Asian electorate drifts to the right

This is not crt. This is classic model minority myth isn’t it?

Once again, I’m looking for how this isn’t just another stereotype issue that has been recognized for decades.

Like most of these things, the use of the model minority myth to bludgeon other minorities is older than crt.

And in what way do her examples amount to asian crt?

Seriously?!?! If you want to call me a racist, you can just say it in the pit.

This is what I mean. 2 anecdotes is not data, its merely storytelling. You are creating a narrative whereby asians are labeling themselves as white adjacent. With two examples.
And why does it matter? Does this make it true? Woke asians frequently make racist remarks about asians because they think they can get away with it, that their race gives them some extra credibility. Would a racist remark by a black man about black people make that remark true?

It … didn’t?

It was just CRT. CRT was not Black-only, from the get-go.

Seriously. I mean, your own post acknowledges that Asians were included along with Blacks, but for some reason you think this is … wrong?

I didn’t call you a racist. Why do you think objecting to Asians and Blacks being considered together in the origins of CRT would be a racist thing to do?

Are they not Asian? Did they not call themselves White-adjacent? You seem to be using “storytelling” as a loaded word somewhat adjacent to “false narrative”, there. But that is not the case - it is both “my narrative”, and it is true.

Are you claiming my cites are made up?

So you’re saying just pointing out how whiteness co-opts Asians as a model minority is racist, now? Well, I don’t agree.

I don’t see anyone else discussing this except for people who are derided for being ‘woke’.

And if you agree that the model minority myth is used in service of the white dominant culture to deny real concerns in Asian groups as well as using success of some Asian groups to diminish the concerns of other minority groups, whether intentionally or unintentionally then I’m not sure why you are on this Crusade (or Jihad, if we want to be Asian :smiley:) against CRT since you seem to agree with a lot of it. The issue appears to me to be that you have constructed this narrative against CRT so much that even when you agree with principles of it you have to aggressively push it away or resort to very strange ideas that AsianCrit isn’t CRT at all.

Anywhere here is the Wikipedia definition:

From the UCLA School of Public Affairs:

(both from )

I think it would help if you indicated which parts you disagreed with and which parts you think AsianCrit is not discussing.

This is what you posted:

“I don’t think your problem with CRT is that Asians weren’t addressed - it’s that they dared to group Asians in with Blacks…”

What are the words “dared to” meant to imply there if not racism on my part?

Storytelling in this context falls into two categories. Anecdotes and parables.
“lived experiences” are anecdotes and the science fiction tales of white people selling black people to aliens is a parable.

If a black person claims that black people only have themselves to blame for the racial disparity in america, what should we make of that?

I’m claiming that the “storytelling” doesn’t make their conclusions (based on anecdote) true.

There is a difference between white people exploiting asian academic achievement to practice a form of model minority racism and acknowledging the importance of academics in some asian cultures as the source of their academic achievement.

White racists aren’t the ones driving a wedge between asians and URM with affirmative action. The wedge is caused by what affirmative action means to asian families. It means that our kids have to work harder to get the same recognition as other kids. It means that their efforts and sacrifices are devalued compared to the efforts and sacrifices of other kids. It means that our kids are put behind other kids based purely on the color of their skin. These things are not perpetrated by white supremacists, they are inflicted on us by woke white liberals who pay for their white guilt with the oppression of asians.

Affirmative action doesn’t have to discriminate against asians but the way it is practiced today asians bear the overhwhelming majority of the burden and any criticism of this inequity is met with accusations of racism or something along those lines.

We aren’t asking for special treatment. As RBG so famously quoted: "“I ask no favor for my [race]. All I ask of our brethren is that they take their feet off our necks.”

As I pointed out, surveys shows 70% of Asian Americans support affirmative action in higher education. So what a minority of Asian Americans feel about affirmative action probably isn’t the biggest reason for any wedge.

It’s not CRT. The exploitation of the model minority myth started in the 1960s as a counterargument to some of the stuff from the civil rights movement. The "myth part of the mpodel minority myth is not that asians aren’t doing better because of their dedication to education and academic achievement, because that is in fact the primary reason why asians are doing better. The “myth” part of the model minority myth is the notion that asians have achieved this type of success because things are relatively fair. Asians have achieved success in spite of racism not because racism doesn’t exist. A granular look at asians shows that it is only some asian ethnicities that are thriving while others struggle. The dividing line seems to be along two axes. Self selected immigrants (like the filipinos, among the wealthiest groups in america, who come here as nurses (or are related to filipinos who come here as nurses)), and asians from confucian cultures that stress academic achievement (in some cases coming from cultures with a history of academic achievement as the primary method of inter-generational social mobility for thousands of year).

How CRT views affirmative action.

CRT started in law schools. It was mostly about how facially neutral laws created and interpreted by white folks from a white perspective advanced or perpetuated racial injustices. They had a working premise but they were clearly making it up as they went along. And things went in all sorts of directions because CRT wasn’t driven by a principled rights based approach, rational analysis or data, it was driven by “lived experiences” and “narratives”

Critical race theorists justify AA on the grounds that the underlying assumption of a neutral merit system was created by whites from a white perspective and give whites an unfair advantage in what is supposed to be a race neutral evaluation. Why then does AA discriminate mostly against asians? Why are the preferences that unjustly tip the scales in favor of whites ignored by CRT folks in favor of AA programs that discriminate against asians? Asians are a politically powerless minority group and this makes us vulnerable to oppression based on prejudices about asian personal traits.

Prejudice + power = racism.

CRT has always had a problem with non-white success. Derrick Bell’s description of the jewish reaction to the sale of blacks to the aliens is a typical example of how crt treats model minorities. His characterization of Jewish opposition to the sale of blacks is pretty ridiculous.

CRT is not a rights based philosophy, it is a race based philosophy. Everything that undermines their argument is dismissed as a “social construct” including merit and logical reasoning. CRT has effectively immunized itself from logic.

In theory we do. In practice, not so much. See, polls on support for repealing race blind admission by asians in california.

Just to clarify the California data more specifically:


I see two issues. One, you don’t understand the purpose of Affirmative Action, and two, you don’t understand how many CRT theorists dislike Affirmative Action, including your favorite whipping post, Derek Bell, who called Affirmative Action “the latest contrivance the society has created to give blacks the sense of equality while withholding its substance.” (and that it gives blacks a slight leg up only to the extent that the gains do not threaten white status. See the article below:

Affirmative Action has been seen by many in the Civil Rights movement as a form of reparative program to atone for American theft of the wealth of different ethnic groups. And some CRT theorists believe that it would be good to have it as a sort of reparation (see linked article). As an atonement, specifically for 250 years of the theft of black wealth and then 100 years of legally denying accumulation of black wealth.

And in fact I think most Asian Americans understand this which is why you see high numbers in surveys of Affirmative Action. Because most Asians are immigrants who had higher education degrees when they came over (for example 69% of Indian Americans are foreign born, though that doesn’t apply to every Asian group - Japanese Americans for one are less made up of recent immigrants) - in effect bringing that wealth over. Which puts Asian Americans in a drastically different situation than Black Americans, or even Latin Americans, in a lot of instances.

We? Speak for yourself. And as @DeadTreasSecretaries link showed that Proposition 16 Asian opposition is mostly led by Chinese immigrants, while among all Asian Americans the numbers for Prop 16 is a good deal above those against. According to recently survey by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, Asian Americans are the second highest in favor or Prop 16, just about Latin support (and among blacks, Prop 16 has 51% approval, 28% against, and 26% undecided). Whites are the only group where the anti is above the pro.

I think I do. The justification for AA is not merely “atonement” (and in what way does it make sense that asians atone to hispanics?), it is also premised in part on the notion that we can devalue objective measures because they don’t really measure merit anyways.

I mentioned him once, maybe twice. Did i mention him in some inappropriate or racist way that you would associate me with using a black man as a whipping post?

I understand that a lot of crt folks think that aa is a cheap way for white people to alleviate themselves of white guilt and i agree. AA has for the most part helped black immigrants and hispanics at the expense of asians.

If you come from a culture that values education, you are more likely to have education. Indians are a special case, like filipinos in that their immigration is largelybased on their education, Indians and filipinos have the highest incomes in large part because of this.

In what way does that make it right to preference a poor hispanic over a poor asian? This is the way liberals explouit the model minority myth to dismiss the concerns of asians in the aa conversation. If you want to give hispanics a break because they are poor or uneducated then why are the existing preferences for poor students of “first in family to go to college” preferences not enough? Why does this preference have to be awarded along racial lines? For the most part affirmative action is not helping the descendants of slaves, it is helping hispanics and black immigrants.

“Among all Asian Americans, 36 percent said they supported the proposition, while 22 percent were opposed and 42 percent were undecided or didn’t know. The survey received support from Asian Americans Advancing Justice, a group that supports affirmative action.”

So 36% is not 70%.

70% of non-chinese support affirmative action. The aversion to affirmative action might be more pronounced in the immgirant community but the sentiment is shifting in the entire chinese community and the asian american electorate as a whole. Chinese americans account for more than a quarter of all asians.

Asians overwhelmingly support a diverse campus but do not seem to think that race should be a major factor in college admissions. And they support affirmative action in theory by large margins (65% support the concept), but only 13% of asians think that race should be a major factor in college admissions. And as we see only a third want to repeal the ban on affirmative action in california.

I stand by my statement that you really don’t understand the concept behind Affirmative Action. As the US Commission on Civil Rights in 1977 said, Affirmative Action is “any measure, beyond simple termination of a discriminatory practice, adopted to correct or compensate for past or present discrimination or to prevent discrimination from recurring in the future.” Not to mention blaming blacks for getting a seat at the table as recompensense for being denied so long as opposed to blaming whites for their own affirmative action - legacies. That almost never gets brought up, nor challenged. I wonder why.

Do you dispute systemic discrimination targeted at Hispanic Americans? I would argue that discrimination in the US against Latin people as a group have been at a greater rate than those against Asian Americans (and yes, I realize that it is ironically because Chinese Americans were kicked out in the early 20th Century and many Asians were not allowed to come in until the 1960s).

I would doubt that significantly. Generally it is middle class black people who benefit from Affirmative Action in education. To the point where some scholars believe that it creates a ‘mismatch’ (ie, they aren’t ready for it, so they drop out - though those scholars support a modest use of racial premises) - other scholars disagree about the mismatch. Regardless it shows that the main beneficiaries are middle class blacks.

Do you really believe that the 51% of Blacks truly support Affirmative Action based on the numbers in the Prop 16 poll? Perhaps questions are framed differently, but you are ignoring that 22% are in opposition, Asian Americans support Prop 16 the second highest of any group and claiming the 42% of undecided for the anti-AA side.

And look at your Pew link, if you add whether Asians think race should be either a major or minor factor in college admissions they are #1 among all races. With 13% saying race should be a minor factor (only second to Blacks) and 29% saying race should be a minor factor. That’s 42% of all Asians who say race should be a major and minor factor in admissions, which is higher than 38% of Blacks who say the same. The Pew survey is saying that Asians appear to be the biggest supporters of race being considered for admissions, which seems to be pretty interesting, wouldn’t you think?

I don’t think anyone can say that the asian experience approaches the black experience during slavery. But neither does the hispanic experience. In what way was the hispanic experience sufficiently like the black experience that you would give them a preference at the expense of asians?
In what way does the asian community have to atone to the hispanic community?

Its still not 70%
Affirmative action as it is applied today is not a minor factor in admissions.
And yes a large minority of asians support some form of affirmative action (as do I), but it’s not 70%.
And whatever the number is today it is lower than it used to be. And that is part of the basis for the shift of the asian electorate to the right. If the republicans are ever successful in ejecting the racists from their midsts, they would see significantly more support from asians as there would then onyl be one party with anti-asian policies.

The country makes amends for systemic discrimination. Hispanics have been systemically discriminated through redlining (it didn’t just affect blacks) and are denied home loans at many levels above white Americans. Latinos were indeed lynched as well, after the US acquired a good chunk of Mexico. It was not on the level of slavery and Jim Crow, undoubtably, but the impoverishment of those communities was something that was done deliberately.

Like I said, different questions sometimes get different results (like only 38% of blacks who believe racial preferences should be major or minor part of admissions - I see you ignore that number for some reason). But with this different question, you still get Asians to be very high on the list of support of Affirmative Action. So I’ll settle for Asian Americans are one of the biggest supporters of Affirmative Action among all Americans. And I see no proof that it is lower now than it used to be.

Do you have a cite? Because this doesn’t sound right to me. Based only on the effects we saw in california’s uc system(particularly berkely and ucla), the biggest drop numerically were white kids followed by hispanics followed by blacks (although blacks had the largest percentage drop). The black kids in ivy leagues are disproportionately immigrants or the children of immigrants. And yes these immigrants are frequently middle class but they are not as frequently the descendants of slaves.

Are you saying that Pew doesn’t know how to conduct polls?

So what if asians supported it higher than blacks and hispanics, the support is still anemic.

Redlining? You mean like chinatowns?
You mean like how they used to burn down those chinatowns and chase them out of town?
You don’t think racism impoverished and harmed asians? What?!?!?

And its not the “country” making amends, its asians. We are granting a preference to hispanics at the expense of asians.

Asians have to pay for the spanish american war? Are you fucking kidding?

With only 13% supporting racde as a major consideration and 29% supporting it as a minor consideration, it seems like a shift away from the 70% support you were talking about earlier.

I noted the Mismatch scholars (though I don’t fully agree with their prescriptions). Richard Sander notes that:

Are you saying you don’t understand how different polling questions can result in different results?!

And I do find it interesting how you really just plow through and it doesn’t faze you that other groups’ numbers are lower. If Asians are mad about being passed over by Affirmative Action, wouldn’t you think the benefited groups, Black and Hispanics would be more in favor of it? Are you just not at all intellectually curious about that? Is just your narrative the only thing that matters?

Systemic Racism has not had the same negative effects on Asian American as it has on Hispanic Americans. And I am perfectly fine with the country deciding to benefit Latin or Black Americans who have had systemically oppressed in greater ways. I still am not seeing an objection to white legacy spots here. Why is that? Blaming other minorities rather than the whites who keep spots for themselves. Curious.

You realize you are talking about two different polls with two different questions and different data sets and methodologies. I’m guessing from the same Pew poll that the majority of black folk don’t want racial preferences in education means blacks are against affirmative action as a group right? I get you want to put all of your marbles in this poll because it advances your agenda, but can you think more deeply about this for one second here? If it shows more Asian Americans are pro racial preferences in education than any other group then perhaps there is wide support for Affirmative Action in the Asian community. This poll shows more so than in the Black community.

That you seem to have some problem with Asians being grouped in with other minorities, as if it were a wrong thing. Why that is is known only to you. I’m not going to speculate. I can think of other reasons than racism, that would take the same “dared to” phrasing.

For here, I’ll just note that you haven’t said I was incorrect to note that you treated Asians being grouped in with other minorities as somehow wrong, quibbles about how I said it notwithstanding.

They’d be wrong.
Are either of my cites examples of Asians claiming they “only have themselves to blame”? No? Then what is the point of your question?

I didn’t cite them for their conclusions, just for the examples of Asians saying one phrase referring to themselves. Whether they are wrong to think that is irrelevant (not that I think they are wrong, mind you - as a member of the local preferred White-adjacent minority, I recognize exactly what they’re talking about).

Functionally? Not at all. Just because whiteness is pointing to a real phenomenon doesn’t make it any less co-opted.

Your post seem inapposite. I mention that blacks had the largest percentage drop but hispanics had the largest numerical drop when admissions became race blind. So I think it is reasonable to conclude that race conscious admissions helped hispanics more than blacks. And I don’t know the breakdown of which black students lost out with race blind admissions, on east coast ivy league schools the majority of black students are NOT the descendants of slaves.

Once again, do you think Pew doesn’t know how to conduct polls? By this rationale you can dismiss any poll that is presented as evidence by claiming that you don’t think the wording is good. Professional pollsters (like pew) know how to phrase poll questions to get accurate results.

It is irrelevant what other numbers are. Your claim was that there was 70% support for affirmative action in the asian community. I am providing evidence that this claim is incorrect. If you are trying to make a different point by pointing out their relative support compared to other races then please do so but only a tiny minority of asians support the use of race as a major factor in admissions (this is true of every group with the highest level of support for the use of race as a major factor at 18% for blacks) and a minority of asians support the use of race as even a minor factor in admissions (although at 42% their support for the use of race as a minor or major factor is higher than any of the other races polled), but 42% is way less than the 70% you claimed.

And even if there was 70% support for affirmative action is it is practiced today, that wouldn’t make it right. If there was 70% support for banning gay marriage, that wouldn’t make it right.


So you think that hispanics have been oppressed enough in the past 6to justify oppressing asians today?

I am assuming you are conceding the obvious point that aa as it is practiced today discriminates against asians.
And of course I think athletic, donor, and legacy preferences are bullshit. I have said so repeatedly. Do I need to preface every post criticizing aa’s discriminatory effect on asians with a caveat that legacy and athletic preferences are bad too?

But when it comes to justiciability, you cannot sue a school for favoring repeat customers. You can sue a school for discriminating on the basis of race. The legal system is not a good vehicle for eliminating legacy preferences. That can really only be achieved through political pressure. Asians have no political power, blacks and hispanics do. Perhaps the burden to change legacy preferences should be on the folks who are capable of influencing legacy preferences rather than on the group that doesn’t even have enough fo a political voice to prevent racial discrimination against asians.

I am presenting evidence. If you don’t want to respond to the evidence, that’s fine. I just did a google search and it was one of the first results that were relevant. Normally when people say my polls are bad, they provide polls of their own. They don’t usually accuse pew of not doing their polls correctly.

I don’t think you are arguing to find the truth, you are finding the truth that fits your arguments.

Like what other reason?

That being asians does not give their opinions more weight than yours. Their race has nothing to do with the merit of their arguments or position. Asians can absolutely be racist against other asians just as blacks can be racist against other blacks.

Of course there is. One is wagging your finger at other minorities and saying, why can’t you be like them. The other is recognizing that a vastly different history created vastly different cultures that placed vastly different weight on education. Asians don’t work harder than blacks, They work harder than pretty much everyone, including whites. I don’t think it is reasonable to expect other cultures to have the same widespread (near religious) faith in education and to work that hard and make that many sacrifices without the millennia of academics being the primary source of social mobility in their culture. But the work is still done and the effort is no easier for an asian child than a hispanic child. The sacrifices are still made and the sacrifices are no less painful for an asian family than it is for a hispanic family.