The Seattle Times, which in the 20 years I’ve been here has never had a Latino on the payroll who had an actual voice on the editorial page, has however had those of Asian heritage, of whom Sharon Pian Chan is the latest. Some of us, of course, might remember Michelle Malkin—who I labeled the “First Lady of Hate” in a post some time ago. But enough said about the polluted state of the Times every time she took fingers to keyboard; One of Chan’s first contributions on the editorial page was commenting on the Pew Foundation’s recent report on the “The Rise of Asian Americans,” which describes the community’s elevated income and education levels—and naturally with the “happiest” outlook on life, as they should. None of this is actually news; I’m not sure why the Pew Foundation’s report is any more “significant” than similar reports that have been out for a decade or more. Apparently the “new” news is that legal immigration from Asia outpaced that from Latin America for the first time in 2010. There are reasons why this number may be skewed and why it is essentially meaningless in long-term demographic trends, which I will get to later.
But back to Chan’s piece, which was basically her to what in her opinion was much needed cheerleading for her “people.” With a population of 604,252 in Washington state, “We're the third most Asian American state after California and Hawaii.” That’s an interesting statistic. The Pew Foundation also noted that 15 percent of the 11 million or who really knows illegal immigrants in this country are Asian, the large majority who entered the country in that condition, rather than overstaying their visas. That means that one-in-nine Asian residents are in the country illegally. Since there are 400,000 residents in the state who are Latino, and if 75 percent of illegal immigrants are Latino, that means one-in-six are of that status in this country. So what does that mean for this state, especially since it is a portal for Asian immigration? That theoretically there are 67,000 Asian residents in this state who are here illegally, about the same number (theoretically) as Latinos? Is there then a reason why Asians prefer to remain “under the radar?” Chan mentions illegal immigration as an issue of sole concern to Latinos, while conveniently failing to mention the possible interest of “other” groups. But no, she is just happy to allow Latinos to get all of the beat-down.
Chan’s opines “Does this mean the political candidates will finally start paying attention to the Asian American vote? Or that news organizations will start mentioning Asian Americans when it writes about race and elections?” I am willing to confess that Asian-Americans voters are not highlighted by the media, but it also my impression that the media believes that the Asian votes tends to reflect that of the white vote, since they have more in common in economic and social strata. I’m not really certain Chan has a point here outside states where the Asian population is concentrated, especially since the Asian population is still either less than 5 percent or up to six percent of the population over all, depending upon what numbers you choose to look at. The 2010 Census also seems to show that the Asians are much less likely than whites and blacks to have an interest in government work. One thing that is clear is that is that Asian residents seemed to prefer to be “under the radar” for a very long time. While blacks fought the fight and often paid dearly for it, Asians remained on the sidelines watching (yes, the Japanese were interned, but so were Germans and Italians; on the other hand, hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens of Mexican descent were “repatriated” to Mexico for less reason). While it is true that Asians have less “visibility” in the U.S. politically and culturally, this is largely of their own making. In his 1903 book “The Souls of Black Folk,” W.E.B. Du Bois’ asks his black readers “How does it feel to be a problem?” when they publicly demand a place in society. On the other hand, people of Asian descent are the “good minority that seeks advancement through quiet diligence in study and work and by not making waves.” So, “How does it feel to be a solution?” What does he mean? That Asians found “success” by not trying to upset the status quo—i.e. not challenging white supremacy. This is even true of the Asian Indian-American governors of South Carolina and Louisiana—both Republicans and both who owe their positions to genuflecting to the white electorate.
Chan goes on to say that “A critical mass of Asian Americans — the ones who can't afford the high-roller lunches — need to make their voice heard at rallies and campaign events. Young Latino voters made immigration a high profile campaign issue, and Obama was forced to waive deportation for young illegal immigrants to win the Latino vote.” Well first off, Latinos didn’t make immigration as issue, anti-immigrant xenophobes and media like the Times with its countless paranoid, and ill-informed stories about illegal immigration made it an “issue”—as did the Obama administration and its runaway ICE raids while failing to tackle immigration reform, which would also benefit those 1.8 million Asian immigrants of questionable status I mentioned before. Secondly, for a demographic that even Chan admits is doing extraordinarily well in this country, what is it that they want to change? I’m fairly certain that all those Asians residents who are doing very well in this country don’t care about the problems of blacks and Latinos in this country; the only reason why they might want to be “heard” is to maintain their status, since there seem very little need to improve upon it without detriment on the quality of other demographics, including whites. We only have to see that in many colleges and universities, the Asian presence is as high as 3 times that of its representation in the general population.
Now, I’m not going to sit here and not give the Asian community its due. Whereas in Latin America, where a class system along racial and “ethnic” lines limits educational and economic opportunities to Euro-elites—meaning that the population most likely to emigrate are the “ethnicities” who have suffered social and economic oppression (at the hands of right-wing regimes sponsored by this country)—Asian immigrants are largely a “self-selected” group, meaning that those who immigrate legally are not those who can swim across the Pacific Ocean, but educated people who see the U.S. as a place they can make a lot money; those with less prefer to stowaway on cargo ships or slip in from Canada. These immigration patterns are not true across the board, of course; the refugees who were the legacy of the Vietnam War did not have the same level of education or skills as those who came later from East Asia or India. The poverty and unemployment rates between Asian “ethnicities” are also rather wide; one study I encountered claimed that poverty rates ranged from 5 percent for Filipinos to 31 percent for Cambodians. In any case, children of educated immigrants are also tend to take their own education more seriously, or have been pushed in that direction. Asian unemployment rates are lower overall than for whites, their median and household income is higher than any other group, and they are more likely to own small businesses (like convenience stores, restaurants and Laundromats) and not as likely to be identified with poverty or gang activity.
All of the above should satisfy the notion that while Asian-Americans as a whole—but not necessarily all of its subsets—are, if flying under the radar, doing quite well. That is something everyone takes for granted in this country. Yet Ms. Chan would prefer that this be shouted from the top of every mountain. We are the greatest. We are better than you. Or is this only an impression one receives from that famous cultural “reserve,” “stoicism” and “aloofness” that are used to explain perceived rudeness, self-admiration, and racism toward other groups? OK, let me stop there and say that I should reserve this impression to narcissistic college students and non-residents unused to a heterogeneous society who don’t think it is necessary to “get along” or not have racist ideas. I remember being on a bus that picked-up a teenage girl who appeared to be Japanese; she must have been just “visiting,” because someone who likely was her mother seemed to trying to calm her nerves before she boarded the bus. Once on, she looked at the heterogeneous nature of the passengers, and appeared positively terrified to take a seat despite the fact that half the seats were empty; she probably grew-up believing the kind of stereotypes that caused a Chinese man to express shock that a black man was elected president in the U.S.; he thought all blacks were janitors or worked in cotton fields. She stood directly behind the driver for another 45 minutes into Seattle, occasionally glancing fearfully behind her. It kind of made me sick.
Asian immigrants are also not necessarily more likely to “assimilate” into the culture than other groups; “Chinatowns” all over the country seem to be virtual cities within a city, with their own separate laws, customs and language. As I mentioned in a previous post, police in cities like Chicago find it almost impossible to break Asian gangs engaged in extortion, kidnapping and drug-dealing, because close-lipped residents obey a different “code” than the rest of the city.
There have also been many “myths” about the “model minority” label that Asians in this country enjoy that might look true from a distance, but don’t add-up to closer scrutiny. A New York University report a few years ago found that contrary to popular belief, “most of the bachelor’s degrees that Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders received in 2003 were in business, management, social sciences or humanities, not in the STEM fields: science, technology, engineering or math. And while Asians earned 32 percent of the nation’s STEM doctorates that year, within that 32 percent more than four of five degree recipients were international students from Asia, not Asian-Americans.” Asian-Americans are also more likely to be in community colleges than four-year institutions. Let’s sit back and think upon this. The prevailing stereotype is that because of their supposed advanced intellect, Asian-Americans are the “saviors” who will take the place of whites in the sciences, engineering or technological advancement; the reality is that multi-generational Asian residents are just as likely as other demographics to be caught-up in whatever disease afflicts American culture; they are just as much interested in making the “easy” money. So instead of inspiring and supporting homegrown talent, this is just more evidence that our high schools are teaching the easy way out. For those who are not college “material,” the failure to offer opportunities in manufacturing skills like machinist work is now is now coming to roost, as many companies are now complaining that their desire to resume hiring is being thwarted by the lack of workers with such hands-on skills. While many leading billionaires like Bill Gates call for loosening H-1B rules to allow more foreign workers with computer programming skills in the country, the dearth of skilled workers in “low” jobs is the real long-term problem. Are Asian immigrants the solution? The evidence doesn’t support that.
Now back to this Pew Foundation report that cites 2010 Census figures that Asian immigration exceeded that from Latin America for the first time, by about 50,000. The reasons for this, exclaimed cheerleaders for the Asian side, is that illegal immigration from Mexico was next to zero. The Census numbers, of course, only reflect legal immigration, meaning that, some reason, those who control the faucet have turned it up in Asia, and down in Latin America. The Census still predicts that by 2050, the Hispanic population will reach 132 million, while the Asian population will is predicted to reach 40.6 million, so I’m not sure what all the “excitement” is about. Even if illegal immigration from Latin American is stopped totally (and that from Asia continues unmolested), higher birthrates among Latinos will not change this equation to any significant degree. It also should be pointed out that the Census figures include citizens of foreign countries who are in the country on “extended business,” especially from India, China and Japan.
It is not my intention to even any “score” in the way the media treats different racial groups, in which Latinos seem to receive the short end of the stick; I’ve quoted a report in a previous post that conducted a survey of newspaper stories in which stories of the personal experiences and views of Latinos—despite representing more than 16 percent of the population—was a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of a mostly unrelievedly negative portrayals. Thus I have a tendency to be cynical about the motives of people who have the conceit to trumpet their already well-trumpeted success, especially when there are holes in the mythology.
No comments:
Post a Comment