Asian Americans - Now Racist?

[s0me0nesmind1]

Finally got around to watching the full show. I'll give my thoughts.
My first thought, before I dig into your post, is that John Oliver's entire rant was poorly done. It lacks a central thesis and kind of just rambles about problems the AAPI community faces without really giving any constructive ideas on how to fix those problems.
The biggest problem is that the rant appears to accept the idea that we should have racist categories at all. John's argument seems to be that we need different, or maybe more, racist categories to lump people into.


So? They were often lumped in with them in reality, because a large number of them look 'Asian' which is what most of this is really about.


Yes, that is what he is saying, and actually says it in several different ways several different times. But his point was that even before adding the pacific islanders it was too broad of a category. Even without the PI you are labeling people that come from a area that contains more then half the world's population, and make up more then a dozen countries. The only reason for this label is because they share some common facial features. It seems a pretty poor thing to label people for.



The point is the statistics are already messed up, as you obviously can see. He limited his argument to AAPI but it obviously works for other groups as well. Anytime we use racist categories we are harming the people we are categorizing.
So, what to do? Don't use racist categories. List people by something that actually makes sense. Maybe country of origin, or other logical categories that actually fit their situation instead of the color of their skin or shape of their eyes.


He is not saying it is out of date. He actually says that for political reasons it is still useful, because the racism it was created to help fight is still there, but he is also saying that much of the racism that 'Orientals' held has now transferred over to it. Once again, although he kept his rant to AAPI, this also generalizes to other minority groups. We can clearly see it in the evolution of words used to describe people of color.



No it is not. He actually shows a number of examples of just that. It is a tactic I've seen on these forums any number of times, someone states that Asians don't have this problem, so it is not a minority problem it is a culture problems with whatever group we are talking about. John Oliver is explaining why the statistics are misleading and how they are harmful to both the AAPI and other minority communities.



And this is the problem, he had no clear thesis, so there is no coherent solution. He is pointing out how even the seemingly positive racism is harmful even to the people that it appears positive for.


I'm Russian American. I have never once in my nearly 50 years of life been called Asian. Because the categories are based on the color of your skin and the look of your face, and I don't look that way.
That is how I can tell that these categories are BLARRINGLY obviously racist.

First and foremost - Thanks for one of the few competent posts I've seen in here in decades. Please feel free to send me a DM anytime, I would honestly appreciate your replies anytime.

My feedback:

My first thought, before I dig into your post, is that John Oliver's entire rant was poorly done. It lacks a central thesis and kind of just rambles about problems the AAPI community faces without really giving any constructive ideas on how to fix those problems.

The biggest problem is that the rant appears to accept the idea that we should have racist categories at all. John's argument seems to be that we need different, or maybe more, racist categories to lump people into.

Absolutely, and entirely agree - spot the fuck on. There is a complete lack of messaging - but I will say - this whole concept of "comradery" amongst someone that is "AAPI" is quite insulting. If you think Asian countries are fond of eachother then you're simply a fucking idiot that doesn't understand history (Not saying that to you SMOG).

My point is it just never gets relayed enough - and everyone boils things down to "brownish people love eachother, white people bhaaaad!". You know, like the majority of people in this forum? White Guilt 101, essentially.

Yes, that is what he is saying, and actually says it in several different ways several different times. But his point was that even before adding the pacific islanders it was too broad of a category. Even without the PI you are labeling people that come from a area that contains more then half the world's population, and make up more then a dozen countries. The only reason for this label is because they share some common facial features. It seems a pretty poor thing to label people for.

The point is the statistics are already messed up, as you obviously can see. He limited his argument to AAPI but it obviously works for other groups as well. Anytime we use racist categories we are harming the people we are categorizing.
So, what to do? Don't use racist categories. List people by something that actually makes sense. Maybe country of origin, or other logical categories that actually fit their situation instead of the color of their skin or shape of their eyes.

So his underlying point here is don't call them Asians - instead identify them by their country and segregate them in a more micro-managing way. Thats really all Oliver was saying. "Oh NO! Pacific islanders don't succeed as much as people from India/Korea/others... because <insert race bait that has no causation, facts, or otherwise>. It must be racism bringing them down! Lets highlight this micro example and not attribute it AT ALL to culture - which actually makes more sense"

The overall agenda still doesn't align. There isn't a problem with OUR culture - unless you're insinuate that the majority of Americans can differentiate between a Japanese person and a Pacific islander.....

I'm Russian American. I have never once in my nearly 50 years of life been called Asian. Because the categories are based on the color of your skin and the look of your face, and I don't look that way.
That is how I can tell that these categories are BLARRINGLY obviously racist.

So you're agreeing that you should fall under the category of Asian - and not just this AAPI shit?

 

[MrSquished]

First and foremost - Thanks for one of the few competent posts I've seen in here in decades. Please feel free to send me a DM anytime, I would honestly appreciate your replies anytime.

My feedback:



Absolutely, and entirely agree - spot the fuck on. There is a complete lack of messaging - but I will say - this whole concept of "comradery" amongst someone that is "AAPI" is quite insulting. If you think Asian countries are fond of eachother then you're simply a fucking idiot that doesn't understand history (Not saying that to you SMOG).

My point is it just never gets relayed enough - and everyone boils things down to "brownish people love eachother, white people bhaaaad!". You know, like the majority of people in this forum? White Guilt 101, essentially.




So his underlying point here is don't call them Asians - instead identify them by their country and segregate them in a more micro-managing way. Thats really all Oliver was saying. "Oh NO! Pacific islanders don't succeed as much as people from India/Korea/others... because . It must be racism bringing them down! Lets highlight this micro example and not attribute it AT ALL to culture - which actually makes more sense"

The overall agenda still doesn't align. There isn't a problem with OUR culture - unless you're insinuate that the majority of Americans can differentiate between a Japanese person and a Pacific islander.....



So you're agreeing that you should fall under the category of Asian - and not just this AAPI shit?

Talk to us about race. Why are white conservative straight males like yourself so obviously racist, sexist and homophobic? You get triggered more than a clitoris getting licked by two lesbians. You hate the thought of people being aware of any racism, and you hate the thought of ordinary labor being paid a living wage, which are most often minorities.

Why are you such a piece of garbage person? What drives you mini tucker Carlson?

 

[HomerJS]

Why does the OP constantly focus on being the arbiter of what others call themselves.

Too bad massa, you ain't king round here

 

[Amol S.]

First and foremost - Thanks for one of the few competent posts I've seen in here in decades. Please feel free to send me a DM anytime, I would honestly appreciate your replies anytime.

My feedback:
Absolutely, and entirely agree - spot the fuck on. There is a complete lack of messaging - but I will say - this whole concept of "comradery" amongst someone that is "AAPI" is quite insulting. If you think Asian countries are fond of eachother then you're simply a fucking idiot that doesn't understand history (Not saying that to you SMOG).

My point is it just never gets relayed enough - and everyone boils things down to "brownish people love eachother, white people bhaaaad!". You know, like the majority of people in this forum? White Guilt 101, essentially.

I had to come back for just one more post, before I take some time off from the forum.

Your first paragraph in feedback, of countries in Asia not getting along with each other is a bit accurate. Maybe the first thing that people can agree with you on. India and China, they are not allies.

Your second paragraph is absurd and way off. If you do some research in culture in India, people with darker shades are discriminated there in such a way, that it is not easily seen. Many parents who wish to do arranged marriage of their children typically don't want to look at profiles of people who have darker skin shade, as they believe that darker skin shade means bad luck. So the next time you make a claim that a particular group thinks of white or lighter skinned people as bad, just make sure you support it with facts, and do some research before even posting.

By the way, since when were the majority of Japanese people were brown??? Doesn't it seem racist to make the claim that majority of Asians are brown, when that is not the case.

 

[Moonbeam]

Or women, he hates them too, ESPECIALLY if they aren't white.

Egotists hate anybody who says no. They are too emotionally damaged to accept rejection.

 

[JockoJohnson]

Your second paragraph is absurd and way off. If you do some research in culture in India, people with darker shades are discriminated there in such a way, that it is not easily seen. Many parents who wish to do arranged marriage of their children typically don't want to look at profiles of people who have darker skin shade, as they believe that darker skin shade means bad luck. So the next time you make a claim that a particular group thinks of white or lighter skinned people as bad, just make sure you support it with facts, and do some research before even posting.

What you said is true from my experience as well. However, that’s not how I took his statement in the 2nd paragraph. I think he is saying that it’s ok to discriminate against white people because of all the bad things white people do —- not light skinned minorities.

 

[WelshBloke]

Why does the OP constantly focus on being the arbiter of what others call themselves.

Too bad massa, you ain't king round here

He is the fucking king of beating strawman.

 

[Torn Mind]

About the most simple takeaway I could form after a casual listen is that Asians start evidently outworking others and that's when the pitchforks start coming out in some way, resulting in a murder, a law passed to stop them from coming here, and other forms of obstruction.

 

[Torn Mind]

Regarding him trying trot out Kamala Harris...her Indian heritage was not particularly emphasized by the press. Thus, Oliver saying "come on" is pretty stupid.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Asian American. Tends to be generally (statistically) associated with higher-intelligent Asians, typically from countries like South Korea, China, Japan, etc... But as of late, people seem to be trying to dip their toes into it with this whole "AAPI" or "Asian American Pacific Islander" movement. To which I say, they were never apart of the general term of "Asians" when growing up. Seems they want to inject themselves as of late, and Oliver's point is that it screws up the statistics because when accounting for pacific islanders and other random places, they statistically aren't the Asian stereotypes of in higher education - having a college degree, higher income, etc..

Okay? So what do you want to do? This is actually very similar with blacks - because things like South African and Nigerian immigrants get lumped together with anyone who is black - and they are statistically shown to have higher income with higher employment, education, etc...

.Well, the Census Bureau has separated Pacific Islanders from the Asian category. Other forms though, may not have, such as job applications, assistance applications, test info.

The broad general point he makes that there are averages but sub groups can deviate from the mean as is common in statistical samples; it is also beyond common for the layman to take the average and treat it as if its related standard deviation is zero.

So, a little nuance regarding analysis statistics and members of a group is something I don't disagree with...and you yourself actually believe in as well.

But, it seems the most disadvantaged ones happen to be the "gen 1" of Asians and/or those coming from the least endowed backwaters such as Bhutan and Mongolia. The ones with a language barrier and had to start off here working the less satisfactory jobs because well, there are time and money barriers to entry to obtain the road to educational success. Gen 1, however, carries with them the cultural principles that usually sets up gen 2 for the stereotypical educational success while growing up a native English speaker grants gen 2 the ability to navigate within the American system and defend themselves to some extent. This cultural legacy of emphasizing education is in generally distinct contrast to most other ethnic groups except for the Jew.

By merely taking the principle of "looking deeper", it seems that Oliver only selectively looked deeper to push his white knight sympathy segment.

He goes over how in the beginning people were referring to them as "orientals" - and how they fought for the term "Asian American". Now it looks like this cis-gendered white male is seeming to tell them that their term "Asian American" is now out of date.

I believe the point is more that it is descriptively inadequate in certain regards regarding certain sub groups.

He then tops it off with this hilarious statement - with no real facts or reasoning, but it merely suggests that as if Whites have control of Asians. He then goes on to suggest that we put asians in a bucket of "model citizens" and say to black people "Why don't you act like those immigrants?" Which is hilarious wrong, not factual, and completely uneducated.[/quote] That statement by him was indeed daft and not reflective of reality. People who commit a wrong against an Asian often do not read all these statistics and stuff. Usually, there's a personal affliction or issue close to home causing rage and due to monkey brain logic, they'd rather blame someone else for their problems. The rich Asian in some elite school district miles away is not the cause. Simple indicators, such as items of value on the person may be the cause. Some hood rat who just got out of jail likely doesn't give a shit about model minority. But they do see the prospect of "no retaliation" and strike consistent with their years of honed predatory experience, helped in part by their keen understanding of law and no fear of the law.

Plenty of more hilarious statements in here - and plenty of statements from an old white guy telling other people how oppressed they are. This is probably as insulting as it gets. Honestly, his ultimate message is all over the place, is he just looking for get rid of the term "Asian Americans" because it's TOO inclusive?

The segment does feel a bit "white knightish"; a sort of outsider's sympathy but daft and unaware of things. His point A does not necessarily support his point B if one looks even deeper than he does. Yes, the condition of people within the minority can vary substantially among sub-groups. That doesn't mean however, the sub-group that resulted in the term "model minority" is not a real phenomenon. Now, can a group unconsciously just going about their business have their behavior politicized? Yes. However, it also cannot be discarded offhand that perhaps Blacks do not have the same cultural environment as gen 2 and later Asians regarding education and that may be a cause in many Blacks' current condition.

I mean locally, I know which school districts command higher property values. The HS I went to has lower ratings than the "better" one and the houses are priced accordingly. As expected, the demographics of the "better" school as of recently happens to have 45% whites and 38% Asian and the property values also reflect it. No cheap houses within those lines, meaning the uninterested trash of all ethnic lines have to populate elsewhere. .

Probably the most hilarious thing that Oliver obviously doesn't talk about - since he always wants to play racial-tip-toeing games - he fails to mention the BLARRINGLY obvious fact that Russia is an Asia country as well. For some reason, idiots just want to continue to gloss over this - probably because their entire point in having this discussion isn't really based on facts, logic, or reasoning - but rather because they want another topic to talk about in the world of "How are you being oppressed today, <insert brown/black skin color> fellow?"

The Russians are recognized for the "Rus" ethnic group that is all too familiar to people. The rather distinct eyes that give away their particular ethnicity, which does not correspond to the expected black hair and "eyes" that term Asian create.

 

[brandonbull]

Talk to us about race. Why are white conservative straight males like yourself so obviously racist, sexist and homophobic? You get triggered more than a clitoris getting licked by two lesbians. You hate the thought of people being aware of any racism, and you hate the thought of ordinary labor being paid a living wage, which are most often minorities.

Why are you such a piece of garbage person? What drives you mini tucker Carlson?

I love how you attack people for stereotyping by stereotyping.

What's a living wage and does that extend to every single job? For example, If someone is employed in a full-time position, they must be paid a "living wage"?

 

[SMOGZINN]

Absolutely, and entirely agree - spot the fuck on. There is a complete lack of messaging - but I will say - this whole concept of "comradery" amongst someone that is "AAPI" is quite insulting.

It is only insulting if you try to generalize it to be all encompassing, and that is the real problem. We are reducing people to a single statistic, and in this case based on skin color and facial features. The truth is AAPI is a useful political tool. They are able to agree on a number of political goals, and work together to accomplish them. So for that purpose lumping them together as AAPI makes sense, but as soon as you move away from those specific political goals it all falls apart. Like it would for any group.

"Oh NO! Pacific islanders don't succeed as much as people from India/Korea/others... because <insert race bait that has no causation, facts, or otherwise>. It must be racism bringing them down! Lets highlight this micro example and not attribute it AT ALL to culture - which actually makes more sense"

He is saying a bit more than that, although it is hard to tell because he did not do a very good job of following a coherent argument.

The overall agenda still doesn't align. There isn't a problem with OUR culture - unless you're insinuate that the majority of Americans can differentiate between a Japanese person and a Pacific islander.....

He is saying that we created a lot of the situations they find themselves in because we (by 'we' here I mean the American government and by extension the people that it represents) choose their starting positions. When we then say that this group is doing better then that one we must take into account the starting position of each group.

For some groups we recruited the already successful and well educated. We brought over their scientists, doctors, and engineers and left the rest (and this is still going on, this is what a H-1B visa does (and why it has dual intent)). In other groups we brought their desperate and downtrodden, the migrant workers and subsistence farmers. Toss both of those groups into American society and one would definitely expect one group to do much better then the other, and for the most part that is exactly what we see. Then we say to one group, why can't you be like the other? As if it is something in their culture that caused their lack of success.

So you're agreeing that you should fall under the category of Asian - and not just this AAPI shit?

My point is I've never once considered myself Asian, AAPI, or anything else. I look white, I live in America and basically no one knows my family came from Russia. My point is that because I look a certain way I've never had to think of myself as any category at all, and no one has ever questioned that. That is how I know these categories are racist.