assignment

The creation of model minorities

During the first few weeks of class we uncovered the restrictive immigration laws (Links to an external site.) that targeted Asians. The limits of who could come (race, skill, gender) created a lower class Asian male population. The strong hatred towards their role as laborers created discontentment and helped shape early images of Asians in America that lasted for decades. This would change in the 1960's due to two events that were happening simultaneously. The 1965 Immigration Act and the Civil Right's Movements. One created an educated skilled workforce (of families) and the other positioned Asian American's as the "good" minorities strategically pitted against the "bad" minorities.

Civil Rights, "bad" versus "good" people of color

march on washington

The 1960's were a time of change in the United States. The nation was dealing with divisions and populations that were done with the status quo. Leaders were motivating their communities to stand up and fight for what was right: equality and access to all parts of society. At the forefront were African Americans. African American leaders were the most heard and more importantly seen, though people from all walks of life were heavily involved in the movement. A negative by product of being the face of change was that African Americans were now seen as disruptive to the comforts of those who benefited from the former years. The movement by an oppressed community of color to stand up for change was seen as appalling. The revolutionists were not celebrated for lifting up Americans to enjoy equal rights, rather they were seen as disruptive and "bad" people of color.

The demonizing of African Americans who worked to ensure rights for all marginalized people was the complete opposite of the "new" Asian Americans. The new Asian American community was seen as people who were dedicated to their families, hard work, and kept their heads down. Asian Americans reaped the many benefits from the Civil Rights Movement and ride the glory of being the "good" people of color for many decades to come. This act of complacency, within the margins of society is rewarded with labeling Asian Americans with positive characteristics. The celebration of the immigrant success stories act as "motivation" for other communities of color but inevitably (and purposely) created divisions. These model minorities achieve success in such rapid rates that they became the epitome of the American dream. As the reading "Continuing Significance of the MMM: The Second Generation," mentions the ability to reach this dream is through the individual's own volition, they just need to have on the right pair of boots.

Self-determination and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps (despite various sizes of "boots" and obstacles) highlight not only the ability for "anyone" to achieve success in America but also puts full ownership on the individuals who fail. The bootstrap theory is essentially the belief that through personal hard work and the will to overcome any obstacle (if your boot slipping, don't complain, just pull it up) anything can be achieved. This narrative ignores the differences in the obstacles faced by each individual as well as how groups in society are treated. Ignoring those facts makes it easier to blame whole communities for their inabilities to rise in society instead of looking at the many factors that impede their progression. Somehow none of that matters when it comes to the conversations about Asian America.

The narrative around the Asian American experience is that they are immigrants who have the disadvantage of the English language (for one) among other hurdles but are somehow able to become successful immigrants within one to two generations. The successful application of the bootstrap theory makes Asian Americans fine examples that other communities of color should seek to replicate. The message is that the hard work of Asian Americans pays off and that if other communities of color fail, it's due to their lack of effort (again ignoring the fact that Asian Americans are treated much differently in society than other communities of color). The celebration of their success is welcomed and works to distance themselves from other communities of color. Divisions between communities are encouraged since they act as an important tool to maintain control and balance of power by those in control and power.

The positioning of the "obedient" Asian Americans against the "defiant" African Americans during the Civil Rights Movements was just one part of the formula towards model minority status. Asian Americans could not be seen as economically or educationally driven without the support of the immigration act. The educated and financially sound Asian America of the second wave could not be as such without the categories of the 1965 Immigration Act.

Immigration act shapes a new Asian America

The shift in the position of Asian Americans in the US changed from 1882-1943. Repeals to the Exclusion Acts came over time but the doors swung completely open in 1965 with the Immigration and Nationality Act, also known as the Hart–Celler Act. (Links to an external site.) The move to rid national origins quotas (as set in place by the 1952 McCarran–Walter Immigration and Nationality Act and the Immigration Act of 1924) was initial set forth by President Kennedy then picked up by President Johnson. An immigration act that would rid of a nationality provision was not coincidental for the time. This categorical undoing of the previous immigration act was in line with the Civil Rights Movement, accepting people for their merit, not their origins. The two crafters of the bill, McCarran and Walter, rid of the national orgins quota, the Asia-Pacific Triangle, emphasized skilled workers and families as immigrants. They did not expect there to be an influx of Asians due to the limited numbers that were in the United States. Little did they know, the Hart-Celler act quickly became known as the "Brothers and Sisters Act" in the Chinese American community, a road to immigration and family reunification that had been shut for eighty-three years. Asians were excited and found many ways to enter into the US, be it by family ties, work visas or the least desirable means, as refugees.

There are seven categories of the Hart-Celler act but they boil down to three major categories:

Family Reunification

Professionals

Refugees

The Measures of the Myth

Although refugees are an important part of the second wave Asian American community they did not help to frame the myth that we are focusing on, because frankly they do not fit the narrative. Their obvious exclusion better serves the model minority myth (and the influx of refugees doesn't come until after 1975) but I will use the population towards the end of this lecture to explain how they break the myth. We are going to focus on the first two categories of the 1965 Immigration Act and see how it shaped the model minority image. Because there were so many utilizing both the professional and family reunification categories, communities grew and expansion of Asian Americans reached into the suburbs. The heavily recruited populations filled voids of talent in the US at that time. The medical personnel (Philippines), technological engineers (South Asians) and scientists (South Korea and Taiwan) tended to skip the ethnic enclave and live settle in the suburbs closer to their workplaces. Their children were attending top rated schools, were being groomed to be the next STEM professional and were essentially becoming the next generation of the model minority. The model minority myth or MMM consisted of four attributes. The understanding was that Asian Americans all exhibited these traits:

High Income

High Educational Level

High Family Stability

Low Crime Rate

These characteristics have been tied to the Asian American community since, and we will take some time understanding how parts of it can seem true but also what could be attributing to these characteristics.

Those Asian American Whiz Kids

time magazine cover titled "Those Asian American Whiz Kids"

High Income and High Educational Level:

We can simply use the immigration act to explain how these myths came about. Many of the immigrants that came in as professionals were educated and specifically in the STEM fields. These are and have always been secure jobs with higher pay. Why would so many Asian immigrants enter into these fields, especially if some may face language barriers? First, we have to look at who is coming and from where. The Filipino doctors and nurses who were recruited to fill the labor shortage of medical professionals had exposure to Western worlds long before their arrival. The Philippines spent some time under Spanish colonial rule (400+years) and then American occupation (close to 50 official years). They have a good grasp of the English language and Western cultures. Those who helped to shape the Silicon Valley, the South Asians came from a British colony (almost 100 years) also had some exposure to the English language. But what about those who had limited English skills? How could they transfer their skills and/or continue education in fields that most Americans find difficult because they all involve math? (Here comes the "all Asians are good at math" stereotype breaker).

Math is universal. Math doesn't need a translator. For many immigrants, the skill of math can be transferred and utilized in the STEM fields quickly ensuring employment and often times well paid employment. This then in turn motivates the successful immigrant to encourage their children to follow in the same path, one that they know guarantees steady, high income. (Hence the generations of engineers and nurses who then become stereotypes). More often than not Asian immigrants enter into fields that have math components but do not desire to be in that career. Their sacrifice to be in that job for stability is yet another admirable trait of the model minority.

Another way to break the myth of high income is to answer the question "How can Asian Americans afford to live in big, expensive cities?" One explanation is the tactic of patchworking or pooling resources. Often times these immigrant families who help to sponsor family members to the US live together, under one roof. There could be four to six adult incomes contributing to the family home, thus enabling them to live in cities in the US that have high standards of living.

One Big Happy Family

High Family Stability:

The family reunification category explains this pretty simply. Family members in the US petition to sponsor family members from back home and "voila" population growth. Outsiders see whole happy families. They see a complete family unit comprised of parents, children and grandparents (often brought over to help watch the kids while the parents work). What they DON'T see are the conflicts that occur within the home. There could be all types of abuse, marital problems, gambling problems, drug and alcohol addiction but it's never uncovered or seen in public. Why? The art of "Saving Face". The protection of the family's reputation to avoid any possibly humiliation is one of the utmost important values in many cultures including Asian cultures. The notion that Asian Americans have stable families is just another positive core value system that is applauded in American culture (where there is high divorce rates and single parenthood).

Low Crime Rates:

We all know that the local news is focused on stories that will engage audiences long enough not to click away from their station. Violent and property crimes are what draw viewers in. The most aired criminals committing these types of crimes are African American and/or Chicano/Latinos. This focus on these "bad guys" unfortunately becomes synonymous with these communities of color. Crimes that involve Asian/ Asian Americans revolve more around the crimes committed AGAINST them. We have seen so much of it this year with the Corona Virus with targeted messaging about the roots of the virus. Hate crimes, personal property attacks, physical attacks are the most common but even those are often not aired nationally rather they're seen as a more localized issue. What this does is send the message that these model minorities are law abiding citizens who do no harm and mean no harm. What is not aired or even spoken of are that crimes that Asian Americans DO commit. Underground crimes (street gangs, drug and human trafficking) and white-collar crimes (money laundering, tax evasion-hence "cash only" signs) are not as flashy and evening news worthy. It wouldn't fit the narrative to have Asian Americans as the "bad guy" since they've been put up on the "good little" minority pedal stool.

The Southeast Asian dilemma

This Time magazine article (Links to an external site.) touches upon what it means to be a model minority today, specifically in the times of COVID, BLM and the Southeast Asian presence or absence in the model minority myth. As stated before the refugee population did not boom in the US until the fall of Saigon in 1975. As a result of American involvement, refugees from Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos made the United States home and shook up the Asian American model minority myth. The refugee population fled their homes with little to no money and were not educated (some not all). They not only fled without the resources previously mentioned, many fled without families. In the dire situations only certain family members were able to escape and many lost their loved ones in the war. Their experiences differ vastly from the Asian Americans who fit in the other two categories. Their goals upon arrival were of survival as opposed to the other Asian Americans who come for immediate success. These refugees break the measures of high educational levels, income levels and family stability right off the bat. It isn't until their second or third generation that they see the turn of success begin to form. Unfortunately though, this population is at a great disadvantage. Because of their ties to the Asian American model minority status they become part of aggregated conversations that they do not necessarily belong to. Their experiences differ greatly as well as their community needs. These needs become unmet because of their label as Asian Americans, the community that is supposed to be successful, especially through their own volition.

This population was also settled in urban areas with government housing support, facing the realities of life with limited resources. They were part of communities who were struggling to make ends meet and often exposed to drug and gang violence which were at their peak in the 1980's. Quickly the children of these refugees would try to find their place in this new home. Often times the children of these refugees who faced bullying from their peers learned how to empower themselves by mimicking their peers by exuding hypermasculine traits (as we saw with the hip hop lecture and Stupid Young). Becoming involved in gangs not only creates a sense of belonging but also a sense of empowerment for the young people. If we look at this alone, we can see how this this breaks the last measure of the myth.

Problems with the Myth

Most people would assume that being identified as the model minority would be a good thing (considering the opposite of course). The problems that plague the community are more of what would help the community integrate in society and the ties to the notions of the self-help successful community of color.

Enhanced tensions

As we saw in the hip hop lecture the tensions between Asian Americans and other communities of color have occurred through different periods of time. What exacerbates these tensions are the deliberate calls of attention to the "successful community of color" in opposition of the "unsuccessful communities of color". Discontentment is bound to arise when this division is created. If one community is often told that their failure is due to their own inabilities without acknowledging the differential treatment within society, how else would they feel about the celebrated model minority? These deliberate omissions only further the distance between these two communities who actually share more commonalities than often revealed. This Time's magazine article (Links to an external site.) highlights this very issue and discusses the historical disconnects and connections between the two communities.

Lack of resources

As discussed with the Southeast Asian Refugees, the identity of "Asian" automatically attaches "success". When a community that does not come in with the same resources and support system seeks out support/aid they are often ignored due to their identity as Asian American. If, for example a Laotian community-based organization is seeking our grants or funding for their program they would often be overlooked because:

People do not even know who Laotians are

Once they learn their Asian, they assume they really do not need financial support

Disaggregating the data would reveal how this is a myth and create a better understanding of the Asian Asian experience.