Model minority

Model minority refers to a minority ethnic, racial, or religious group whose members achieve a higher degree of success than the population average. This success is typically measured in income, education, and related factors such as low crime rate and high family stability. Critics of this terminology say that it amounts to racial stereotyping, and that its use may be a political tool and its implications incite jealousy and fighting among ethnic minorities, an example of leveraging majority power dynamics to provoke ill sentiments between minority groups.

Additional recommended knowledge

How to ensure accurate weighing results every day?

Safe Weighing Range Ensures Accurate Results

Don't let static charges disrupt your weighing accuracy

Background

The term "model minority" was coined in the mid-1960s by William Petersen to describe Asian Americans as ethnic minorities who, despite marginalization, have achieved success in the United States^[1].

The purpose was to provide a comparison of capitalist and socialist economies: as capitalism was equated with inequality, particularly in reference to poor African Americans, Asian Americans were chosen as an example of a minority group who could succeed by "merit" alone. Modelminority.com writes: "While superficially complimentary to Asian Americans, the real purpose and effect of this portrayal is to celebrate the status quo in race relations. First, by over-emphasizing Asian American success, it de-emphasizes the problems Asian Americans continue to face from racial discrimination in all areas of public and private life. Second, by misrepresenting Asian American success as proof that the US provides equal opportunities for those who conform and work hard, it excuses US society from careful scrutiny on issues of race in general, and on the persistence of racism against Asian Americans in particular."

Asian Americans

In as little as 100 years of American history, stereotypes of Asian Americans have changed from portraying a "bucked-toothed, slanted-eyed, uncivilized yellow peril" to portraying a hard-working, musically talented, and mathematically brilliant model minority.^[2] Constituting over four percent of the U.S. population in 2000, Asian Americans have exceeded 15 to 20 percent of some of America's most prestigious private universities including the Ivy League, Stanford University, MIT, Johns Hopkins, Carnegie Mellon, and New York University, and outnumber European Americans at many University of California campuses (around 40-50%). Asian Americans are spoken of as a 'model minority' group because the group has been argued to be more successful comparatively than other minority groups. In this context, the term Asian Americans is used primarily to describe those of East Asian descent or South Asians (especially in Great Britain), specifically Chinese, Korean, Japanese, and to a lesser extent, Indian, Pakistani, Vietnamese, and Filipino Americans. According to the U.S. Census Bureau's Annual 2004 American Community Survey Report, the median household income of Asian Americans is $56,161, higher than the total population's $44,684.^[3]

As of 2000, about 44% of Asian Americans ages 25 or above held a bachelor's degree or higher , as compared to 24% of the whole population.^[4] Also, as of 2007, over 1 in 4 Asian American college graduates have graduated from an elite university (elite university being roughly defined as a school in the Top 40 according to US News and World Report), meaning that overall approximately 1 in 7 Asian Americans have graduated from an elite university.^[5] In contrast, only 1 in 7 Blacks have graduated from any college, with the vast majority of that percentage graduating from HBCUs and third to fourth tier universities. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's 2003 report Crime in the United States, Asian Americans have the lowest total arrest rates^[6] despite a younger average age, and high family stability.^[7] Asian Americans have achieved higher Math SAT,^[8] and higher IQ scores (in particular involving high visuospatial aptitude, but average to slightly below average verbal aptitude^[9]) (than other ethnic groups (this may be caused by non-native speakers in the relevant subpopulation), even when more socioeconomically deprived^[10] or in cases of transracial adoptions (Clark 1992, Frydman 1989), which can control for environmental and cultural differences in upbringing.

Math SAT scores of relatively poor Asian Americans compare favorably to affluent European Americans, though there is also a high number of very low scores. In the Seattle area, one study published in National Review by Arthur Hu showed that Asian Americans tended to score as well as Whites in the next better suburb. Studies have shown Asian Americans to be, on average, about two years ahead in math ability compared to average, which is also about the same gap observed between nations such as China and Japan compared to the United States. This is despite the fact that Asian Americans have the same school year, and often go to the same urban school systems that serve other minorities. Nationally, Asian Americans tend to get higher grades and have a higher completion rate than whites, and lower rates of discipline, along with lower rates of drug use and premarital sex, entirely inconsistent with the common wisdom that minority status necessarily results in poorer outcomes. Asian Americans still lag on verbal scores because of the predominance of recent immigrants.

History of discrimination

The success of Asian Americans as a group has occurred despite severe discrimination in the previous century, such as, prior to the 1950s, being stereotyped as cheap, uneducated laborers. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, many White Americans feared that the western part of the US would be overrun by the "Yellow Peril," prompting initiatives to reduce immigration from Asia, and during World War II, anti-Japanese paranoia led to thousands of Japanese Americans being held in "internment camps" in the USA. In addition, numerous Asian Americans were recent immigrants or their offspring, since immigration laws had limited Asian immigration prior to the mid 1960s. In the mid 1900s, the Yellow Peril stereotype began to give way to recognition of the racial group's socioeconomic accomplishments.

Media coverage

Media coverage of the increasing success of Asian Americans as a group began in the 1960s, reporting high average test scores and marks in school, winning national spelling bees, and high levels of university attendance. One such example is the University of California system. For instance, at the University of California, Berkeley, Asian Americans account for 41% of the undergraduate student body as of 2003, almost four times the proportion of Asian Americans in California (11%). At the University of California, Irvine, the Asian American population is 44% as of 2004. At top high schools, Asian Americans constitute even larger proportions of the student body; over half at Stuyvesant High School and Hunter College High School.

Possible Causes of Model Minority status

Further information: Stereotypes of intelligence of Asians

Self-selective immigration hypothesis

One possible cause of the good performance of Asian Americans as a group is that they represent a small self-selected group of Asians because the difficulty of emigrating filtered out many of those not possessing more resources, motivation, or ability.

For example, there are only 3 million Chinese Americans in the United States, and worldwide the total number of overseas Chinese is about 34 million, whereas the total worldwide Chinese population is almost 1.4 billion. Emigration to the United States has always been strictly limited by factors such as the high cost of trans-Pacific transportation, language and cultural barriers, strong racial prejudice against Asians which did not wane until the early 1970s, historical state laws that once prohibited Chinese from working most jobs or owning land, and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which limited Chinese immigration to about 100 individuals per year from 1882 through 1943. Self-selection could be continuing even today, as the current quota of about 25,000 per year is still small compared to the millions of Chinese who would like to immigrate to the United States.

In addition, this self-selection occurs in countries which are themselves rising economically: countries such as South Korea, Taiwan, the People's Republic of China, and Japan. Thus, Asian American immigrants generally had high social status in home countries which are themselves rich countries. South Korea and Taiwan count today as developed countries, roughly at the level of European and Japanese development and GDP per capita. However, a large number of Chinese and Japanese Americans are descended from laborers.^{[citation needed]} This means that recent immigrants from countries such as South Korea tend to blend in quickly with the white upper middle class while descendants of earlier immigrants have a much different and more difficult history.

Moreover, American immigration law holds preference for skilled workers and those with college degrees; as such, many Asian immigrants are well-educated before coming to America and are often in a upper-middle economic bracket. Traditionally and statistically children who have higher-educated parents are more likely to attend college; therefore more emphasis is typically placed on education; this trend is noticeable among White and Black populations as well. It should be noted that income and educational attainment are negatively impacted by affirmative actions for all persons broadly identified as "Asian".

This hypothesis is supported empirically. The sociologist Stephen Klineberg conducted a 1996 study of Asian Americans in Houston, and found that the Asian American population had little upward mobility. Most Chinese emigrated for educational opportunities, while most Indians and Filipinos emigrated for economic and work advantages.

See also: Myth versus Facts: Asian American and Model Minorities

Other hypotheses

Cultural differences

Cultural factors are thought to be part of the reason why Asian Americans are successful in the United States. East Asian societies themselves, in general, will often place more resources and emphasis on education.^{[citation needed]} For example, the Chinese culture places great value on work ethic and the pursuit of knowledge. In traditional Chinese social stratification, scholars were ranked at the top — well above businessmen and landowners. This view of knowledge is evident in the modern lifestyle of many Asian American families, where the whole family puts emphasis on education and parents will make it their priority to push their children to study and achieve high marks. Similar cultural tendencies and values are found in South and Southeast Asian families, whose children similarly face extra pressure by parents to succeed in school and to achieve high-ranked jobs.^{[citation needed]}

Genetic differences

Main article: Race and intelligence

Both the self-selecting immigration explanation and the explanation that the racial group simply worked hard for its success are challenged by the observation that the average IQ scores of the East Asian population living in the US and in Asia are similar^[11], and both are 5 points higher than the average IQ scores of the White population living in Europe and the US, and in particular both demonstrate a similar profile of high visuospatial scores and slightly above average verbal intelligence scores. ^[12] Additionally IQ scores for the African American and Latino populations are lower than for the White population. ^[11] Some scientists believe genetics play a role in the success of racial groups, though this is debated and difficult to isolate from factors such as socio-economic discrepancies, subcultural discrepancies, social discrimination, and internalization of stereotypes.^[11]

The scores obtained by various minorities on tests such as the IQ and SAT could be influenced by cultural and social differences.^{[citation needed]} Also interesting to note is that whites who take natural sciences tests against Asian Americans often score lower regardless of academic history^{[citation needed]}; similarly, a Black person often scores lower than a white person regardless of academic history^{[citation needed]}. It has been argued that this is a clear indicator of the internalization of stereotypes and is called stereotype threat theory.

Effects of the stereotype

According to Gordon H. Chang: The reference to Asian Americans as model minorities has to do with the work ethic, respect for elders, and high valuation of family and elders present in their culture. Despite the fact that this concept seems to valorize Asian Americans, it comes with an underlying notion of their apoliticality. Moreover, such a label one-dimensionalizes Asian Americans as having those traits and no other human qualities, such as vocal leadership, negative emotions, or intolerance towards oppression. Asian Americans are labeled as model minorities because they have not been as much of a "threat" to the U.S. political establishment as blacks, due to a smaller population and less political advocacy. This label seeks to suppress potential political activism through euphemistic compliments. (Reference: Asian Americans and Politics: Perspective, Experiences, Prospects by Gordon H. Chang.)

Effects of Model Minority stereotyping

Asian Americans being an economically successful racial group in the US can create a stereotype as a side effect. Asian Americans may also be commonly stereotyped by the general public as being overly studious, materialistic, and passive. In some cases this may have the effect of those with learning disabilities being given less attention than they need. As well, the connotations of being a model minority mean that in school, Asian students are often labeled with the unpopular "nerd" image. Many Asian Americans resent the label of model minority and see it as another attempt to stereotype a minority group.

Asian Americans as a group have a very low crime rate, but a side effect of their success may be a downplaying of the presence of Asian criminal behavior and gangs in several cities, including New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Houston, and Vancouver as well as in the state of Hawaii. Occasionally however, news of Asian American criminals receives widespread media coverage, such as the infamous Han Twins Murder Conspiracy in 1996, the shooting rampage by physics student Gang Lu at the University of Iowa, Esmie Tseng, an honor student, murdering her mother in 2005, and the Virginia Tech Massacre in 2007 committed by Seung-Hui Cho who killed 32 people and wounded another 25 (total of around 57 people).

The labeling of Asian Americans as the model minority, rather than as a model minority, has led to tensions between them and other minority groups, as well as discrimination in education in curriculum and admissions.

Model minority could be a euphemism for the definitive yuppie culture among young adult Asian Americans — particularly for those employed in typical white-collar occupations e.g. medical, law, and computer science. However, despite — or perhaps because of — their success and yuppie mentality, there is a growing presence of Asian Americans (many of whom work at some of America's most prestigious firms) committing white collar crimes. The most prominent example is that of Norman Hsu, a Wharton educated businessman and former campaign donor to Hillary Clinton who was captured after being a fugitive for sixteen years for failing to appear at a sentencing for a felony fraud conviction. Other Asian American white collar criminals who gained media attention include John Huang, Jay Kim, Henry C. Yuen, and Kyung Joon Kim.

Asian American status in affirmative action

Because of their high degree of success as a group, Asian Americans do not benefit from affirmative action policies the way other minority groups do. In fact, most schools routinely choose lower-scoring applicants from other racial groups, including European Americans, over Asian Americans, in an attempt to promote racial diversity and to maintain some proportion to the society's racial demographics.^[13]

Cultural references

• The film Better Luck Tomorrow plays on the model minority stereotype by depicting a group of East Asian American teenagers who use their academic achievements to cover up criminal activities they are involved with.
• In Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle, Harold is faced with the stereotype of the intelligent, academically successful and "nerdy" Asian male. Kumar, of South Asian descent and whose father and brother are both medical doctors, denies himself the prospect of going to medical school in defiance of the "Indian doctor" stereotype despite his considerable intellect and knowledge.

Black immigrants from Africa

See also: Africans in the United States

According to the London Daily Times “Black Africans have emerged as the most highly educated members of British society, surpassing even the Chinese as the most academically successful ethnic minority.”^[14] In a side-by-side comparison of 2000 census data by sociologists including John R. Logan at the Mumford Center, State University of New York at Albany, black immigrants from Africa averaged the highest educational attainment of any population group in the U.S., including whites and Asians.

According to an analysis of Census Bureau data by The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education Some 48.9 percent of all African immigrants hold a college diploma ^[15]. This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., nearly double the rate for native-born white Americans, and nearly four times the rate for native-born African Americans. In an article by Clarence Page for the Chicago Tribune 43.8 percent of African immigrants had achieved a college degree, compared with 42.5 of Asian Americans, 28.9 percent for immigrants from Europe, Russia and Canada and 23.1 percent of the U.S. population. The article beginning with the lines "Do African immigrants make the smartest Americans?" was meant to call attention to the dubiousness of affirmative action ^[16]. A major caveat in the study is the failure of the author to define the different ethnic groups that make up African immigrants. The U.S. Census Bureau report classifies African immigrants as people migrating from Africa regardless of their ancestry. Previous reports have shown European settlers from former colonies and Arabs from North Africa form significant parts of the African immigrant bloc. In the United States, statistics are broken down by country of origin.

Similar to the Asian American population, attainment rates vary widely between countries. While some African immigrants to the United States such as Nigerians^[17], Egyptians, and Beninese each have around 59% with bachelors degrees, others come as refugees from places such as Sudan and Somalia have comparatively less stellar statistics 40% and 16% respectively. ^[18] Out of sub-Saharan Africans, Nigerians have the both the largest number of immigrants as well as the highest educational attainment and income statistics. For all African immigrants, their statistics are only slightly edged out by Egyptians. ^[19]

SOURCE: 2000 US CENSUS

Other / European American US groups

Jewish Americans are in some interpretations considered a model minority. Mormons have also been identified as exhibiting model minority characteristics.^[20] Iranian Americans as well as Armenian Americans can be considered a model minority, due to above average rates of academic and commercial success in the United States^[21]. Furthermore, in some US cities where European Americans do not make up the largest ethnic group such as Atlanta or Detroit, the European American population in general can somewhat be regarded as a model minority considering their vastly lower crime rates and higher personal incomes and educational attainment.

Other Countries

In the United Kingdom, the Jewish, Chinese, and West African immigrants are often considered to be model minorities.

In some areas of Australia such as Sydney and Melbourne, East Asians, South Asians and Jews are considered a model minority. This is often illustrated by the representation of these groups in selective schools compared to population proportion.

Negatively viewed success

In certain countries, minority groups successful in economic and other measures have attracted the reverse sort of attention. In Indonesia, for instance, ethnic Chinese—a group which historically have achieved prominence in business and economics—have been the target of violence and measures aimed at reducing their share of the economy. In Indonesia, according to official figures the ethnic Chinese constitute only 3-4% of the population, yet according to some (controversial) studies control as much as three quarters of the wealth.^[22]

The government of post-independence Uganda persecuted the Indian minority who were disproportionately prosperous businessmen and traders. They were expelled from the country by the government of Idi Amin in the 1970s, which also outlawed Judaism and severely persecuted the Abayudaya Jewish community (resulting in an 83% reduction in the size of that community). Many of them emigrated to Leicester, UK, to the chagrin of the local council, which placed advertisements trying to persuade them not to relocate to the city. However, they became one of Britain's most successful economic groups and 30,000 jobs in the Leicester area were created as a result of Ugandan Asian economic activities.^{[citation needed]}

Another example of negatively viewed success is whites in southern Africa. Under colonialism, whites continued to cling onto power in nations such as Zimbabwe and South Africa long after world opinion had turned against white rule. However, not all of their success can be attributed to their monopoly on power. According to the University of the Western Cape [11], in South Africa over the period 1995-2000, average black incomes dropped 19% and average white incomes rose 15%. Given that there was a black-led government in power for the whole of this period, it is difficult to substantiate an argument saying they got this wealth by anything other than merit alone. However, this has not stopped the South African government pursuing means to strip the white community of its wealth and redistribute it to blacks under pretexts such as Black Economic Empowerment.^{[citation needed]}

The economic success of Jews in pre-1933 Germany was viewed with extreme negativity and suspicion by the Nazis after they took power in 1933. There is no historical evidence to suggest that they, as a community, became successful by dishonest means. However, in the wake of the Great Depression, as a distinctive ethnic group that was significantly wealthier than the rest of the German population, they were vulnerable to scapegoating, even though some historians believe that their economic activities may have mitigated the effects of the depression for Germany. The fact that they were relatively shielded from Germany's economic woes was mainly due to their investments in assets whose value couldn't be destroyed by hyperinflation, such as property or commodities (e.g., gold), whereas many other Germans had their assets in savings, whose value was eroded by the hyperinflation.

See also

• Stereotypes of East and Southeast Asians
• Stereotypes of South Asians
• Affirmative action
• Race and intelligence
• Race and crime
• Dominant minority
• Supremacism
• United States foreign born per capita income

References