The Racist and the Diversity Czar
Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Fisher v. University of Texas, a case challenging the use of racial preferences in the university admissions process. The case has led supporters and opponents to engage in a heated national debate about the merits of affirmative action, but few have noticed that one of the best reminders of the policy’s absurdities actually comes from the territorial conflicts currently raging in Asia.
In the world of affirmative action, Asians-Americans, along with other races, are lumped together as a single group that receives, or are excluded from, employment, education, contracting, or other positions. In the real world, however, the people of Asia not only are not interchangeable tokens; they have numerous reasons not to like each other. Grouping Asians together for the purpose of fostering “diversity” in America is not only ignorant but also insulting.
In recent months, nasty territorial squabbles over islands in the South China Sea have sparked widespread and at times, violent protests featuring one Asian nationality against another. China stands at the center of Asia’s simmering tensions. Just last month, anti-Japanese protests broke out in over 100 Chinese cities. Protestors ransacked Japanese stores, disrupted work at factories, burned Japanese flags, threw bottles, eggs, and apples outside of the Japanese embassy in Beijing, and called for the annihilation of Japan. Numerous Japanese stores in China closed temporarily, and Japan’s top manufacturers—such as Panasonic, Canon, and Toyota—halted production. Since then, consumer boycotts against Japanese cars in China have led to plunging sales for Japanese automakers.
These protests raged over the Japanese government’s September 11 purchase from private ownership of various disputed islands claimed by China and administered by Japan. Tokyo had intended for the “nationalization” of the islands, called Diaoyu in China and Senkaku in Japan, to prevent further escalation of bilateral conflict, but it only reminded Chinese citizens of Japan’s naked land grab in China before and during World War II.
Unfortunately for Japan, the Chinese are not the only ones protesting against it. Citizens of Taiwan, a former colony of Japan that also claims the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands, have staged what Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou has called “patriotic” demonstrations against Japan. During the last week of September, a flotilla of nearly 80 Taiwanese fishing boats, escorted by coast guard ships, even traveled to the disputed area to assert their historic fishing rights and “protect” the islands.
Meanwhile, the South Koreans have chimed in as well. They, too, have an ongoing dispute with Japan over a small (though different) group of islands in the South China Sea. They, too, have staged protests and proclaimed that they have not forgiven Japan for its war-time sins, especially the transgression of forcing South Korean women to serve as sex slaves to Japanese soldiers.
If this is not enough conflict, Vietnam and the Philippines have each engaged in tense standoffs with China as well. They, too, have overlapping territorial claims in the South China Sea and have historically clashed with China over various disputed islands. And just this month, the South Korean coast guard fired a rubber bullet at a Chinese fisherman and raided his boat, which they claimed had illegally entered South Korean waters in the Yellow Sea. The fisherman subsequently died from his injuries.
These political, territorial, and ethnic quarrels dominate the headlines in Asia. Other ongoing conflicts—such as India and Pakistan’s deep-seated bilateral animosity, China’s refusal to renounce the use of force to reunify with Taiwan, or North Korea’s hostilities toward South Korea and Japan—similarly evoke raw emotions and offer no easy solutions. This does not mean that all Asians despise each other or that they will not be able to peacefully resolve their conflicts. But the complexities of Asia’s political landscape or cultural heritage simply do not matter to diversity czars in America, who count yellow people against black, white, and brown folks as mere statistics.
One statistic, 37.2%, reflects the freshmen Asian enrollment in 1995 at the University of California, Berkeley, an institution that aggressively practiced racial preferences before voters in California banned the practice in 1996. Another statistic, 46%, shows Asian freshmen enrollment at Berkeley in 2012, a level of participation that the university’s bean counters, when unencumbered by state law, considered to be too high.
In other words, modern racial divvying not only ignores the inherent political, cultural, and historical differences within different ethnic groups, it caps their success as a race as well. Ironically, old-fashioned racists usually discriminate this way as well—for instance, by referring to Chinese, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Koreans, and Japanese alike as “Chinamen.”
Today, diversity czars feel no shame when they lump ethnicities together and pit different races against each other. Whatever the Supreme Court decides in Fisher v. University of Texas, this country would do well to end the sordid business of racial classification and preferences sooner rather than later.





Thank you for pointing out the superficiality of our leftist do-gooders. Books like yours should be required reading for American teens who are taught that they have suffered more than any others on the planet. Remember that it was the students of Frank McCourt who encouraged him to put his life experiences on paper. The more our young become acquainted with individuals, the harder it will be for them to put these individuals into PC victim groups.
As Thanksgiving Day nears, we should remember how much we all have to be thankful for and that every immigrant is a unique person who came to America to find a better life.
I have long maintained that there are no “Asians” in Asia.
But there is nothing but “Asia” in American Asians!
What the hell are you talking about? I don’t want to go overboard on my reaction to your comment, but it sounds like the typical racism towards those from the Far East the author decries.
Care to explain yourself?
Irony, stupid, irons. I will ask my Chinese girl-friend what she thinks of my “racism”. Suggestion: Get some literary education!
The push for diversity is an outgrowth and a tool in education’s official rejection of the primacy of the individual. The assigned group comes first. The Common Good (as usefully presupplied by those with power) must be deferred to say the statist schemers. How useful to foster that belief at a deep, unconscious, emotional level.
Diversity is yet another one of those “hearts and minds” slogans the statist schemers are pushing that means power for them and a loss of real autonomy for us. The very kind of preachments I explained here http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/does-common-core-target-hearts-and-minds-to-sway-future-voters/.
Thanks for reminding us with reality and actual facts, the very things K-12 and higher ed try to minimize these days, to illustrate the inanity of this Diversity concept as the be all and end all of education. It is simply par for the course in a world that has now rejected the transmission of knowledge in favor of socio-cultural learning theory. Which is just good old-fashioned Marxist political theory with a more palatable name so it can become a theory implemented into practice. With our money and those minds and hearts we will likely need tomorrow in individuals, not assigned groups.
The interesting thing about diversity that escapes the leftists: If you’re in a situation where everyone works hard and is rewarded on a merit basis rather than an artificial standard due to race, sex, age, whatever, then everyone benefits. Diversity is not an end in itself; success is. Enlightened self-interest can benefit everyone…it can be the rising tide that floats all boats.
One need not apologize for success.
The analysis reveals the phoney nature of “cultural diversity” by showing the “all Asians” is an illigitimate category. But, I wonder, are all “Aftrican Americans” as a lump group also valid? What is the common denominator between an African American such as Obama and Allen West (who refused to view Obama culturally as an American) or some poor almost illiterate black in some slum. One can go on ad infinitum. The notion that so and so many persons with sufficient black DNA constitutes a collective whole which can be used to measure diversity is also phoney.
The same could be said about North Americans and South Americans. Each country has different cultural identity and cooperate and compete within and without each country’s borders.
Admission should not be based on race or ethnicity at all, but on individual achievment. If the admissions board finds too many applicants than space available, then the problem must be a lack of refinement or discrimination of valid markers between the top applicants.
The admissions people just need to do a better job. All weights for admission should be published in advance before the applicant term begins.
Race baiting is the oldest trick in the book, and it is encouraged by those who pretend to want inclusion and to help ‘the other’. Hogwash. They want no such thing.
And so called liberals are the most racist of all. For if this is not the case, why in the world would so much animosity always evolve, out of their so called help? And how does it help people, who truly need assistance, to believe that they would be equal, if only the other side would just get out of the way, thus leveling the playing field? Isn’t victim hood the natural outgrowth of said manipulations? Of course. It is the oldest shell game.
In other words, a person who is ill prepared – regardless of their color – will fall on their face, especially when entering the real world of competition, if they are not held to basic requirements needed to succeed. And does interference from perpetual race-baiters help anyone, other than to fan the flames of entitlement?
Hence, the Radical-in-Chief teamed up with the Racialist AG to foster ‘equality’ – http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/30/the-racialist-potus-seeks-transformation-via-raced-based-classroom-edicts-say-it-aint-so-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/, and they are nothing but pyromaniacs in suits!
Most significantly, when political leaders push the racial flames in any direction, the only ones who benefit are those at the top – for whatever political calculus they set in motion, citizens be damned.
“Diversity” as practiced in ‘higher education’ today is nothing more than a tool for the admissions office to stack the deck in favor of specific groups. “Fairness” is not the question nor the issue; redistributing educational opportunities in favor of groups considered “previously disenfranchised” is.
There are exactly two ways to settle the college/university “diversity” question: a) eliminate it entirely; or, b) set an absolute quota equal to the percentage of each race in each state as of the date of the last census, and set that number by the of percentage of people in the 15 – 21 age group only.
One has to wonder if redistribution of educational opportunities is really the goal. Certainly they want us to think it is. But surely the perpetrators of this policy have to know that the success of their “affirmative action” kids who are admitted to schools they are ill equipped for, is not good. It is hard to conclude that benefit to the minority students is really their goal. The motivation may be nothing more than simple political correctness, where every school’s hierarchy wants to have plenty of little black and little brown faces in the freshman class photo. The pressure for conformity on the left is enormous.
SongDog-there is a worldwide movement in higher ed, initiated by UNESCO in 1998, to change the nature of higher ed in order to make it about social interaction to award equity in credentials. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/credential-inflation-how-reforming-higher-ed-with-learner-outcomes-can-damage-all-degrees/ is where I explained it awhile back. The accreditation agencies are the key enforcers of this equity vision worldwide along with the Lumina Foundation in the US through something called the Diploma Qualifications Profile that I have also written about.
It is less that equitable credentila s are sought than requiring equity focuses a change in classroom practices. It can no longer be about cultivating knowledge of the past nor anything that nurtures the mind’s abstract conceptualization ability. That is the real basis for the Reading Wars and the Math wars. Symbolic manipulation which is what happens when you teach someone to read phonetically or work with math equations is like a turbocharger to the logical mind. Its inevitable byproduct is the ability to play out potential scenarios in the privacy of your own mind and weigh potential consequences.
Which is really an impediment to statist schemers with aspirations of controlling individual behaviors.
Think of Diversity as a means to an end. A Fundamentally Transformative End.
‘“Diversity” as practiced in ‘higher education’ today is nothing more than a tool for the admissions office to stack the deck in favor of specific groups.’
This deck stacking in favor of specific groups is done for the purpose of patronage; to award desired groups with political favors in exchange for political power.
In other words, the diversity game is ultimately about achieving and retaining political power for the hard left.
Welcome to progressive America. Our dear leaders have also stripped history and culture from all other groups, as well: whites, latinos, blacks, Middle Easterners, etc., forcing people into broad racial classifications that are essentially meaningless. This has degraded the richness of our national life and robbed us of our heritage. It’s what they want: to make ‘the new man’.
Kinda off topic, but I read some days ago that Othoritarian wants to institute a Czar of Small Business in order to help the economy. I don’t know what to call them: laughable, shameful, pitiful or just downright stupid.
“I don’t know what to call them: laughable, shameful, pitiful or just downright stupid.”
If it was me, I would choose the “all of the above” option….
With a conservative Supreme Court perhaps they will rule that we can no longer classify people as men, women, African-American, Hispanic, etc. but we will be declared “HUMAN”. Thanks to the same-sex marriage crowd that would be a fitting ruling. We can go on down the road without government and university set-asides for privileged “groups”.
A conservative Supreme Court? Sounds like a Utopian ideal. Conservatives may be fortunate to have a majority of conservative-leaning justices from time to time, but that by no means equates to the advancing of conservative ideals. (See: Chief Justice Roberts decision in Obamacare)
I yield to no one in my conservative bona fides, and loathe political pandering by race as much as any. BUT, my dilemma is this: If there were no affirmative action, just admissions based on academic merit alone, would we really be content to see the entering classes of all the competitive schools be filled with whites and Asians alone? Of course one would hope and believe that when the crutch was taken away the blacks and Hispanics would respond with hard work and meet the standards without special help. In recent years however, given the resiliency of culture, I have begun to doubt that would be the case, at least not for many years, perhaps many generations.
Could we tolerate that situation? if not, and affirmative action is given the burial it richly deserves, what could we do about it?
When he was governor of Texas George Bush instituted a “top 10%” rule for all the state schools in Texas, and that worked after a fashion, but it overloaded the flagship schools with many students who were not prepared to compete at the highest levels, and has now been modified to limit the number of top ten per centers each school must take. Is that any better than counting by race?
I don’t have the answer.
We could just declare that the percentage of doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers, mailmen must mirror the population. It would be “fair,” but I’d be looking for an Asian doctor under that system.
If you don’t have equal standards, you don’t have equality. Life is unfair. We all have different abilities and all we can do is work with what we have, to do as well as we can. I believe it is wrong to deny anyone what they have earned.
Re: Asian doctors. It’s sad but true, when it becomes down to peoples health they are left to question how someone got their credentials because of “diversity”. That shouldn’t be, but that’s what’s happened. So good, intelligent people are saddled with a big question mark over their heads.
Who cares if the schools are filled with whites and Asians? Do black folks demand the NBA be less black? Let the chips fall where they may, America’s not some de facto racial charity. If you want to compete, complete. If you want something given to you you don’t deserve, it’s not an admission of the continuance of structural and individual racism, but that you’re second rate.
Good point. And the hypocrisy and double standard always seems to go unaddressed in those bastions of liberal “intellectual” circles called academia – an academia I’ve often noticed which seems to incredibly white at and near the top. Do as we say and not as we do seems to be the leftist creed about a great many things.
Quotas by demographic are self defeating for everyone and cheapen the quality of result.
…And, private enterprise will effectively meet the demand if regulatory controls are eased on colleges, universities, and specialty schools. Much of the problems are not caused by the free market offering educational opportunities through available classroom slots, but because of regulatory controls that effectively limit available spaces.
It works just like rent control in certain cities effectively reduces the available number of houses or apartments for rent.
The shortage is artificial in the sense that if the regulations did not exist, the free market would address the shortages through investment in housing making more and better available for a given price.
Similarly with educational institutions, the limited space brought about through regulatory (government) controls makes admission to any given institution much more competative thus eliminating slots for qualified students. Less regulation, more competition and available space at a lower cost to the student.
The same applies to medical school, law school, and other graduate programs. It also applies to cost of hospital care, medical treatments, and so on. The cost of government regulations and their negative effects are throughout our society. This does not mean there is no place for good regulation, but all regulations nust be weighed against the cost to society versus the benefits.
The answer is that we would have to be completely and totally free as a society to look at those who do not make it in based on standards alone and address why that is. We aren’t able to do that today. If we try to do that today, we are called “racists.” The brutal truth of the matter is that those who cannot make the cut based on standards have made poor choices, their parents have made poor choices, and the cultures of their communities have made poor choices. All of these factors have combined to set them at a disadvantage when it comes to preparing them for making the stadards of admission at an insitution of higher learning. Until and unless we are prepared to have that discussion, with the appropraite acceptance of responsibility where it is due, there will be no solution and a society with pure admission based on standards will continue to have admissions dominated by Asian students followed by whites.
Unless, like my failure to play professional basketball, is due to things inherent in ourselves. It’s not fair that I’m less than six feet tall, and slow and not extremely co-ordinated. I got over it and found something else I could do. As we all must.
The reasoning for AA was to eliminate admissions committees’ assumed racist proclivities that prevented qualified minorities from being accepted. The goal at that time wasn’t to diversify the academic abilities of the college population.
If that were so, whites wouldn’t need 300 SAT points more than blacks. The reasoning was that the aftereffects of institutional racism hampered the education of blacks and that was the reason fewer blacks attended college. Of course it’s all nonsense. Immigrant blacks do better than American-born blacks so networking, past laws and economics have nothing to do with it. You don’t need money to study. You need desire. Let me know when flash mobs loot book stores and I’ll show you a smart culture.
If the author here is Chinese, then it’s my guess that he doesn’t want himself or the Chinese in general to looped together with the other ethnic groups in Asia that the Chinese traditionally have looked down upon for centuries.
This former self-designated “Celestial-ness”, if you will, is a hard thing to dismiss inside China.
He is a she, and I suggest you read her book Chinese Girl in the Ghetto.
My observation is gender neutral.
Another book doesn’t apply.
Internet based education where your race is invisible and irrelevant can’t come too quickly for me. Send the ‘Diversity Czars’ to the countryside for reeducation.
Two Asian countries alone (China and India) account for roughly 1/3 of the total world population. Throw in the dozens of other Asian nations and you’ll easily exceed half of the total world population. To lump all of those people from countries with such distinct cultures, languages and backgrounds into a single group is beyond foolish, it’s intellectually lazy.
In the mid 90′s I worked for Japanese engineering and construction company building an oil refinery in the Middle East.
The discipline (civil, piping, mechanical, electrical, etc.) lead engineers/superintendents were Japanese. The supervisors were a mix of Filipino, Chinese and local nationals.
The Japanese, Filipinos and Chinese had no love for each other. The Japanese were on top, so didn’t really care what the others thought. The Filipinos were relatively laid back. Veterans of overseas projects, they got the job done whether or not they liked their manager. The Chinese though, hated both the Japanese and Filipinos. Chinese would not coordinate issues with their Filipino fellow supervisors, wouldn’t even talk to them. All such issues were referred upwards to the Japanese superintendent to resolve.
As a European, I was totally outside all of this ethnic/racial/national/(your preferred description) rivalry/dislike. I found it highly amusing at the time.
It makes no sense whatsoever to classify all Asians as the same.
Of course, it makes no sense to classify people by race anyway. Doing so simply creates a version of apartheid.
Years ago in college, I made the mistake of assuming a Korean student was Japanese. Fortunately we were friendly acquaintances and he filled me in on why that was an insult to him…and I daresay, an would be an insult to call a Japanese person Korean.
Back in the 1800′s it was far more likely that a black man would be hired before an Irishman. The Irish had been handed the reputation as troublemakers and drunks and criminals.
In white US society, the different factions of Christianity fervently despised one-another. Poles were also targets as were Italians and Jews. Yet today, all white people are lumped together as WASPs, except maybe for the Jews.
I was always taught to accept a person on their merits and personal character, not their heritage, color or background. It has set me up for being at odds with affirmative action from the very beginning. AA has always been crap to me and will remain so.
Two things:
1. What’s more absurd than lumping Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, etc. together is throwing Indians into that pot. It makes some kind of weird geographical sense, but absolutely no anthropological sense.
2. The “Asians” (for educational affirmative action purposes) are the new Jews. Imagine if Jews were considered a separate race from “white” for college admission purposes. The problem that would create is obvious. It wasn’t that long ago when American Jews would go to Europe for college, because the quotas were full here.
Of course, this all may become moot soon, when anyone in the world will be able to get a credible degree online. The trolls will probably end up destroying their own bridges.
Israelis live in Asia; thus, they are Asians. So are Turks, Saudis, Armenians, Iranians, Indians, Tibetans, Iraqis, and many, many others. Taken as a group, they speak Indo-European, Semitic, Oriental, and other languages, and range in color from lily white to coal black. It’s absurd to place them all in one category — or to place anyone in any category at all.
I wonder if Juan Carlos, the blue-eyed King of Spain, would qualify as Hispanic and receive preferential treatment? I have personal experience of a case in which a member of a politically privileged black family in an sub-Saharan African country filed an employment discrimination suit with the EEOC, which took his case. I know of other cases in which (so-called) non-minority wives were given preferences because their married last names were Hispanic. The whole damned preference system is an outrageous absurdity that only a white person with money and an advanced degree from an Ivy League College could warped enough to consider “fair.”
You never heard of George Zimmerman? There’s a special classification of “white Hispanic” for Hispanics who get the Goldstein treatment. And you don’t want to know what they call Allen West.
It might have made sense a hundred years ago when “Asian” in America was almost synonymous with “Chinese.” But today, it’s Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean, Hmong, Cambodian, Laotian, Thai, Tibetan, and (depending on where you draw the western border of “Asia”) Indian and Pakistani. Lumping all these groups together ignores diversity rather than promoting it.
Look, the Asian street gangs get it even if we don’t. You don’t have gangs that are monolithically composed of anyone from the Asian continent. Instead you have gangs composed of the various nationalities from Asia doing what ethnic gangs have done for decades, grouping together in a tribal fashion.
Really, the whole purpose of subdividing people into ethnic subgroups, or hyphenated Americans, is to tribalize us and get us to identify more with a group or groups than as individuals. It’s easier to do with those who look different than the majority or with those who aren’t that far removed from their countries of origin because they feel more like outsiders. However, for the rest of us, we’re all interbred and removed from our places of origin. What troubles me is that they’re no circulating that the proportion of the white vote that’s likely to vote for Romney is shifting heavily beyond the 50/50 mark. Now, I don’t regard that as a sign of racism, but since it is becoming common knowledge that we are rapidly becoming less a strong majority, are we starting to feel more like a tribe? The tribe of white? That worries me.
You’d have more of a point if we weren’t a melting pot. My wife’s Japanese (by birth as well as ethnicity.) My kids are a mix and becoming more so by marriage. Decades ago it was perhaps uncommon, now not so.
Back when I was in college I met what would prove to be my future girlfriend standing in line to the admissions desk. She was hotter than than a wet cat because the college had declared her “African American” because of her skin color. She went into great detail about the history of the native population of Australia, their culture, and more importantly the distance between Australia and Africa. They put her in the category simply because of the color of her skin. She raised enough of a stink that they changed her classification to pacify her. She then became Asian. They didn’t have a box for ‘Australian American’ it seems. She’s still angry over than, 20 years later.
…and what of the descendents of the first Europeans to emigrate to lower latitude locales in the Southern Hemisphere, namely the Afrikaners and prisoners who got sent to Australia? Ddue to the harsher sun and other peculiarities, those whites tend to become “orange” over time. I remember when Zola Budd (before she tripped Mary Decker) had a report done on her in Sports Illustrated and they had a photograph of her nearly orange Afrikaner mother and her squshy white recent British emigre father. Watch for this in Texas and Florida 200 years from now. A better example – what we call Native American is just a bunch of Russians who did not succumb so easily to heat stroke and melanoma.
PPS – I’m pretty sure the “sophisticated” racial categories used by our liberal, affirmative-action-promoting friends are based on a 19th-century understanding of race. Our great grandpappies believed there were 5 races: White, Black, Brown, Red, and Yellow. How many racial categories on your college admission form? Caucasian, African-American, Hispanic, Native American, and Asian/Pacific Islander. Did I miss any, other than “Other?”
Very subtle, very nuanced.
When confronted by the race question, I select Other and write in Human. There is only one race and that is human.
Larry, in the past I’ve just declined to fill those out (as every reasonable person should!), but thanks to you I now have a new approach!
Your girlfriend, Russell Crowe, and Jet Lee are “Asians.” Of course – they all look alike, right?
P.S. – Some people from southern India have extremely dark skin but don’t look anything like Africans. Australian “Aborigines” (or whatever the polite term is now) have dark skin but don’t look much like Africans. People from Papua New Guinea have dark skin and look a bit like Africans. Residents of places like the Andaman Islands (the so-called “Negritos”) have dark skin and look EXACTLY like Africans. If they applied to an American college, Admissions would try to make them all “African-American.” Then they’d all have to correct that to “Asian,” which puts them in the same category as Koreans – who, incidentally, don’t look anything like Africans.
The biggest benefactors of AA are white women. That, perhaps, explains the evolution of the “Asian” block.
The real reason for all this diversity crap is to keep a lot of bureaucrats in business. If “diversity was achieved” all these people would lose their jobs. Therefore it will never happen.
This is bizarre, first of all most of the applicants to UC are Americans NOT Asians. So cultural and political differences be damned!
Most Asians I know don’t fall into the PC trap, they’re at the top schools because they work hard.
We don’t need to analyze these kinds of subtleties, we need to reject race as a political scorecard.
Caucasians are treated the same way, Italians are different than Swedes and for that matter Argentinians! The whole “Latino” thing is nonsense too, people from Latin American countries range from dark African to light European, but they’re all “Latino”. But of course in those countries they see themselves as different cultures.
Let’s just get all MLK on this subject and judge people by what they do and not how they look or where they come from.
I think that both the diversity nonsense and the “higher education bubble” can be traced to a 1971 case, Griggs v. Duke Power Co. Before Griggs, an employer could administer a test to an applicant to estimate the applicant’s intellectual capacity, as well as the ability to write or calculate. After the effective banning of these tests, employers have used the possession of a college degree as a proxy for doing well on an employment exam. Aggressive diversity programs sprang up to assist African-Americans getting jobs, and watered down curricula and worthless degree programs sprang up to assist everyone. Administration of these programs was funded by government aid, ostensibly for students, but which was cynically diverted to college administrations for empire building and nest feathering.
Two things: First, referring to people of the Mongoloid Race as “Asians” is absolutely incorrect. Mongoloids are not the only indigenous people in Asia. Second, does your outrage of grouping all “Asians” together also apply to grouping all those of European descent as “white?”
I can really appreciate the basic assertion of this article, BUT, I know there is a deep seated and inbred dislike and reservation of other races in “asian” people, just as there is an inbred dislike and reservation of other cultures in other races.
Having said that; My time spent in Japanese and Chinese cultures was rewarding to me for the experience of appreciating the enlightenment I discovered in those cultures. I have fond memories and an acquired respect.
Several decades ago, and one President ago, having experience living, mingling, and learning the language of other races/cultures, was considered to be part of a well rounded experience for any individual. These days, isolating yourself from the tinge of other cultures/races seems to be the elite preoccupation, and is even cultivated for it’s political and commercial prestige.
We are being legislated into petty voting blocs by a group of ignorant, uneducated, inexperienced and vindictive individuals. And we are being farmed for that purpose.
Until the People behave in a manner superior to their “government”, nothing will ever alter this course. You might as well just get used to living and functioning with the status quo.
Pathetic.
I wrote my comment after reading the essay, and before reading any other comments.
I have been rewarded and substantiated in my convictions.
Keep up the good work, Ying.
So once again, Americans can do nothing because everything we do is wrong. Dim. Decidedly, demonstratively, dim.