Please help distribute this information to anyone you know or group that may benefit from it.  Please do not alter or change the written information of this email in any manner.

Due to Drs. Kao Ly Yang’s and Gary Yia Lee’s challenges, I feel compelled to express my thoughts on the issue.

Based on the Hmong’s ideological point of view and egos (e.g. Dr. Kao Ly Yang, Tzexa Lee, Dr. Gary Yia Lee and many others), they perceive Mong Leng who identify themselves as “Mong” as a subgroup of the “Hmong” and this is unacceptable to the Mong.  Just recently, the Hmong Der developed a theory explaining the term “Hmong” implying the idea of dominance and superiority.  They have claimed that the term “Hmong” is the only term that represents all Mong and Hmong.  Their ideological idea and concept are that Mong Leng who are “Mong,” Hmong Der who are “Hmong,” Striped Hmong who are “Hmong,” Green Hmong who are Mong/Hmong, etc. are subgroups of the “Hmong.”  This is their usual tactic of brainwashing technique which they use to persuade people to believe that their group is the superior and dominant group and their term (Hmong) that represents their group is the only term to represent all Mong/Hmong.  Due to Assemblywoman Sarah Reyes’ lack of knowledge about the Mong and Hmong, the Hmong successfully brainwashed her to believe that there is only one Hmong and that is the Hmong Der.  Due to Sarah Reyes’ need for political gain, she listened to the Hmong group which is only one side of the story and did her best to lobby members of the state assembly to pass AB 78 in March, 2003.  This was clearly a discrimination act against the Mong group and it was an act to tear the Mong/Hmong apart. 

From the educational perspective, I find Drs. Kao Ly Yang’s and Gary Yia Lee’s emails to be very bias, degrading and a putdown to the Mong.  They perceive the Mong as the minority.  In their views, the Mong is a subgroup under the Hmong.  Dr. Gary Yia Lee uses his personal experiences and knowledge to exhibit that the Hmong are the majority.  Dr. Kao Ly Yang uses her brainwashing tactic to tell the world that the Mong is a subgroup of the Hmong.  Can I use my personal experiences and knowledge to claim that the Mong are the majority and the Hmong are the minority, too? 

My visit to Laos

My visit to Thailand

I visited Thailand twice a few years ago.  I did not get the chance to visit many villages.  However, in Chiang Mai, I got the chance to meet many Mong Leng and Hmong Der who are farmers, business owners, community leaders, civil service workers, college students and travelers.  I also got the chance to visit two Mong/Hmong villages.  According to the Mong/Hmong in Thailand that I met, they indicated that the Mong Leng are the majority in terms of numbers.  Eighty (80) percent of the total Mong/Hmong population are Mong Leng.  Those Mong Leng in Thailand called themselves Blue Mong.  Again, based on this information, can I claim that the Mong Leng are the majority?  Maybe not.  According to a Hmong Der Ph.D. in Minnesota and the Hmoob Koom Haum Haum Xeeb in Thailand, the majority of Mong/Hmong in China are Mong Leng.  Can I claim that the Mong Leng are the majority? I cannot claim it until I have a concrete data.

California Assembly Bill 78 (AB78) and the Mong/Hmong identity

Reading through all emails, I can conclude that some people seek to understand, some to learn, and some to putdown.  Many have tried to brainwash others as well.  A few people seek nothing at all.

Expressing through emails, many people have repeatedly said that the Mong should not touch AB 78 because it is not about the Mong/Hmong issues.  If AB 78 is not about the Mong/Hmong issues, then what is it about?  You are wrong, very wrong.  AB 78 is about Mong and Hmong.  It is the core of Mong’s and Hmong’s issues.  It is about the Mong’s and Hmong’s identity, self-esteem and lives.  AB 78 is about teaching and learning. If this bill passes, it will teach the American public school students grades 7^th to 12^th about the “Secret War” in Laos.  In fact, AB 78 is about the Mong’s and Hmong’s involvement in the Vietnam War.  It is about the history of the Mong/Hmong and the sacrifices they had made by helping the United States fight against the Communists during the Vietnam War.

The Mong were at the frontline fighting side-by-side with the Hmong against the Communists.  Many of them died and they all deserve to be recognized just like any other Hmong.  Their stories need to be taught in the California Public Schools.  The Mong children deserve to learn about their parents’ contributions to the war.  The only way to ensure that the Mong stories will be taught, their contributions are valued and they are recognized for what they did and to assure equal access and equity in education for Mong children is to include the term “Mong” in the title and the text of AB 78.  According to the Lao Veterans of America, Inc., 35,000 to 40,000 Mong, Hmong and other Southeast Asian soldiers in Laos were killed in the war.  Based on the information provided by many Mong veterans, it is believed that the majority of those soldiers who were killed in the war belong to the Mong group because they were the low ranking officers who were sent to the frontline more often.  With all the sacrifices and contributions they made to the war defending the freedom of all people, the Mong have been suppressed by the Hmong and they are excluded from AB 78.

The Mong have always been there for the Hmong.

The Mong have always supported the Hmong.
The Mong have always respected the Hmong.
The Mong have accepted the Hmong as who they are.
The Mong have valued the culture and language of the Hmong.
The Mong have always learned the Hmong language and culture.
The Mong always make the Hmong look good.
The Mong always include the Hmong.
The Mong value and appreciate the diversity of the two Mong/Hmong groups.
But why do the Hmong suppress, deny and exclude the Mong from AB 78?

The Mong and the Hmong have been co-existed and whether you (Hmong) like us (Mong) or not, we are here to stay and you can deny us all you want, but we are not going to go anywhere and you can’t make us disappear.

We know that there are some Mong who are “Hmong Wannabe” and many Mong who already changed their identities completely from Mong to Hmong.  If you are one of these Mong, you can choose to deny your existence, your root, your language, your culture, your parents and grandparents, your ancestors and your heritage all you want; that’s your choice, but please do yourself a favor and speak for yourself and do not speak against us or for us.  We believe that when you learn more about your root and your heritage you will reclaim your Mong identity.  When that happens, we hope that you will join us to fight for fairness and justice not only for yourself but your fellow Mong.

It is so sad that Mong sacrificed so many lives to defend the freedom of all people and now their efforts are not appreciated and are not going to be recognized.  It is so sad that AB 78 divides the Mong and Hmong.  To the Mong, AB 78 is an exclusion act, a separation act, and a discrimination act against all Mong.

As far as I know, the Mong and Hmong are two groups of people originated in China.  The Chinese called them “Miao.”  The Lao and Thai called them “Meo.”  However, “Miao” and/or “Meo” are not acceptable terms to the Mong/Hmong.  The Mong have always maintained their identity and called themselves “Mong” and the Hmong have done the same to keep their identity.  The spelling terms “Mong” and “Hmong” were introduced to the general public in the 1950s.  Neither term was designated as an ethnic term for both Mong and Hmong, but each term was designated to represent a group of people.  Due to the lack of knowledge about the two Mong/Hmong groups and the result from the misinformation and miseducation, the spelling term “Hmong” has been widely used to represent all Mong and Hmong since 1975.  However, the term “Hmong” only represents the Hmong group who are Hmong Der.  The spelling term “Hmong” has misrepresented the Mong who are Mong Leng for almost 30 years. 

Due to the Mong’s and Hmong’s beautiful and colorful clothing styles, they were given many names, such as Black Hmong, Striped Hmong, etc.  However, these terms do not represent the two Mong/Hmong groups as a people.

Hmoob Ntsuab/Green Hmong.  The term Hmoob Ntsuab/Green Hmong has negative connotation and it is an offensive and negative term to describe Mong Leng.  Dr. Paoze Thao explained it in his email already, so I will not get into it.  I have never heard of Green Hmong until I arrived in the United States.  Many Hmong Der know that Green Hmong are Hmoob “Noj Tuab-neeg.”  However, they continue to use this term to represent Mong Leng.  Without knowing its meaning and due to their lack of knowledge about their root, some Mong Leng accept the term “Green Hmong” to represent them. 

Hmoob Dawb/White Hmong.  In their view, some non-Mong/Hmong perceive the term “White” as a negative term for Hmong Der.  To them, White implies White supremacy, White superiority, etc.  The non-Mong/Hmong asked, “Hmong Der are not white, but why do they associate or call themselves using the term “White”?  Of course, if you are a white Hmong, they will not ask you this type of question because in America you have the right to call yourself in any name you wish.  In December 1991, I met Dr. William Smalley, the co-founder of the “Roman Popular Alphabet (RPA)” writing system for Mong and Hmong.  I spent approximately an hour talking to him about the RPA writing system for the Hmong and the Mong.  I also asked him about the Hmoob Phaj Haum (Pha Hauh) writing system.  Then, I asked him about White Hmong.  He said that Hmong Daw (his spelling for Hmoob Dawb) is White Hmong when you translate it into English.  I asked him why Westerners like to translate people’s name into English.  He replied, “They do it because it is easier to pronounce.”  I told him that Hmong Der is Hmong Der and Mong Leng is Mong Leng.  These are terms that represent the people and we should not translate them.  He replied, “I agree.”  Frankly speaking, I don’t like to use these translation terms, such as White Hmong and Blue Mong, etc.  I always use Hmong Der and Mong Leng.  We, Hmong and Mong, must educate people to use the correct terms and not the translation terms. 

Suppression and division

The two Mong and Hmong groups have lived side-by-side for a long time and one group is not a subgroup of the other, but why the Hmong perceive the Mong as a subgroup of the Hmong.  The bottom line is that Mong will always be Mong and Hmong will always be Hmong.  Mong Leng were born to be Mong by blood and Hmong Der were born to be Hmong by blood with the exception of the few who were born from those parents who were in the inter-group marriages between the Mong and the Hmong at the turn of the century.  Therefore, one group cannot deny the existence of other.  It doesn’t matter how widely the term “Hmong” has been used it does not represent the Mong.  Therefore, to show the inclusion of the Mong group, AB 78 needs to include the term “Mong” in its text.  The Mong and Hmong must recognize, accept and treat each other with respect and dignity.

Friends, SEPARATE WE VANISH; TOGETHER WE SURVIVE.  LET’S WORK TOGETHER TO INCLUDE THE TERM “MONG” WITH THE TERM “HMONG” IN AB 78 TO SHOW THE INCLUSION OF THE TWO GROUPS.  IF THE TERM “MONG” IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE BILL, PLEASE OPPOSE AB 78 BECAUSE IT DISCRIMINATES AGAINST THE MONG AMERICANS IN CALIFORNIA and IN THE UNITED STATES.  Please write to the California State Senators and tell them not to support AB 78 because this bill will only create more problems for the Mong/Hmong communities.