| 
Yale University, as President Levin often remarks, is a “laboratory of leadership.” Among the many extracurricular opportunities at Yale, the challenges of leadership are particularly profound and difficult in the area of ethnic organizations. At a place such as Yale, where ethnic pride is dually admired and disdained, groups like the South Asian Society have the responsibility of bridging differences while still appreciating those same differences. It is an enormous responsibility?one that South Asian organizations, at Yale and elsewhere, sadly have not met. South Asia is not an arbitrary collection of countries, but a remnant of a British desire for a united empire in the region. As recently as 1947, the modern country of India was made up of over 500 kingdoms, both large and small. At most major college campuses, South Asia is the byword for the ethnic and cultural organizations that represent the region. Yale has the South Asian Society (SAS)?the only major campus organization representing students from that part of the world. This inevitability has led many members of such societies, including those at Yale, to seek separation of South Asian organizations into smaller parts. Each racial, religious, or national group, they argue, should form an organization exclusive to members of the same origin. On one level, this does not seem to be particularly dangerous. To its many detractors, “South Asia” has become a term associated with the unrealistic idealism of a unified continent. The region has always been wrought with division and it is only natural that separate groups of people seek out their own representation. Beyond its surface appeal, this line of thinking is both defeatist and unimaginative. The South Asian subcontinent is by no means united, not under a single flag, currency, religion, or race. Overseas, however, the South Asian immigrant community is much too small to withstand division. These communities, whether on college campuses or in towns and cities across the country, have a responsibility to influence American society in a meaningful way. At Yale, a solely Indian or Pakistani or Bangladeshi organization will never be able to exert enough influence to do justice to their communities. Moreover, if divisions are to be made on nationality, why not on ethnic group or regional bias as well? Divide the South Asian community, and its influence will die “by a thousand cuts.” Yet neither should Yale’s SAS become a majority-beats-all organization. It should not purport to create a unified identity for the South Asian community, but rather serve as a common organization that represents and appreciates differences. Rather than forcing a Sri Lankan to call himself a “South Asian,” have him be a Sri Lankan who is represented equally in the South Asian Society. Those who hail from the subcontinent can only influence American society by earning that influence through their actions; to be meaningful, these actions require the divided immigrants of South Asia to seek a collective voice. At Yale, the South Asian Society must become a welcoming and open forum for all interested students: a source of unity, not a place where majority politics reign. Today, being a minority too often means listing every reason why you are different from everyone else. While it is important to be unique, it is even more imperative that differences do not lead to the division that ultimately weakens the voice of a community. That is the challenge of all communities, including South Asians, and it is a promise that must be kept. Akash Shah is a junior in SaybrookCollege. | ||||||||||||
Yet the
unity of the organization is nothing like what the name suggests. There
may not be 500 divisions within the organizations, but there are enough
to have significantly weakened this group’s ability to showcase
South Asian talent and leadership on campus. Splits between Indians and
Pakistanis, the lack of recognition for smaller South Asian countries
like Sri Lanka or Nepal, and the cultural divide between South Asian Americans
and their native counterparts make fragmentation seem almost inevitable.