Will UC Berkeley become a um, Historically Asian College?

by guest contributor Jeff Yang

uc berkeleyCheck out this interesting story in the New York Times: “Little Asia On the Hill,” the cover feature of this week’s “Education Life” supplement. It explores something that Californians have been aware of for almost half a decade now–in the wake of the repeal of affirmative action laws, Asian Americans have become an increasingly dominant force at U.S. elite colleges.

UC Berkeley, considered by many to be the best public university in the nation, and perhaps the world, is currently 41 percent Asian, a proportion that’s over three times higher than the percentage of Asian Americans in the California population, and almost 10 times higher than the percentage of Asians in the U.S. And Berkeley is just one example among many; along the bottom of the article runs a ticker-style strip recounting the Asian American percentage on top college campuses across the nation, from 13 percent at Princeton to 27 percent at Wellesley, 17 percent at University of Texas – Austin, and 27 percent at M.I.T.

This poses a dramatic challenge for the redress of historical discrimination: Black and Latino enrollment at top universities has suffered significantly over the past five years. But it should be noted as well that the net effect on white enrollment has essentially been zero–suggesting that the elimination of race-based affirmative action has been exacerbated by the preservation of other kinds of questionable preference (such as preferences for the children of alumni, who are said to have a “thumb on the scale” giving them a 20 percent greater chance of admission at most schools).

And this is ultimately unfair to Asian Americans as well. If college admissions are to be a true meritocracy, why protect certain classes of applicants who are mostly white and mostly privileged? Legacies make up an average of 10 to 20 percent of admissions; at Ivy League colleges, legacy applicant pools range from 75 percent to 90 percent white.

But even eliminating legacy preferences won’t resolve this situation on its own. Nor are there easy and good solutions that don’t penalize groups or individuals in fundamentally life-changing ways. But there aren’t easy, good solutions to anything, really; other than on late night infomercials, “good” almost always goes hand in hand with “difficult and painful.”

That said, I’m intrigued with what’s happening at these, uh, Historically Asian Colleges. Critics have said that Asian grads of places like UC Irvine (majority Asian American), Berkeley, and UCLA (the “University of Caucasians Lost among Asians”) are not being prepared for the real world. They also say that Asian American students spend all their time in libraries, don’t contribute to “student culture,” and tend to seclude themselves into ethnic clusters, refusing even to interact across ethnic lines, much less racial ones.

Based on my own experiences visiting these campuses, I pretty much wholeheartedly disagree: That depiction of Asian Americans is at best a generalization and at worst a rationale for outright discrimination.

I also think that spending four (or so) years in an environment where you’re part of the “mainstream”–as opposed to an outsider, an exception, an alien–is incredibly empowering to this generation of Asian Americans. And when I say generation, I mean generation: 8 in 10 Asian Americans attend college, meaning that for Asian American Millennials, this four-year period of normality is essentially the norm.

I predict that this will be the most important generation in Asian American history–with more leaders, more outstanding achievement, and more social progress for our community than any preceding it, including my own (which I’m largely writing off; all in all, we’ve been like a lull between the pioneering generation of the 60s and 70s and the emerging one of the 00s and beyond).

I’d love to hear from those of you who attended or are attending heavily Asian American colleges, to get your opinions on the experience. In fact, I’d love to hear from all of you, to get your thoughts on this topic for a possible future column. Mail me with your thoughts at asianpopculture@gmail.com. And Happy New Year!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Google Bookmarks
  • NewsVine
  • Current
  • email
  • Print

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. In case you missed it… at Addicted to Race on 12 Jan 2007 at 5:27 pm

    [...] Will UC Berkeley become a um, Historically Asian College? UC Berkeley, considered by many to be the best public university in the nation, and perhaps the world, is currently 41 percent Asian, a proportion that’s over three times higher than the percentage of Asian Americans in the California population, and almost 10 times higher than the percentage of Asians in the U.S. [...]

  2. In case you missed it… at Anti-Racist Parent - for parents committed to raising children with an anti-racist outlook on 12 Jan 2007 at 6:10 pm

    [...] Will UC Berkeley become a um, Historically Asian College? UC Berkeley, considered by many to be the best public university in the nation, and perhaps the world, is currently 41 percent Asian, a proportion that’s over three times higher than the percentage of Asian Americans in the California population, and almost 10 times higher than the percentage of Asians in the U.S. [...]

  3. Naval Academy Admissions Standard - Page 3 - Benzworld.org - Mercedes Benz Discussion Forum on 06 Jul 2009 at 10:24 am

    [...] Originally Posted by drewprof What are your thoughts? As an educator who has experienced this first hand, I tend to agree with Prof. Fleming. But on the other hand the "whites" may need help soon: UC Berkeley, considered by many to be the best public university in the nation, and perhaps the world, is currently 41 percent Asian, a proportion thats over three times higher than the percentage of Asian Americans in the California population, and almost 10 times higher than the percentage of Asians in the U.S. And Berkeley is just one example among many; along the bottom of the article runs a ticker-style strip recounting the Asian American percentage on top college campuses across the nation, from 13 percent at Princeton to 27 percent at Wellesley, 17 percent at University of Texas – Austin, and 27 percent at M.I.T. Will UC Berkeley become a um, Historically Asian College? at Racialicious – the intersection of race… [...]

Comments

  1. Just Wondering wrote:

    First off, I think Asian-American youths should be lauded — not punished — for their academic success.

    If they make the grades and pass the tests, they should be allowed into college regardless of the current racial makeup of the student body.

    And if that means that many universities are majority Asian-American — or close to it — then so be it. The lesson for everyone else is to get busy and do the work.

    Second, I’m not against legacy admissions as long as they don’t make up a majority of each entering freshman class and as long as it’s clear that the students themselves can do the work.

    I get the sense that when people think about legacy admissions they picture an idiot great-great-grandson of the Rockefellers getting into Harvard when he should be working at Wal-Mart.

    Of course, that stuff does happen but the majority of people getting into school via legacy admissions are most likely going to a public college somewhere — not old-money, just regular kids who want to carry on the family tradition of going to State U.

    Nothing wrong with that … it’s no different than some kids earning admission — and full tuition — by being good at basketball or the trumpet.

    Finally, I think it’s a tad ridiculous to expect every college campus to have an exact racial representation of the surrounding community. It’ s incredibly difficult to achieve and there is no proven value in maintaining such balance.

    Would Berkeley be “better” if the student body were only 30 percent Asian-American? 15 percent? 10 percent? At what point do you consider the level of diversity sufficient?

  2. squidfly wrote:

    Once again the History of 200 years of Civil Rights fought by Black Americans, paved the way for every non-white group in this country, that’s the dirty little secret of American race. It’s not simply about”Doing the work” This response is simplistic at best. Affirmative Action is action an imperative, to level the racist playing field. Where would Asian Americans be without the battle won by Black Americans, to vote?
    Housing discrimination still affects Black people in horrific numbers, and how do you build equity, buy property. Black American communities during reconstruction were leveled, destroyed by angry, jealous white mobs. Asian Americans and all other minority groups need to get clear and get honest, they buried their heads in the sand when Black kids in the South were being hosed by cops and bitten by dogs; as the rich and middle class kids are now doing now by not going to Iraq and letting the “Others” do the fighting for them. Read the real-Black- version of American History and not the easier softer version.
    The question that Asain Americans need to answer is without the Civil Rights movement where would we be?
    To claim it was all hard work and olde world values is denial at best and blindness to the country you live in.
    The Untied States of America was built on free labour for over 400 years.

  3. Just Wondering wrote:

    Oh, good! Another lecture!

    squidfly, is it not true that promising black and Hispanic high school students are heavily recruited by both public and private universities, all eager to add to their diverse student populations?

    Of course it is. It’s one of the main reasons that schools have trouble increasing their minority numbers — there is a lot of competition for strong performing black and Hispanic students.

    The problem is not that minority students can’t get accepted or that nobody wants them … it’s that there aren’t enough of them to go around!

    And that’s where the hard work comes in. Regardless of what happened in the past, it all boils down to what you do today.

    Look what is happening in Texas — the state’s public schools will accept any student who finishes in the top 10 percent of his/her graduating class. The reason? To increase minority enrollment … the colleges are desperate to look more like the general population.

    So what happens? A student who finishes in the Top 15 percent of an elite private school just might lose his/her spot to a student from a low-performing inner city school. Is that enough “playing field leveling” for you?

    Regarding Berkely, who do you want to punish so that more African-Americans can get in? The Asian-Americans who are doing what it takes to succeed?

    Or, let me guess … how about those evil white kids who are just coasting on their skin color?

  4. kim wrote:

    >This response is simplistic at best.

    As is your response.

    >Affirmative Action is action [?] an imperative , to level the racist playing field.

    Yes, and there are actions within the Black community that we MUST address, in order to get us solidly back on the track where we SEEK to struggle. Struggle to get to school, to finish school, to start in some entry-level position and WAIT for our excellence to be recognized and rewarded.

    Wait too long while being passed over? No.
    Wait, and sit quietly while being passed over, relegated to secondary status, and abused? No.

    But have the patience to delay instant gratification.

    I do not disagree that we paved the way, with blood and toil. That there are horrendous systemic conditions which imposed upon us as free citizens which led us to where we are, the fallout of the systemic conditions which found us here in the first place.

    Asians know a little

    They toiled and died to lay a foundation for an industry that allowed this country to forge (smile) ahead in the industrial revolution, and westward expansion, even while suffering systemic discrimination when it comes to housing, immigration, establishing family bonds, etc.

    They have undergone rejection from public places, and been discriminated against by the same good people :) who treated you thusly.

    You do know about internment camps, right? Citizens, fellow American citizens.

    What is the answer? I don’t have the answer, but a hard-working student is to be applauded. As is the ethic that pushed the student forward.

    As to the college campuses, and the level of student engagement and contribution there, surely the colleges can take measures that seem to be diminishing the administration’s mission and hopes for the campus as the center of campus-(home) life. Mind you, the administration cannot determine what that campus life will be, how it will play out or evolve, but in instituting controls at the admissions level, one does indeed have the chance to “engineer” the make-up, ethnically, racially, socioeconomically, of the student body.

    Should the university? Why not? What does it hurt?

    The sticky question is, as you say, Just Wondering, “at what point do you consider the level of diversity sufficient?”

  5. Donna Darko wrote:

    how about those evil white kids who are just coasting on their skin color?

    They should look at the 10-20% elite school legacy admissions that are 75-90% white. But the racial makeup of California legacies may be different and not as high as 75-90% white. California’s population is also different: 44% white, 35% Hispanic, 12% Asian and 7% black so Latinos are hurt most by Prop 209. I like what Eric Liu said about poor, Latino and black students:

    Until all students — from rural outposts to impoverished urban settings — are given equal access to the Advanced Placement classes that have proved to be a ticket to the best colleges, then the idea of pure meritocracy is bunk, he says. They’re measuring in a fair way the results of an unfair system.

  6. squidfly wrote:

    Just Wondering:
    Whenever the response is “Oh another lecture”
    it’s obvious buttons have been pushed.

    Look in this country everyone is fighting to become the next white man on line. To gain entree’ into the Country Club. Why is it that 60% Asian American women are dating/marrying white men? For their looks?…

    The group that has benefited the most from Afrimative Action are white women “Jounal of Higher Education”

    Black, Hispanics haven’t benefitted as much.
    Asians weren’t in shackles for 400 years.

    My problem isn’t that a particular group is progressing/actualizing the American Dream, it this strange notion that they did it on their own, well they didn’t.
    Arab -Americans only decided their was something called racial-profiling when it affected them, this is why Black people get pissed.
    When Asian/Arab/Mexican-Americans join in the marches, and the demonstrations, instead ducking under the covers til the “Rubber Bullets” stop raining, then we’re always going to have this problem.
    Because if America didn’t have Black people, then they’d have to invent some.

  7. Just Wondering wrote:

    They should look at the 10-20% elite school legacy admissions that are 75-90% white.

    I’m not totally familiar with the elite schools’ way of doing things as I graduated from a basic state school. :)

    But I do know that my university has eliminated the advantage that being a legacy used to add to the admissions process, for this very reason.

    Unfortunately, this has a negative consequence on important issues such as fund-raising, and in combination with Texas’ Top 10 percent rule, has meant that a lot of traditional, long-standing family ties have been broken.

    That’s an unintended consequence, of course, but a perfect example of how every action — even if well meaning — has a reaction.

    At elite schools, however, if 75 percent of legacies are white, doesn’t that mean that 25 percent are minority? So it’s not a either/or advantage, and legacy admissions, as the article points out, are usually only 10 percent or so of every freshman class.

    And as universities seek to add more minority students, the number of black or Hispanic legacies should increase, too, correct?

    The problem here is not one of university admissions. If you want universities to better reflect the racial makeup of the general community, then you need to increase the pool of college-eligible minority students.

    That’s a whole other issue. And I fail to see where limiting Asian-American — or Anglo-American — opportunities will make any difference.

  8. Donna Darko wrote:

    Yang’s article said 10-20% of elite school admissions are legacies and of those, 75-95% are white. I’m not sure what the legacy numbers are in California. Eric Liu hit the right note about poor students (the NYT article said it’s Asians and affluent whites who benefitted in California), Latinos and blacks. The system is unfair from the start for poor, Latino and black students.

  9. Just Wondering wrote:

    Whenever someone doesn’t tow the standard party line here, the response is usually one of “you need to read this book or that report,” and it’s done in a condescending tone as if to imply that the original commenter is ignorant.

    Having a different opinion doesn’t necessarily mean a lack of facts or historical context.

    I like the way Kim tackled this issue in her comment above — yes, there were (and still are in some cases) horrendous systemic reasons for minority underachievement in education, but all of us can learn from the example that many Asian-American students are setting.

    We should see their success as an inspiration, not a threat.

    I still say that in today’s world, a black or Hispanic student with strong grades and good SAT scores has tremendous opportunities available. They can literally attend the university of their choice in many cases, including elite schools. I see real-world examples of this every year in my volunteer work.

    The focus should be, then, on increasing those numbers, rather than limiting the opportunities available to Asian-Americans.

  10. Just Wondering wrote:

    Sorry for the all italics.

  11. Donna Darko wrote:

    Poor whites and Asians are also left out of the California system. Rural area and inner city schools also don’t have enough funding. School funding shouldn’t be based on competitive property taxes. 60% of more of public schools are funded by local property taxes.

  12. Donna Darko wrote:

    We should see their success as an inspiration, not a threat.

    The only people threatened by Asians are whites.

  13. Just Wondering wrote:

    Rural area and inner city schools also don’t have enough funding. School funding shouldn’t be based on competitive property taxes.

    Okay, but the post in question is about whether it’s a bad thing for Asian-Americans to dominate the university admissions process out of proportion to the general population.

    I say no. Are you saying yes?

  14. ren wrote:

    not simply a yes or no question

  15. Just Wondering wrote:

    Donna, you really believe that the only people threatened by the success of Asian-Americans are white?

    Maybe you are right about “threatened.” How about if I had written “jealous?”

  16. Lyonside wrote:

    Donna: I totally agree. The brightest mind in the world will function poorly at a bad school, unless there is significant intervention outside of school. In the real world, parents don’t always HAVE those resources.

    No Child Left Behind is full of nice ideas and poor implementation. I know public schools in affluent suburbs in my area that rival the most expensive private college prep academies. And I know public schools in which the teachers ask the parents to contribute basic necessities… like paper towels, TP, and chalk (my mom teaches in one of them). How is that fair?

  17. Donna Darko wrote:

    I say no. But some attacked Latinos and blacks in this thread instead of white legacies.

    The only people threatened by Asians are whites. -me

    Whites aren’t reading this site either except to check out which races are threatening.

  18. dresseuse wrote:

    “Look in this country everyone is fighting to become the next white man on line. To gain entree’ into the Country Club. Why is it that 60% Asian American women are dating/marrying white men? For their looks?…”

    Clearly dating someone she’s attracted to is totally alien behavior for an Asian-American woman.

    Of course the politics of interracial dating are always complicated, but to suggest that an entire group of women has nothing but country club membership in mind is insulting and misogynistic.

  19. Donna Darko wrote:

    And I know public schools in which the teachers ask the parents to contribute basic necessities… like paper towels, TP, and chalk (my mom teaches in one of them). How is that fair?

    Teachers buy supplies too. Eventually, the best teachers burn out and leave a poor school district. It always comes down to funding.

  20. Rachel S wrote:

    Just wondering,
    The racial prejudice against African Americans and Latinos that underlies many of your comments is disturbing. I know squidfly is insinuating that African Americans are the only group that has struggled, and s/he needs to understand that others have fought for civil rights too, but you started out that thread with some offensive statements and some misperceptions of how the process of admissions process works.

    Just wondering said, “If they make the grades and pass the tests, they should be allowed into college regardless of the current racial makeup of the student body.”

    I think that sounds good in theory, but people don’t get into college based on grades and tests alone. First, as several commenters notes (Donna?) not all schools have the same classes and grading systems. Those student who get above 4.0’s can only do that in schools with AP courses. Poorer schools don’t have those classes, and it would be completely unfair to treat students better just because they can afford to live in a wealthy area. We also consider outside activities–volunteer work, research, extracurricular activities, athletic talent, and other factors that will contribute to campus life.

    Just wondering said, “And that’s where the hard work comes in. Regardless of what happened in the past, it all boils down to what you do today.”
    This is terribly offensive because you are implying here that Asians work hard and Blacks and Latinos don’t? This is about more than hard work; moreover, hard work should be broadly defined. The day laborers who wait on the corner are hard working, but their hard work is not economically rewarded. All the hard work in the world won’t get you that 4.0+ in a school that doesn’t offer APs. Asian folks aren’t better than anyone else when it comes to work ethic; I know that myth circulates in this country, but it is just a stereotype.

  21. bamaman83 wrote:

    It isn’t just culture…it’s a proven fact that generally-speaking Asians are just smarter than everyone else. The average white IQ is 100 and the Asian IQ is around 105(?). And that of blacks and hispanics are well below average. Deal with it, there will be always be more Asians at these colleges

  22. ren wrote:

    Squidfly,
    If someone claimed this was a lecture, I’m not grasping it.

    “Black, Hispanics haven’t benefitted as much.
    Asians weren’t in shackles for 400 years.”

    If you’re claiming that Blacks have been in shackles for 400, I’m going to have to question your knowledge of American History. Considering the “United States” hasn’t even existed for 400 years. What I find more insulting is your suggestion that Asian Americans don’t have the “claim” to racial injustice like Black Americans have. That somehow this belongs to Black Americans exclusively. I’m sorry that your pissed they take part in your marches however it’s not a fight for “black rights”, the civil rights movement was not for blacks to get a special “privilege” for being black, it was a fight for civil liberties. This is a freedom that makes no distinction in racial background since it concerns the freedoms that protect an individual and the rights that can not be interfered with by the government. Why you think this appeal for civil liberties should exclude all other minorities except Black Americans mystifies me.

    I don’t want to start a “we got hurt more” rant, but Black and White Americans need to come to terms with the fact that yes, Asians know a thing about racial injustice. Pulling out the slavery card is not the end-all argument and it annoys the piss out of me that the injustice of slavery by which you can only view historically, somehow clouds over all other minority injustices, especially contemporary ones. Ask the Philipines and the Hawaiians about the racial injustice and brutal suppression they never had to experience because they are asian. Guess what, the large influx of south-east Asians weren’t immigrants any more than the first blacks were, they are refugees. Their countries have been bombed to pieces by American foreign policy and then they were begrudgingly allowed into the States with little support. The influx of Koreans in America was in part due to the devastation of the Korean war, leaving millions dead and Korea in a state of perpetual unease for the last 53 years. I’m sure after America’s involvement in that war Korean Americans were treated with racial warmth and know nothing of racial injustice. While certainly there has been wrongs done to the early Chinese, many Asians know the effect of racial injustice in the modern times, we don’t get the pleasure of viewing it as nostalgia.

    “Look in this country everyone is fighting to become the next white man on line. To gain entree’ into the Country Club. Why is it that 60% Asian American women are dating/marrying white men? For their looks?…”

    There are many possible reasons why Asian women don’t marry Asians, it’s not purely an issue of scaling the class ladder. If it were, it brings up some issues like white women who marry black, are they going down the social ladder or does that elevate the black male? What if the black male is upper class and the white woman is lower class, does she still elevate him or does she bring him down? I don’t really buy this idea that marriage is purely an issue of class.

    You claim that Asians did not “do it on their own”, since you seem so sure of this, what exactly is your proof that they didn’t?

    Then you add this fine point:

    “Because if America didn’t have Black people, then they’d have to invent some.”

    Ugh, this is painful. I wouldn’t use Voltaire’s god argument if I were you. The question suggests that Blacks are necessary to non-black Americans… they are??? Without Blacks you think White Americans and Asian Americans wouldn’t be able to maintain the level of success they are achieving? Statements such as the one you propose are the ideas that are killing Black Americans. The idea that your under-achieving is a social necessity, that America just wants to purposely make you fail, that it’s unavoidable. This is ugly scapegoating, forcing this idea that Blacks need to accept the idea that they are society’s lesser is counterintuitive to the desire to better oneself.

  23. RobynT wrote:

    I want to comment on what Jeff Yang says about it being helpful for Asian Americans to be an environment in which they are the majority. I’ve never lived in California so I don’t really know what the demographics are, but I have heard that there are some areas that are known as having a lot of Asians (Cupertino, and that town that Q-Bert’s from I think). Just wondering if these students might already have had the experience of being in the mainstream in their high schools or hometowns.

    I’m from Hawai’i, where Japanese and Chinese Americans grow up as the mainstream. It’s definitely empowering in some ways but I think it also can make it easy for us to ignore the challenges that other groups face.

  24. Donna Darko wrote:

    If you’re claiming that Blacks have been in shackles for 400, I’m going to have to question your knowledge of American History.

    The first record of African slavery in Colonial America is of a Dutch ship which brought twenty blacks recorded and sold them to the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619 as indentured servants.

  25. Donna Darko wrote:

    Blacks and Asians have completely different histories. Many Asians came voluntarily in waves after 1965 with skills and education and were called the model minority in the 1970s.

  26. Donna Darko wrote:

    It’s much better to stick together as minorities and target those who make ALL THE RULES in this country, rich, straight, white Christian men.

  27. bamaman83 wrote:

    Why did those Asians have these skills in the first place?

  28. Donna Darko wrote:

    They immigrated with education and skills because the US government set up requirements.

  29. atlasien wrote:

    Family background combined with economic class is the major determining factor for educational attainment. It’s too simplistic to take an Asians vs. Blacks vs. Hispanics vs. white approach. For example, due to traumatic refugee history in this country, Cambodian- and Laotian-Americans are a group that ranks below Mexican-Americans in educational attainment:

    http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=445

    In Southern California, as shown in the first columns of Table 3, the greatest educational disadvantage is found among children of Mexican immigrants and Laotian and Cambodian refugees.

    By their mid-20s, these groups had achieved less than 14 years of education on average and close to 40 percent failed to go beyond a high school diploma. These results are far worse than those found in the South Florida groups and reflect the difficulties faced by children coming from families with very low levels of human capital.

    A positive governmental context of reception for Cambodian and Laotian refugees did not suffice to lift their second generation to a position of educational advantage. In fact, the proportion of children who achieved no more than a high school education is about the same as among their parents (as shown previously in Table 2).

    In the case of Mexican youths, low levels of parental human capital, combined with a negative mode of incorporation — that is, with a history of exploitation and discrimination, a high proportion of undocumented immigrants, and the prevalence of negative stereotypes — produced high rates of school abandonment and low mean levels of academic attainment. However, in this case, the proportion that did not complete high school is only about half the figure among their parents.

  30. Kyla wrote:

    I find it very telling that, when quota systems are in place, white enrollment doesn’t drop significantly at many universities, but “model minority” enrollment does. And when quota systems are removed, white enrollment doesn’t drop significantly, but African Americans and Latinos lose numbers to make way for “model minorities” again.

    Shifting minorities around is not leveling the playing field.

    Additionally, “do the work or get over it” may work for model minorities, but many African Americans, Native Americans and Latinos live in extreme poverty, and last I checked, good teachers weren’t exactly fighting to teach at reservation or inner city schools unless they grew up in those areas themselves. Until these students have the same access to quality education that whites and model minorities do, “do the work or get over it” is just taunting groups who are doing the work, but have been denied the tools to do it as well.

  31. Kyla wrote:

    And I think I should point out that I don’t think “model minorities” and other minorities should be fighting it out, either. We’re all victims of the institutionalized racism the U.S. in based on.

    The model minority myth is a tool. If it weren’t for model minorities, who would whites hold up when they say, “If you really wanted to succeed, you would”?

    But when it comes time to “level the playing field” it’s us who get shafted, so that white people don’t have to give up their seats to the cause. The white power structure is playing both ends against the middle, and we’re all suffering for it, whether we’re “model” minorities or not.

  32. ren wrote:

    Donna Darko,

    “The first record of African slavery in Colonial America is of a Dutch ship which brought twenty blacks recorded and sold them to the English colony of Jamestown, Virginia, in 1619 as indentured servants.”

    Fair enough. I’ll accept that indentured servitude as “shackles” in the metaphorical sense of economic slavery. Granted the United States wasn’t formally instituted until 1776, prior it was merely British/European colonies. The issue is with US sanctioned slavery (as of yet I don’t recall Blacks asking reparations from the Dutch)… US sanctioned slavery of the shackles type was legally ended in 1865, unless you know anyone in shackles in the 20th or 21st century.

    “Blacks and Asians have completely different histories. Many Asians came voluntarily in waves after 1965 with skills and education and were called the model minority in the 1970s.”

    Your use of “voluntarily” is a bit ambiguous, granted they weren’t rounded up but certain strains like war and economic disparity due to US foreign policy is equally a motivational force. And it was only after 1965 Asians as immigrants came into America because the Hart-Celler Act formally abolished the original immigration act that set up unfair racial quotas. All part of that non-racial injustice on the part of being Asian, I guess.

    I never argued that Black and Asian histories were alike. And as I stated I don’t want to turn this into a who got kicked around more. I simply state that the racial injustice we both face is not so different that one can claim exclusivity over the other or admonish one for trying to get in on their “fair” claim. I agree that we should stick together, but first that requires Black Americans to see Asians as minorities.

  33. Donna Darko wrote:

    atlasien, like the NYT article said, it’s poor, Latino and black students who suffered under Prop 209.

    I find it very telling that, when quota systems are in place, white enrollment doesn’t drop significantly at many universities, but “model minority” enrollment does. And when quota systems are removed, white enrollment doesn’t drop significantly, but African Americans and Latinos lose numbers to make way for “model minorities” again.

    Shifting minorities around is not leveling the playing field.

    Kyla, that’s exactly right. Minorities fight for crumbs while rich whites run everything.

  34. Donna Darko wrote:

    Whenever someone doesn’t tow the standard party line here, the response is usually one of “you need to read this book or that report,” and it’s done in a condescending tone as if to imply that the original commenter is ignorant.

    Just wondering and bamaman, maybe you should read a book. Or read Rachel S’s blog.

  35. Kyla wrote:

    And Donna, I would disagree with your assessment of Asian immigration. It’s true that a large number of Asian immigrants have come into the U.S. since the 1960s with skills, but a large number have also come as refugees. Additionally, the Chinese laborers who moved to California during the Gold Rush and other Western states to work on the railroads were not “imported” because of their skills, they were imported because they were cheap labor (and when white people protested, the government passed the Chinese Exclusion Act and the railroads imported Mexicans instead).

    Many Filipinos moved to the U.S. after the country because a U.S. territory in 1898, and they were often recruited as farm workers in Hawaii and California. They fought with Cesar Chavez during the farm workers’ movement. Many also came after the country was torn apart by U.S. and Japanese forces in WWII. My grandmother came here after being freed from Santo Tomas.

    Some Asians have come into the country with skills and education. Many have not.

    This fighting about who has it worse is just counter-productive. Every minority group in the United States has faced hardships. Yes, African Americans suffered from slavery, and nothing Asians have suffered in this country compares. Yes, Native Americans have suffered from genocide and nothing Asians have suffered compares to that. But that doesn’t stop white bullies from calling Asian kids ‘chinks’ and it doesn’t stop people like Adam Carolla and Rosie O’Donnell from saying ‘ching chong’ for laughs.

    The past is different, and it does influence the present. African Americans and Native Americans have larger historical hurdles in their paths. That should be taken into consideration in any discussion of race and affirmative action. But that doesn’t remove the hurdles Asian Americans face. Getting into a fight over who has had it worse just redirects our anger toward people who should be our alllies. Because no minority benefits from white oppression, even if some have the facade of it. The only people who benefit from a history of white oppression is white people.

  36. Rob wrote:

    I do agree with the gist of Squidfly’s point but it makes it hard to agree with when you get obvious facts incorrect.

    Asian American women don’t date outside their race at 65%, guy. It’s more like 35% for females and 24% for males.

  37. Rob wrote:

    Sorry, date=marry.

  38. Kyla wrote:

    Although I totally agree with your statement here, Donna: “Minorities fight for crumbs while rich whites run everything.”

    The rich white men in power have been playing the people who want a share in that power against one another since 1492. That’s why poor whites want to deny the racialization of poverty, and why there’s a huge fracture against white feminists and feminists of color. I’m not saying everything should be hunky dory between groups that have wronged each other – there’s healing needed in a lot of places – but that we need to stop playing oppression olympics and denying other groups’ experiences and focus our anger where it belongs, on the rich white men who run this country.

  39. Donna Darko wrote:

    That’s exactly right.

  40. Just Wondering wrote:

    This is terribly offensive because you are implying here that Asians work hard and Blacks and Latinos don’t?

    Rachel S., I DID NOT imply this! You are twisting my words based upon your preconceived biases.

    My point was simply that you should not deny admission to anyone who has the qualifications to be enrolled simply because they are Asian-American.

    In fact, if you read my posts fully, you will see where I’ve commented frequently about black and Hispanic students who “do the work” and how they deserve access, too.

    The conversation about the inequality of high school education is a separate matter altogether.

    But while we are on the topic, is it not a stereotype — and a very negative one, at that — to assume that all black and Hispanic students go to poor, underfunded schools? And that being poor automatically means you can’t do well scholastically?

  41. Just Wondering wrote:

    Just wondering and bamaman, maybe you should read a book. Or read Rachel S’s blog.

    See what I mean. :)

  42. kim wrote:

    squidfly:
    Because if America didn’t have Black people, then they’d have to invent some.

    Kim: Actually , I kinda like that one. If one thinks of it in terms of the Biblical cop out of ‘ the poor will always be with us,’ that helps some Christians back away from a concerned social agenda that addresses systemic poverty, the analogy makes some sense.

    If one considers the economic conspiracy idea of capitalistism, wherein there must be a class of have-nots in order to juxtuapose them against the class of the haves, in order to know where the line is,then, yes, there will be systemic processes in place to maintain the existence of these separate classes.

    Neither analogy is set up to posit Blacks as ‘the poor,’ so please don’t bother to engage in that vein. If Squidfly’s idea is to fly, and for me it does in a rhetorical and sympathetic way, and for me there is not only poetry to it (thank you for referencing Votaire), but a palpable truth that someone was going to have to do the dirty work, and have placed upon them the mantle of perennial ‘other,’ in order for the existing classist, racist and sexist (triple whammy for me, thank you) “principles” to be able to have a face, and a name.

    I have spoken before about the proximity to Blackness that other groups hold, and the fluidity into Whiteness that is possible in a way that is not for Blacks, which allow for an evaluation of the ‘how hard are we catching it/how well are we doing?/ examination to take place, and I think that there is something to be considered there.

    Off to pick up my children, we’ve been asked to take it easy on the invective, and (I say, head bowed) rightfully so. Can’t we talk?

  43. Kyla wrote:

    “I still say that in today’s world, a black or Hispanic student with strong grades and good SAT scores has tremendous opportunities available. They can literally attend the university of their choice in many cases, including elite schools. I see real-world examples of this every year in my volunteer work.
    The focus should be, then, on increasing those numbers, rather than limiting the opportunities available to Asian-Americans.”

    I don’t think anyone has advocated limiting opportunities for Asian Americans.

    However, there’s more to getting underrepresented groups into elite colleges than just raising their SAT scores. It’s tied into both poverty and race. A middle class minority student has a better chance of going to college than a poor minority student. A poor white student has a better chance of going to college than a poor minority student.

    Poor minority students are getting the raw end of the deal, and the majority of poor minorities are African American, Native American, Latino, and certain Asian American groups (Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, Filipinos, Pakistanis, Indians, etc.).

    Saying they should work harder won’t solve anything. The root of the problem is racism, poverty, and poor basic educations for the victims of racism and poverty. Minimizing these obstacles by saying that students who work harder have “tremendous opportunities” is like saying that, because a few people managed to climb a high, slick wall, we don’t need a door or even a ladder.

  44. Kyla wrote:

    “But while we are on the topic, is it not a stereotype — and a very negative one, at that — to assume that all black and Hispanic students go to poor, underfunded schools? And that being poor automatically means you can’t do well scholastically?”

    No. No one has said that all African Americans or all Latinos are poor. But the demographics of this country show that a disproportionate number of the people living in poverty in the U.S. are African American, Latino, or Native American.

    And being poor doesn’t mean you can’t succeed, but it does mean that you most likely will have a subpar education in public schools, and your parents likely cannot afford to send you to private school. The deck is stacked against you. Sometimes you manage to snag yourself a winning hand, but most often, you lose the farm.

  45. Donna Darko wrote:

    You hinted it’s about work ethic in the two following comments, that if they worked hard or were like or inspired by those model minority Asians, they would be fine:

    The problem is not that minority students can’t get accepted or that nobody wants them … it’s that there aren’t enough of them to go around!

    And that’s where the hard work comes in. Regardless of what happened in the past, it all boils down to what you do today.

    Look what is happening in Texas — the state’s public schools will accept any student who finishes in the top 10 percent of his/her graduating class. The reason? To increase minority enrollment … the colleges are desperate to look more like the general population.

    and

    I like the way Kim tackled this issue in her comment above — yes, there were (and still are in some cases) horrendous systemic reasons for minority underachievement in education, but all of us can learn from the example that many Asian-American students are setting.

    We should see their success as an inspiration, not a threat.

  46. Donna Darko wrote:

    The last comment was addressed to JW. The “Read a book” comment should have been directed at bamaman and ren. My apologies. It’s offensive to tell people to work harder or be inspired by those model minority Asians they’re apparently “jealous” of.

    Lyonside brought up No Child Left Behind.

    Guess which groups suffer greatly under this program?

    Wait for it…

    Poor, black and Latino students.

  47. Donna Darko wrote:

    Poor minority students are getting the raw end of the deal, and the majority of poor minorities are African American, Native American, Latino, and certain Asian American groups (Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, Filipinos, Pakistanis, Indians, etc.). –Kyla

    I bet JW wouldn’t tell poor Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, Filipinos, Pakistanis, Indians to their face (as he’s doing here) that they aren’t working hard or inspired enough by us model minority Asians.

  48. Donna Darko wrote:

    “That’s where the hard work comes in.”

    “All of us can learn from the example that many Asian-American students are setting. We should see their success as an inspiration, not a threat. “

  49. Milan wrote:

    One issue I find interesting (I don’t know if it has already been brought up before) is the number of students in top-tier universities who are children of African immigrants.

    My sister is a sophmore at Harvard and she has a lot of black friends, but the majority of them are Nigerian or Ethiopian, born and raised in the U.S. If private universities do indeed practice some sort of affirmative action with the aim of providing underrepresented minorities with quality education, is the benefit misplaced if the African-American students who are admitted into these schools do not have any family history in the U.S. that traces back to the times of slavery? I do not know if there is any tension between African-Americans who can trace their roots to slaves and recent African immigrants, but I do know that there is a definite cultural difference and perhaps a socio-economic difference. Going back to the example of my sister, she had a close friend in high school who was Eritrean, and from what I remember her telling me she had a hard time identifying with “American blacks” and when she was deciding on which college she went to, ended up choosing Stanford because of its large African-American population, many of whose parents are recent immigrants from Africa. I don’t know if I am generalizing, but in my experience, I find that many of the recent African immigrants and their children I come across are much better off economically and educationally than African-Americans who have been in the U.S. for a much longer time.

    Both groups can identify themselves as African-Americans, but is it unfair if the African-American students getting into top colleges do not share the similar social, economic or cultural fabric of African-Americans for whom the system of affirmative action was created to help?

  50. ren wrote:

    Donna Darko,

    “The last comment was addressed to JW. The “Read a book” comment should have been directed at bamaman and ren.”

    Not sure what book I should be reading concerning what exactly I’m terribly confused by? I don’t like it when people blow things out of proportion to push their point. What, just cause I can’t accept that Black’s were in shackles for 400 years in the United States when the United States only existed for 231 years? Fine I’ll go read a book, you can go learn basic arithmetic.

  51. Donna Darko wrote:

    You didn’t say in the United States. To wit:

    Squidfly: “Black, Hispanics haven’t benefitted as much. Asians weren’t in shackles for 400 years.”

    ren: If you’re claiming that Blacks have been in shackles for 400, I’m going to have to question your knowledge of American History.

    Isn’t it insulting to say they weren’t in shackles for 400 years? When they were?

  52. Donna Darko wrote:

    Both groups can identify themselves as African-Americans, but is it unfair if the African-American students getting into top colleges do not share the similar social, economic or cultural fabric of African-Americans for whom the system of affirmative action was created to help? –Milan

    It’s not perfect. But it evens out in the end like with other races. Short answer.

  53. Vandia wrote:

    Milan,
    You raised quite an important point which indirectly would support Squidfly’s argument and Donna Darko’s ideas.
    I read a recent interview with a professor from Brown University in which he reports, “…….This places African immigrants in the United States with the highest educated Asian immigrants and actually higher than non-Hispanic whites.”
    I will try to look for the complete quote- and if there is an actual study done. The bottom line is if you get a good education early on in a stable environment, there is no reason why one will not succeed. I will try to quote(liberally) Gandhi here, ” There is enough for everyone’s need. There isn’t enough for everyone’s greed”.

    I think every one should own the truth. The injustices borne by the different ethnic groups, in my opinion, can not be compared. No ethnic group, except African-americans, was forced to come to this land. Even though the civil war liberated the slaves in 1865, in earnest the real oppression and brutal marginalization began after that. The Jim Crow era was worse than slavery,in my opinion. It “ended” 3-4 decades ago.
    What the Chinese endured in the Reconstruction era was indeed very bad. When I read what the court justices wrote when the “Chinese exclusion act” was made into law, I find it hard to think of them as fellow human beings.
    I am sure every minority group has some story to tell. The important thing is not to lose focus of these important issues. I personally learned a great deal from all your discussions!

  54. merq wrote:

    Donna Darko and Kyla:

    Very well said… There would be no point even commenting any further, as you two have nailed every last point.

    Just Wondering:
    I’m sorry people choose to lump you and Bama together, as I’m sure even you deem such an assocition as a gross insult.

    I would never call you a racist based on your comments. Rather, I think you’re just afflicted with the form of naivete that can only come with White Privilege. Also, I read in your comments a subconscious unwillingness to recognize that privilege.

  55. Vandia wrote:

    Ren,
    I don’t know if the problem here is the number 400 or the fact that slavery in all its monstrosity existed for as long as people started to settle here…..?

  56. merq wrote:

    and thus ends our tarot card reading for today.

  57. ren wrote:

    Milan,

    “If private universities do indeed practice some sort of affirmative action with the aim of providing underrepresented minorities with quality education, is the benefit misplaced if the African-American students who are admitted into these schools do not have any family history in the U.S. that traces back to the times of slavery?”

    I would say no the benefit was not misplaced and the reason is due to the misconception that affirmative action was created exclusively for Black Americans. Nothing within the legal reading of affirmative actions makes any statement requiring one’s ancestors had to be a slave. It’s a policy open to all minorities that are historically subjugated to discrimination. Discrimination being the factor here. Because we are talking about academics, in particular, affirmative action is to give help to those that are underrepresented minorities that have a history of discrimination. Vague as it is, had they said only those who’s ancestors were slaves would block out pretty much all except Black Americans which would work little to counteract discrimination. Academic affirmative action’s big success in particular are white women who were historically barred from higher education. Thus “underrepresented minority” means historically underrepresented within academia and does not necessitate a racial or demographically disproportional requirement.

    Donna Darko,
    If you read past further than simply what insults you, you’d read my reasoning for it. I didn’t say they weren’t in shackles, just not for the claimed time. Riding false claims don’t help anyone’s cause especially if it’s to spur sympathy for one’s argument. Jewish Holocaust survivors realized how damaging the widely believed claim that “Jews were made into bars of soap by the Nazis” because it doesn’t help them, it helps Neo-Nazis who disprove that claim by the fact that all prominent Jewish Holocaust Historians deny it as urban myth. This one claim can end up discrediting the real experiences of Jewish Holocaust survivors and vindicates Neo-Nazis who counter it as “rationalists”. So no, it’s not insulting to reject a spurious claim, it’s more insulting to believe it.

  58. Vandia wrote:

    Higher education rate of African immigrants:

    I don’t how authentic this link is but I suppose will do for the time being:

    http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.african.american/msg/a085fd2a28776cac?q=educated+nation&hl=en&rnum=3

  59. Vandia wrote:

    “If private universities do indeed practice some sort of affirmative action with the aim of providing underrepresented minorities with quality education, is the benefit misplaced if the African-American students who are admitted into these schools do not have any family history in the U.S. that traces back to the times of slavery?”

    Ren, Ren I think you are missing the point here. Milan is talking about black people who are the descendants of the slaves brought from Africa Vs black people who voluntarily come to the U.S in pursuit of a better life. Milan’s point seem very valid actually because all the facts used to bolster affrimative action for African-americans really apply to black people whose ancestors came here as slaves. The recent immigrants came to the U.S of their own volition,already equipped with skills and knowledge.
    Milan- most students from Africa right now are not on affirmative action. I know for a fact that some of these students had to score quite exceptionally on their SATs and had to have very good transcripts. I don’t think the y would compete( at least in terms of university spots) with the “native” African-americans to whom affirmative action should rightly be reserved.

  60. ren wrote:

    Vandia wrote:

    “Ren, I don’t know if the problem here is the number 400 or the fact that slavery in all its monstrosity existed for as long as people started to settle here…..? ”

    You’re very right Vandia, and had it been worded as reasonably as that I’d have no problem. My issue wasn’t with the idea that Blacks were slaves (I’d never doubt that) my issue is squidfly’s use of black slavery as a tool to show how other other (Asian) minorities could not possibly suffer comparable discrimination. That’s debatable, which I don’t mind doing, but don’t push that argument by making a false claim.

    It was context of how that was used that bothered me. Don’t throw in some imaginary number to further distinguish the Black experience from all other minorities as to suggest your historical discrimination is monstrously greater then all. I found it a bit glib and condescending. You don’t have to blow up the number to impress me, I think one year of slavery in shackles is as equally disgusting as 400 or 10,000. You don’t have to win me over that slavery is bad any more than Jewish Holocaust survivors have to demonize the Nazis. Believe me, you don’t have to demonize Nazis, they do a fine job meeting that requirement on their own. As far as I’m concerned this issue is put to rest.

  61. ren wrote:

    Vandia,

    What didn’t make sense? Milan is asking whether African-Americans with no history of US slavery have a right to partake in affirmative action. I say yes, because slave ancestry is not a factor in affirmative action, the issue is counteracting historical discrimination, the means by which they do that is (usually) examining your race and your economic status. Affirmative action doesn’t technically have anything to do with race thus I made the point of white women being the affirmative action success story. Historically, within academia, women were the minority though demographically obviously they are not.

    Now that women are more freely accepted into higher education affirmative action became a race issue. Still, affirmative action legally is built with no rule stipulating ancestry to slaves. If that were the case no Native Americans, no Hispanics, no Asians would be able to engage in affirmative action programs. Milan spoke of recently immigrated Africans (and in particular their African-American children). Affirmative action legally makes no mention that one had to come to the country by the own volition or not, if you are a black immigrant you face the possibility of discrimination whether you are well educated and have skills or not. Anyone who is going to discriminate against blacks are not going to make the distinction that this is not an “American” black but an “immigrated” black individual. The whole factor here is historical discrimination, not slave ancestry.

  62. kim wrote:

    The merq-ury is rising.

    That was great, man.

  63. Modern Pitung wrote:

    I’ve written about this on my blog, here: http://alloutforthefight.blogspot.com/2007/01/theres-asians-on-campus-whiteys-work-is.html

    In a nutshell, my thoughts are this: this is a typical annoying NY Times article on some racial/social phenomenon that we all know about, that barely scratches the surface and then says “Hey, ain’t we (the dominant group in America at any given moment) just fucking great?”

    This article does a great job of saying the obvious (there’s a lot of Asians in the U.C. system!) but it doesn’t mention a lick about the dynamics of Asian-American population that underly why things work out the way they do. Like the class-determinist immigration policy we have, which poaches te best and brightest of well-educated East and South Asians, then pats them on the back for being “American” while it simultaneously poaches Southeast Asians with little education for purposes of a cheap labor force. Or the overall picture, of how Asians get duped each and every time into seeing the black struggle (that’s the whole reason we’re allowed in this damn country to begin with) as some enemy to our social status, rather than the overall white power structure.

    Anyway, more in the post.

  64. Raphael wrote:

    The article makes me sick as hell. Diversity? Is this diversity at all? Just 3% or less of Latinos and Blacks in UC. WTF is Jesse Jackson and NCLR? These people are just talking about racist whities, but they don’t talk about this issue.

  65. Stef wrote:

    Hate to bring up old sh!t, but,

    “Whites aren’t reading this site either except to check out which races are threatening. ”

    is another example of the often blatent and unchecked anti-white sentiment (for lack of a better descriptor) that bubbles up here now and then. How are statements like these helpful? Can’t we discuss racial issues (including white privlidge and our white-supremecist culture) without making blanket generalizations about the white people who come here? Some of us, as oppressive and evil as we are, would still like to learn and share at this site. What good does shutting whites out of the conversation do?

    Sorry if this is off-topic to the majority of this thread.

  66. Donna Darko wrote:

    ren, I don’t think anyone tried to out oppress each other. The thread started with JW telling others to work harder:

    1. The lesson for everyone else is to get busy and do the work.–JW

    which offended Squidfly who replied:

    2. Once again the History of 200 years of Civil Rights fought by Black Americans, paved the way for every non-white group in this country, that’s the dirty little secret of American race. It’s not simply about”Doing the work”

    That’s how it started. It’s not about working harder or being more inspired by us house niggers (Asians) who enable the system. It’s about looking at the who runs the capitalist system.

    Modern Pitung, nice blog.

    The Asian model minority myth is like most myths, with a tragic and comic aspect — see Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle.That said, however, the persistence of the Asian-American model-minority myth is fucking annoying and should be annoying to any Asian-American who strives to be fully human. Not only because it places impossible-to-reach expectations upon us, but because it is part and parcel of an attempt to keep us stranded from the struggles of black and Latino people and to strand black and Latino people from “polite” society in general.

    when investigating further you find that those that are shafted by the dismantling of affirmative action in higher education are those that need higher education the most — i.e., working class Asians. That is to say, while the pool of “Asians” in higher education at Berkeley and so on is greater now, examining further you’ll find that the U.C. system as a whole has lost a great deal of its working class component with the end of affirmative action: big decreases in Hawaiian native, Pacific Islander (Samoan, Tongan, etc.) and Filipino populations.

    I’m adding you.

  67. Donna Darko wrote:

    Offended by the Asian house nigger meme? Assuming JW is Asian, he and ren talk just like the white man:

    The problem here is not one of university admissions. If you want universities to better reflect the racial makeup of the general community, then you need to increase the pool of college-eligible minority students.

    The problem is not “diversity”, it’s the lack of minority “power in and over institutions”, as Modern Pitung put it on his blog.

    I still say that in today’s world, a black or Hispanic student with strong grades and good SAT scores has tremendous opportunities available. They can literally attend the university of their choice in many cases, including elite schools. I see real-world examples of this every year in my volunteer work.

    Pulling oneself up from one’s bootstraps is something ruling whites say.

    In fact, if you read my posts fully, you will see where I’ve commented frequently about black and Hispanic students who “do the work” and how they deserve access, too.

    You mean blacks and Hispanics who “do the work” are a small minority? Given that such a tiny minority make it into UC schools, they must be. Pulling up by one’s bootstraps is something white elites say.

    The question suggests that Blacks are necessary to non-black Americans… they are??? Without Blacks you think White Americans and Asian Americans wouldn’t be able to maintain the level of success they are achieving? Statements such as the one you propose are the ideas that are killing Black Americans. The idea that your under-achieving is a social necessity, that America just wants to purposely make you fail, that it’s unavoidable. This is ugly scapegoating, forcing this idea that Blacks need to accept the idea that they are society’s lesser is counterintuitive to the desire to better oneself.–ren

    Cluenessness aside, there is ignorance here of how blacks contributed to whites financial well-being since slavery.

  68. Donna Darko wrote:

    Stef, my apologies. Curious whites and white allies do read this site. I got caught up discussing affirmative action. Whites feel threatened by affirmative action or the Asian campuses. Minorities do not feel threatened by this.

  69. ren wrote:

    HAHAHA Donna,

    “Assuming JW is Asian, he and ren talk just like the white man:”

    It’s said with such disdain, I just have to chuckle. I was worried I was sounding too militant Asian American, but to you I guess that sounds “white”. I’ll be sure to avoid such language next time as to not insult the rest of the minorities. I love seeing the minority policing. My favorite is the Asian version which is the claim that you’re “white-washed”. I find this line of conversation annoying, because anyone who makes that claim also suggests by saying it that they are “authentic” in their views as a minority. I find the minorities need to keep their own in line with “their” (minority sanctioned) way of thinking that it does more to fragment minority communities than any of your spooky white hegemonic powers. Speak my mind but don’t say anything that might be regarded as “white”, ha, nice censorship. I’m not sure what race you are Donna but I assume you must know what it is that authentically makes up an Asian American point of view to know I’m deviating away from it. When were you assigned the duty of guardian of cultural authenticity, to ward off that line of thinking that will turn me white and scare me that I’m not “Asian” enough?

    Actually, I think it’s YOU that’s talking like the white man. You create this false category where you disparage those you disagree with by labeling them less than their racial identity, you presume to know what it means to be Asian American when their is a chance you aren’t even Asian (correct me on that). All the races do this, we call them the house nigger or banana or race traitor, we love to point out what embarrasses us fearing that they make “our race” look bad. But look bad to who? To white people. They’re scared as to how they are viewed by white people. And so you degrade them, thus technically catering to the whims of white society. You might think you have this true minority viewpoint but I see little to suggest that your behavior and representation isn’t being dictated by white tastes. You’re no better than a dominant white culture that tries to define for me what it is to be Asian. But I appreciate your superbly authentic minority voice… thanks.

    So far, I have yet to hear a convincing opinion from you. Apart from cop out reasoning like “you talk like a white person” or “that’s what a white person says”, “that’s what an elitist white person does” and so forth, sorry but that’s not an explanation and that’s a far cry from solid reasoning. I had asked Squidfly what his proof was that Asian American success isn’t due to their own resourcefulness, and so far I haven’t heard a thing. Again a question of voicing solid conclusions with no justification. You bring up my comment about Squidfly’s statement that “If America didn’t have Black People, then they’d have to invent some”. Apart from the scathing retort of “you’re clueless” it tells me you must “know” so feel free to enlighten me. So I ask, what is your reasoning that Black Americans are a necessity to White Americans such that if they didn’t have any they’d “have to invent them” (however that would be done)?

    By the disgust you have in what I say, you must disagree with my statement that Asian American’s could still achieve academic success… again make your justification. You seem convinced in the genuineness of this statement, perhaps you’d be brave and tell us why exactly? You had made some offhand comment about black’s contribution to the financial empowerment of white during slavery. What that has to do with Squidfly’s assertion that Asian American success is a product of Black Americans… well, Fair enough. But if you believe Squidfly’s claim and this resulting statement, then from what it sounds like without Black Americans, Asian Americans would to this day be deprived of all civil liberties and would in no way be attaining the success that they are. This is all based upon some evidence you won’t share to fit your hypothetical world. Sorry, but I find that a weak premise. I could simply say without the Chinese the transcontinental railroad would have never been built and the west would have never modernized to this very day. Again, a spurious claim, based purely on the idea that Chinese Americans were a necessity to the successful construction of the railroad, that it depended solely on them… then I guess I could get away with saying if Asian Americans hadn’t been around they’d have to be invented. Obviously with the adoption of the Asian Exclusion Acts and other measures to deny Asian Americans basic rights, suggest they weren’t so necessary to the greater white society that for a great part of the early 20th century Asian Americans were considered undesirables. But if your intent on believing that the cogs of the world would sputter and stop and that Asian Americans would have never advanced without Black Americans, fair enough… if you find that convincing.

  70. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

    I’m closing comments on this post.

    Quite honestly I’ve been disappointed by the discussions on Racialicious lately. Please see this post
    for a refresher on our core beliefs.

    I hope that going forward, we’ll all focus less on one-upmanship and having the last word. Instead, let’s keep the conversations productive.