Sunday, November 19, 2017

Week 9 - Jaselle Abuda

Jaselle Abuda
Professor Valverde
ASA 189F
18 November 2017
Question: Sometimes in branding, there is a cover-up to promote untruths. What are these lies or untruths in the Viet Nam case and how is it applied to your own research project?
The lies or untruths in the Viet Nam case is how America’s approach in legal and humanitarian compensations to those families who are affected by the nuclear war herbicide, Agent Orange, in hopes of reclaiming America. However, compensations are unequally distributed throughout the Vietnamese diaspora, as programs are mostly focused on Vietnamese Americans within the U.S. rather than the country of Viet Nam itself. As mentioned, “The programme extends only to those who have partially or totally lost the ability to work, children who have suffered deformities, and those who are not already claiming state benefits” (Palmer 7). Not only does America’s form of compensation lacks the aid the Vietnamese diaspora needs, but it neglects the fact that what they did was a warm crime. How it may be applied to our own research project is that legal reforms and the marginalization of Asian Americans may obscure statistical data of the whole Asian diaspora throughout the United States. The common marginalization of Asian Americans and the Asian diaspora as being the most successful and well-assimilated ethnic minority group in the United States perpetuates the Model Minority myth and normalizes the obscurities and anti-Asian sentiment.

Question: In the article, it was acknowledged that Agent Orange was a war crime, but why doesn’t Viet Nam propose and accuse America of being a terrorist as it seeks to “compensate” for their damages?


No comments:

Post a Comment