Chpts. 1
East is East, East is West: Asians as Americans and

Begins with “the color line” quote from DuBois’s The Souls of Black Folk
and memories of his own “pre-race-conscious” self – memories of his childhood – note the Americana of it all – totally the same as most of our childhood memories; no sense of difference – until??
 

Asserts that theories of race relations in the US are incomplete without a treatment of Asians (Latinos, too, I’d say)

Can’t do “just black and white”

Highlights the tendency to conflate “race problem” with African American

Asks, where do Asians fit??
In between (some have argue, a la middle man theories)
Superior (for those who buy into the “model minority” myth)
Inferior (to some racists)
Discriminated against/essentialized (in the experience of people like Wu)

Are Asian-Americans a minority group?
Recall our list of minority group characteristics - .
unequal treatment
easily identifiable (??) because of physical or cultural characteristics held in low esteem
sense of peoplehood
ascribed status (born into it)
endogamy (tend to marry each other, by choice and because of social isolation)
 

What about the term Asian American?
(18) he says lumping together all Asians unfounded – “we are all people, most of us are Americans, but there is little else that can be said categorically that is not an oversimplification.”
 

This raises the questions how can we/should we reason about race or ethnicity?
Can we draw the line between
1) generalizing according to our own “experience” a la Samuel Gompers and other racists
2) falling victim to our own ecological fallacies,
3) making empirically verifiable social scientific distinctions
4) validating the real experiences of people (a la our students in the And we stayed video or Wu in his anecdotes about kids passing him and doing kung fu moves or being lumped together with the other Asians in line)

Is the term Asian-American the same as African-American, European-American?
Is it appropriate to lump people together in this way by continent?  Are any of these more or less descriptive, intellectually honest? Why?

I think they are different

Not because they “should be” but  because their usage reflects specific political histories and differential levels of group status.

e.g., “Asian-American” new form of political correctness – the antidote to “Orientals” or mistakenly calling a Chinese American, Japanese

European-American – I think that this is an improvement over “white” – gets messy with East-West differences; and blurs more specific ethnic differences, but may be useful from an assimilation and power point of view

African-American – like Asian-Americans this terms is the product of a specific political era – 1960s in this case – has specific socio-political understanding – historical reference – i.e, the descendants of slaves (not recent/voluntary immigrants from Africa)
 
Chpt. 2 The Model Minority Myth
According to the myth:
All Asians come here fleeing some kind of tragedy, persecution with nothing but the clothes on their backs;
work their butts off;
become small business owners;
provide their families with the basis for upward mobility by stressing academic achievement, hard work, filial piety;
send for ever more relatives to share in their realization of “the American dream”

Why the myth is dangerous, troublesome:
1) overgeneralization, essentializing
2) causes us to overlook the real prejudices/racism that Asian Americans encounter
3) used to fuel anti-Black myths – “they can do it, what’s wrong with you?”
 

Wu’s Chapter on Dog Eating
Wu uses the fact that some Asians eat dogs as a significant example of limits of DIVERSITY
EATING DOGS: not easy as tolerating chopsticks – can’t forbid as violence against women
Dilemma of diversity – PRINCIPLES conflict with PRACTICE
THOUGH an Asian entrepreneur wouldn’t offer up a bite of dog.
At a luau POI DOGS aren’t the main dish anymore.
Dog-eating not in Asian cookbooks (transl. in English).

1989, Long Beach – Cambodian refugees bludgeoned to death a German shepherd puppy. Judge dismissed the misdemeanor indictment (inflicted no unreasonable pain on their MEAL).
ANIMAL RIGHTS outraged – sensibility of the community offended.
California passed a law: eating a cat or dog = MISDEMEANOR (later amended: every pet).
1992 -  a man (not Asian) BBQed the neighbor’s dog -  sentenced of 3 years.

JOEY SKAGGS (1994) sent letters from non-existent company (KEA SO JOO = dog meat soup). Received messages “filthy yellow devil”. Skaggs wanted to demonstrate the VAGARIES OF CULTURAL CHAUVINISM.

1. Face-saving defiance: ASIANS DON’T EAT DOGS.
Refuting the claim that Asians eat dogs = ADMITTING that it would be WICKED TO DO SO.
Protest – Asians as a whole – protester is acquiescing to STEREOTYPE.

2. OTHER ASIANS MIGHT EAT DOGS, BUT I DON’T. I DON’T EVEN CONDONE IT = reflects the majority norm (devouring dogs is DEVIANT BEHAVIOR).

Many Asians’ delicacies – disgusting for Anglos – supper = spectacle.
Tofu – raw fish – bee pollen – ginseng – kava – herbs + medicinals –  NOW IN HEALTH STORES.
Edamame – calpis – pocari sweat drink.
Slimy sea cucumbers – seaweed salad – bear paw – warm snake bile – congealed blood – chicken feet – giant water bugs – savory baked cocoons – bitter cow dung – fired duck embryos – NOT ATTRACTIVE.

Once, African Americas, Asians and white ethnics shopped TOGETHER at downtown warehouses – no more.

3. Philosophical attitude – I DON’T EAT DOG, BUT IF I DID, WHAT WOULD BE WRONG WITH THAT?
Freedom of expression, not UNCONDITIONAL MORAL RELATIVISM.
Wrong – human cannibalism, eating powdered horns etc.)
4. worst reply “WHETHER OR NOT I EAT DOGS, DON’T WORRY – I PROMISE I WON[‘T EAT YOURS”.
Does not deal with the real question: is eating dogs wrong?
Forecloses discussion (closes us in our culture).

1989, San Francisco, rumors -  Vietnamese immigrants hunting dogs in Golden Gate Park.  Response “there have been VERY FEW. The rest = false/racist stereotypes”.
Dog-eating = excuse to make Asians butt of jokes.

Pacific islanders – genetic adaptation to food scarcity. Imported fatty diets: epidemic of morbid obesity.

Peasant population: alien to the concept of loving a pet. Eating dogs = adaptation to material deprivation & lack of reliable sources of other meats.

IF YOU CAN CRITICIZE MY CULTURAL PRACTICES, I SHOULD BE ABLE TO CRITICIZE YOURS.

Brigitte Bardot campaign against eating dogs – luxury for her – curtailing immigration for racial reasons. Antagonism toward dog-eating = part of political agenda.

META-DISCOURSE about dog eating is IMPERATIVE.
Ascetic case for a VEGETARIAN LIFE.
Eaten dogs: beaten down to TENDERIZE their FLESH. Intelligent enough to know about the IMPENDING EXECUTION. Trusting enough to allow it. FEELING ENOUGH to EXPERIENCE PAIN.
Objection to dog-eating – expanded to other animals.
 

Everybody favors DIVERSITY, nut almost nobody thinks CRITICALLY about it
Substitute DIVERSITY with INTEGRATION, PLURALISM – MULTICULTURAL, ASSIMILATION – not synonyms.
Americans: able to assert beliefs optimistically in CONTRADICTORY PRINCIPLES.
We see integration & pluralism = forms of EQUALITY, though mutually incompatible.
E PLURIBUS UNUM.

Annihilation/multiculturalism = not inherently & thoroughly good or evil.

Michel Guillaume De CREVECOEUR “Letters form an American Farmer” (1782):
 “What is the American? Not a European/descendant of a European- mix of blood that you can’t find elsewhere”.

Americans (as with De Tocqueville) encourage a French reporter who flatters our country (interpreting its customs &providing an object lesson to Europe).
If we knew Crevecoeur’s notion of assimilation, no one would be interested in such particulars about him or another writer.

Israel Zangwill (British Jew, family from Russia) – “The Melting Pot”
“I, a Jewess, how dare you?”
Their courtship does as well.
Vera’s father to Quincy: solution to Russia’s Jewish problem – 1/3 baptized, 1/3 massacred, 1/3 emigrated.
River of blood between them. Each assumes – pursuing the other is futile.
David’s concerto. Speaks of USA = “God’s crucible”. Races of Europe + Latin, Slav, Teuton, Greek, Syrian, black and yellow.

Asians – desperate – ASSIMILATION.

Bravery Japanese troops – novel; story, exploited by the press. Assimilated in their uniforms, under white officers (though families were behind barbed wire).
Nisei superfighter.

Robert Parker + Booker T. Washington founded SOCIOLOGY (@ Univ. of Chicago) – inexorable cycle in race relations:
CONTACT, COMPETITION, ACCOMODATION and ASSIMILATION.
Assimilation, Anglo-Saxon conformity.

Only one race in this country: AMERICAN. Third World immigration is ruining the culture. BUCHANAN – isolationist (“America first”) – resolves any contradiction with “WHAT GROUP OF PEOPLE WOULD BE EASIER TO ASSIMILATE AND WOULD CAUSE LESS PROBLEMS FOR THE PEOPLE OF VIRGINIA?”
Citizenship = RACE (white Americans = only real Americans, everyone else unassimilable).
“HIGH RATES OF NON-EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS WILL SWAMP US. Black-on-white crime. “IS IT NOT TIME TO TAKE AMERICA BACK?”
One race. “A majority of Americans will no longer claim Europe as their ancestral home”.

RICHARD BROOKHISER, “The Way of the Wasp”  (1991):
 “NON WASP TOO BUSY TRYING TO BECOME WASP TO EXERT THEMSELVES AND BRING DOWN WASPDOM”.