NYTimes: Harvard and the Myth of the Interchangeable Asian

US progressives are not pro-immigrant. They only like subservient, toadying immigrants who will endorse any kind of vileness against themselves that serves the Liberal cause.

18 thoughts on “NYTimes: Harvard and the Myth of the Interchangeable Asian”

  1. The Latina immigrants who I’ve been around are neither subservient nor toadying, and I’m supportive of their pro-immigrant, progressive political agenda, not imposing my own. (And some of them prefer Latinx – pronounced Latin-ex – so they can avoid saying Latino and Latina or writing Latino/a all the time. It’s annoying, like every single form of inclusive language, until you get used to it.) What gives you the impression they’re not setting the agenda? Check in with Susana Mendoza sometime for how a child of Mexican immigrants operates, and maybe let her know you think she’s subservient and toadying. I’d love to see that conversation.

    The Asian immigrants (and kids of immigrants) I know also are neither subserviant nor toadying, and, as your article points out, have a variety of political agendas. Many of them also don’t think getting into Harvard is the most important thing in the world. I don’t see how the article proves your point.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The Hispanic people I hang out with – I’m guessing a lot more often than you do, eh? – have all sorts of agendas and I support the right of all of them to believe what they want. You, on the other hand, seem very selective in your friendships. It sounds like the Hispanics who don’t serve your agenda but have their own, can go stuff themselves, far as you are concerned.

      Hey, have you tried advancing to your Latinex friends your idea that Guatemalans and Salvadorans are just like Nazis? If they heard that and swallowed it, then I rest my case.

      As for not everyone wanting to get into Harvard, it’s just like the argument that women just choose to be underpaid. African Americans just choose to live in impoverished neighborhoods. Etc.


      1. It would be funny if it weren’t so sad. I say “progressives have no use for immigrants who don’t support their agenda.”

        In response I hear, “that’s not true! All my immigrant friends support my agenda!” Which is exactly what I said.

        You just can’t make this shit up.


          1. What, you are having becherovka, too? 🙂

            Let’s try this again. Do you know any immigrants who are Trump voters? Evangelicals? Religious conservatives? Reaganites? Bushies?


          2. I can’t imagine you mean to say that your progressive Hispanic friends/colleagues are subservient and toadying, and the conservative friends are not. Or that they’re only progressive because they want white people to like them. But that’s what this sounds like.


            1. Sorry, I was replying while you were replying. I know a lot of evangelicals and religious conservatives (because it’s my field of study) but not a lot of Latino/as. Some Bush supporters, but never-Trumpers.


            2. Lack of an answer is also an answer. 🙂

              On my part, I can repeat that I have not met a single Hispanic person who refers to him or herself as Latinex. Hispanic people share great love and respect for their language and find the Anglo attempts to SJW it to be ridiculous and offensive.

              Try to imagine how many Hispanic people I meet because of my job. A lot of people. All social classes. All walks of life. All sorts of political beliefs. Not a single one has anything but derision for this kind of thing. But they can be open with me because I’m perceived as “one of our own” because of my language and general comportment.



              1. And by Hispanic people in this context I obviously don’t mean children of immigrants. Children of immigrants have as their primary task repudiating the culture of their parents and fitting into a new society. Of course, they’ll call themselves anything to feel accepted.


  2. I’m not sure where the concept of “liking” comes in — that would be about individual feeling. The questions are of human rights, labor rights, civil rights, equality, justice. Affirmative action, though, is about representation & looks to rectify underrepresentation


    1. I’m very pro-affirmative action. But I’m very much opposed to racial discrimination against a minority that is based on egregious racist stereotypes.

      It’s beyond my comprehension how anybody can support it. I mean, anybody but people like this author. She’s just a poor schmuck who wants supercilious progressives not to shun her.


      1. I also really love the eternal trick of siccing minorities against each other. Of course, Hispanics and African Americans can only get into Harvard if Asians are kicked out to make space. There’s absolutely no other alternative. Now let’s debate if a black kid is more or less privileged than an Asian kid. Because that’s the real problem here, right?

        This is now a great liberal cause? Approving of racial insults to Asians in the name of racial justice?


        1. Of course, Hispanics and African Americans can only get into Harvard if Asians are kicked out to make space.
          Or you know, admit less legacy students. [They tend to be overwhelmingly white.]

          For a meritocratic process where you’re supposed to prove you’re a good citizen and have great test scores and grades, it was sure fucking weird to answer questions about how much education my parents had and where they obtained it.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. I agree. Bump all the rich fuckers, children of politicians, of celebrities, etc. That, I understand. But supporting discrimination against Asian kids who happen to be smart? I can’t stand behind it. And I don’t understand how it can be a progressive thing to support this. Racial justice can’t be achieved by discriminating against a racial minority, and I absolutely stand by this.

            And once again, I’m a great supporter of affirmative action. I have seen it at work and I’m convinced it’s a good thing.


            1. Yeah, at least we can all agree on legacies. And celebrity kids (the dumbest kid I ever TAd at my fancy school was a sweet child of celebrities.) Except the development officers. I wish we could figure out a way to get some of that Ivy money to the state schools. It kills me every time I get a solicitation from my $29-billion endowment school when I work at a school that’s barely scraping by and has an endowment of $50 million.


              1. Same here. :-)))) I seethe when Yale writes to hit me up for money. And I’m at a struggling state school that serves the population that really needs it.


          2. In my innocence, when I applied to Ivies, I thought the questions about parents was so they could make sure to let in enough LESS privileged people. Only later did I discover it was to give me points if I turned out to be a legacy student. They really could let fewer whites in


      2. No, but the tougher thing, with affirmative action implementation, is the question of underrepresented minorities. This isn’t always fair according to all lights. It can mean white people getting scholarships to HBCUs, Asians not getting counted as minorities, etc. — and what is fair is not always clear


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.