more play than non caucasoid looking men in general. (Arabs and Latinos are more caucasoid looking than South/East Asians) Blacks might be an exception to this phenomenon though.

put brown people in washington and the proclivity to photo-op with anyone of substance is squared.

You mean power, not substance. I've never heard a similar story about framing pictures with Jane Jacobs.

AM, there are multiple components, but i think the "masculinity factor" is the most important, which plays to the reinforcing nature of stereotypes. but there is a cultural difference that predates the east asian migration to the USA, the chinese mandarin was a different archetype than the martial gentlemen in the west. while herakles was blackened by his exposure to the sun during his labors, the chinese mandarin was pround his long nails (no labor) and fair skin (no outdoor work).

but it omits the changed circumstances around race in general in the United States in 2005 vs. when Germans or Irish or other communities were in the same position as Indians--and more broadly, desis--are today. I'm not really sure what those changed circumstances are, but it would be hard to deny, at the very least, that race had a different role in American society mid 19th century or early 20th century than it does today (e.g. maybe partly mitigate the "physical visibility" issue for upper class / middle class desis).

yes, i agree. let me extend my analysis a bit, if you think of "ethnic identity" as a bundle of traits (race, language, religion, habits, etc.) i think there are objective differences that can be plotted out on a taxonomical tree using "characters". so, for example, a tree with english, scottish and irish would probably have the irish be the outgroup.* if you add the french, the irish would be included in the english-scottish-irish cluster vs. the french. and so on. i think there are objective differences.

but, times change, and perception of Other change. 150 years ago americans were a protestant nation, and there was a lot of fear of "popper." this included french canadians emigrated into new england, german catholics into the midwest and of course the irish. by 1960 the US had elected a catholic president, and it had transitioned to a christian identity. today, i would say it is judeo-christian (on average). objectively not much has changed as regards the differences between catholicism and protestantism, but the cognitive salience has decreased a great deal as perceptions of difference dampened.

so, objectively islam, hinduism or brown people might be far more alien to the WASP main-stock of this country than the irish were, but renormed for the times they might occupy the same cognitive space. of course, the outward paradigm that this country approaches outsiders with has also changed a great deal, so, to some extent apples and oranges. but, i think analogies can work, they only need to used judiciously and be well qualified.

* most scots never spoke gaelic, before i get that objection of the outgroup. lowland scotch dialect (before recent anglicization) derived from the ancient anglian germanic dialects of northern england.

popery, not, popper :)

the chinese mandarin was a different archetype than the martial gentlemen in the west

On a side note, speaking of martial people, the English had classified the Rajputs, Jats, Pathans, Moguls and Awans as the martial races of India. The Indian army during the Raj, had a disproportionate number of people from the above ethnicities as the English considered them to be more fit for martial duties.

On a side note, speaking of martial people, the English had classified the Rajputs, Jats, Pathans, Moguls and Awans as the martial races of India. The Indian army during the Raj, had a disproportionate number of people from the above ethnicities as the English considered them to be more fit for martial duties.

part of this was because the sikhs of punjab, for example, were loyal to them during the 1857 mutiny, while the other sepoy levies were not. but the armies of the east india company were disproportionately bengali and tamil (often with mixed-race "british" officers), because those were the regions under earliest british control.

off topic, but a fact i learned today, the head of the iranian military is traditionally always part of the 1/4 turkic minority because the perception that the turks are people of war (while persians are people of poetry).

Aside from posing for pictures, which has been identified as a brown trait, I think there is a larger pciture(no pun intended) here - people being selected just because they happen to be brown or of Indian origin. To some degree I think it points to the level of assimilation of a person of Indian origin. And I concur with Abhi especially with the issue of divided loyalty.

AM, interesting comments about South Asian men. So it wasn't just me. :)

re: German-American assimiliation

My maternal grandmother was born to German immigrants and raised speaking German as a first language in a predominantly German-American midwest town, fittingly named Germantown. Following WWII, societal pressure compelled her and many of her relatives to assimilate, proving loyalty and all that. She told me some of her relatives (American born) thought Hitler was the shit. She stopped speaking German at 18 and has now completely forgotten the language.
My paternal grandmother was born in Germany to a Jewish family, escaped to America and subsequently forgot her German as well. Needless to say she had reason to distance herself from her German heritage. It has always been a point of fascination to me that they managed to forget an entire language through purposeful neglect, for entirely different but related reasons.

part of this was because the sikhs of punjab, for example, were loyal to them during the 1857 mutiny, while the other sepoy levies were not. but the armies of the east india company were disproportionately bengali and tamil (often with mixed-race "british" officers), because those were the regions under earliest british control.

Punjab only fell to the British in 1949 so the 1857 revolt was mostly centered in the Bengali regiments (most of which were dissolved after 1859)

haha i wonder if bradon chillar actually went.

Of course the real reason for this picture was the one Amardeep mentioned earlier. In case anyone has any doubt that he was correct in his statment I submit to you exhibit B. What a coincidence that he just happened to be invited on the same day.

I dunno -- it's better than the fact that the last time an Indian Prime Minister visited, Star Jones was invited to the welcoming dinner for some reason. (And I wasn't!)

well, if star jones was invited that means there must have been smaller portions for everyone else. and since indians are kind of thin by stereotype....

(totally unrelated disclaimer) When was the last time you guys noticed an Indian PM and his/her spouse with the American First couple??!!!

Nehru was a widower, Indira Gandhi was a widow, Narasimha Rao was a widower and Atal ji was a bachelor when they visited the US. Rajiv and Sonia were the only Indian first 'couple' to visit.

Are IPs blocked here?

The real question is what happened to all the non-Indians who wanted to meet Singh and got elbowed aside by Indian-Americans who knew they needed a photo with him to show their moms.

Man, Abhi, you sure know how start threads :)

I think it's a slight overreaction, and I agree with a lot of people that it has to do with money, ambition, and just the idead of posing with the US president and the Indian PM.

Btw, if you reallllly want to dig into it here are links to the other state dinners that Bush has hosted.

Also, it seems that NPR might be doing a India based stories while the PM is here on it's Marketplace segments. Here are the links for Monday and Tuesday. I'm not sure if they are doing a week long thing or not. Monday's piece seems to go along with the intent of this thread...sort of the, "ooooh look, Indians really do exist"

Looking at the guest list of the Polish state dinner, there are a lot fewer Polish-Americans there than there were Indian-americans for Manmohan. (But they did invite Duke's Coach K!). A few politicians and diplomats (Mikulski, Brezinski) and one or two guys from the Polish-American association. Otherwise it was mostly businessmen (Sanford Weil of Citibank, etc).

Why the difference? Are Indians more desparate to hang out with 'their' PM, or is that just the perception at the GWB white House?

Text of Manmohan Singh's Speech at a Reception, Tuesday Evening

Looking at the guest list of the Polish state dinner, there are a lot fewer Polish-Americans there than there were Indian-americans for Manmohan. (But they did invite Duke's Coach K!). A few politicians and diplomats (Mikulski, Brezinski) and one or two guys from the Polish-American association. Otherwise it was mostly businessmen (Sanford Weil of Citibank, etc).

Why the difference? Are Indians more desparate to hang out with 'their' PM, or is that just the perception at the GWB white House?

I think one of the major differences as other people have noted, is the generational gap, i.e. how many more 1-2 generations Indians are there in the US as opposed to Polish. I don't see why anyone would see this as desparation, it's just part of the game. Sometimes you have to toot your own horn to get ahead, and if your ambitious and want to get into those arenas, then you have to go and get it.

First off, that is awfully presumtious of you to try and guess their professional background. And if they are secretaries and junior staffers, why can't they have their picture taken with Bush and Singh? Or are such courtesies extended only to our social betters?

KXB, I think you misread my statement. My point was that it's insulting to the Indian PM if some guy from the mailroom is brought up to meet him simply on the basis of shared color/ethnic background. The implication is that a head of state is basically the same as a stockboy because color neutralizes stature. And that somehow GW deserves a pat on the back for his "appointees."

Like I said, I DON'T KNOW if this is the case. It's just a guess, and a cynical one at that.

This has NOTHING to do with "social betters" and I'm rather surprised that you misunderstood my point so badly. I speak from my own experiences as an envelope-licker and coffee-getter...who got to meet important South Asian authors because the higher ups wanted to show-off the brown faces on staff. Why, I have no idea. To dispell a lily-white rep? To reach across the cultural divide? I dunno..

Anyway, jolly good for me, yaar? But the poor author would of course know that I was an entry-level fart, and we'd make excrutiating small talk, feeling like performing monkeys, to the self-congratulatory beams of the muckety-mucks.

So like I said, it's my litmus test.

Don't think he misread you at all. You didn't exactly paint a nuanced picture:

But I think most (not all, just most) of those happy brown faces were drawn from the secretarial pool, mailroom, ranks of junior staffers to unimportant congretional districts...the make-me-coffee-and-xerox-this echelons.

Fair enough. I'm still trying to juggle snarky with nuanced. Not enough room in one post for both, yeah? Not unless I bore you all by explaning my explanations, forcing you to scroll down endlessly...

The Bush administration may have recognised India as a responsible state with advanced nuclear technology but it is far from recognising India as a legitimate and responsible nuclear weapon state - Indian Express

) ben franklin complained about the unassimibility of germans early on ("pennsylvania dutch" are germans, deutsch ~ dutch, see, anglo-whiteys are so ignorant).
Are you being sarcastic? I could cut and paste the posters to this site splitting hairs ad nauseum as to whom in India belongs to what group.

Everyone is so fucking busy finding differences with each other,-- and then they wonder why there is no revolution or progress.

Well look in the fucking mirror.

I do hope you were just trying to be ironic.