The Noble Truth of the Model Minority

A case study in the palpable bias of Wikipedia

I recently stumbled upon Wikipedia’s article on the “Model minority myth.” Which instantly raises the question: “What precisely is mythical about this ‘myth’?”

The article’s bias is so astounding that I shall critique it line-by-line.

The model minority myth is a sociological phenomenon that refers to the stereotype of certain minority groups, particularly Asian Americans, as successful, and well-adjusted, as demonstrating that there is little or no need for social or economic assistance for the same or different minority groups.

“Demonstrating” is too strong. How about “raising strong doubts about the need for social or economic assistance”?

The model minority stereotype emerged in the United States during the Cold War in the 1950s and was first explicitly used as a term in the 1960s during the Civil Rights Movement as an antithesis to African American claims of racial oppression and has perpetuated notions that other minority groups can achieve the same success through hard work…

Why shouldn’t the existence of successful minorities “perpetuate notions that other minority groups can achieve the same success through hard work”? It’s a timeless truth, so shouldn’t it be “perpetuated”?

and that discrimination and systemic barriers do not impede upward mobility.^[1]

People who praise model minorities normally emphasize that “discrimination and systemic barriers” did impede upward mobility. The whole point is that model minorities succeeded despite these barriers.

A Japanese-American gardener, c.1950s

The model minority myth has been widely criticized as oversimplistic and misleading and for being used to justify discriminatory policies and neglect of marginalized communities.^[2][3]

Calling it a “myth” strongly endorses the criticisms. So how intellectually solid are these criticisms?

…It was only until the 1960s Civil Rights Movement that the concept "model minority" was made explicit.^[4][7][5] A prominent The New York Times article in 1966 by sociologist William Petersen ("Success Story, Japanese-American Style") is most commonly credited for the origination of the model minority concept.^[4][7][8][6] … Petersen's article framed Japanese Americans as an embodiment of success through hard work and ultimately, justified the United States as a meritocratic society in which so-called "problem minorities" could also rise above racism and discrimination to succeed.^[4]…

Reference to a "model" minority group first appeared in a U.S. News and World Report article in 1966 ("Success Story of One Minority Group in the U.S.").^[6] Though Petersen's article only made reference to Japanese Americans, the U.S News and World Report article applied the model minority concept to Chinese Americans, and claimed that they overcame racial discrimination faced by other minority groups, namely African Americans, through so-called traditional values of "hard work, thrift, and morality".^[6] In addition to Chinese Americans, the model minority term was later applied to Asian Americans groups like Korean, and Indian Americans, who were also seen as highly educated and successful…

Following the Civil Rights Era, the model minority term continued to grow in prominence and has been perpetuated by United States media, academia, and popular culture. It is often used to compare model minorities to other minority groups, such as African Americans and Latinos.^[9]

After all this backstory, the article finally names one plausible way in which the MMM is oversimplified:

The growing acceptance of the model minority myth may be partially attributed to the 1965 Immigration Act, which abolished national origin quotas and based admission on skills and profession instead.^[10] As a result, from 1965 to 1979, many immigrants from Asia were highly-educated professionals, like physicians and scientists, and this demographic and their children makes up a significant portion of the Asian American community today.^[10]

But on reflection, it is the preceding paragraph that is grossly oversimplified.

First, commentary on the MMM has long emphasized East Asian success prior to the Civil Rights era. Japanese Americans were demonized, imprisoned, and expropriated during World War II. Chinese Americans suddenly fell under suspicion after Mao’s triumph in mainland China. Yet during the next two decades, when racial discrimination remained legal, these East Asian groups still achieved great success.

Second, while some immigrants from Asia were highly-educated professionals, a great many others were desperate refugees from war-torn Indochina. Korean immigrants, moreover, became increasingly lower-class during the 70s and 80s, then switched back to being more professional in the 90s.

…Because the model minority myth suggests that those designated as model minorities, such as Asian Americans, are a homogenous group characterized by a singular conception of educational and occupational success,^[4] critics of the model minority myth argue that it oversimplifies complex issues of race, class, and discrimination, and ignores the many obstacles that Asian Americans and other minority groups face.^[13]

The claim that the MMM suggests that Asian Americans are a “homogenous group” is itself a gross oversimplification. Who is the most notable researcher to ever make this claim?

For instance, some scholars argue that the model minority myth has been used as a tool to assist the advancement of color-blind ideologies and agendas within politics that delegitimize the existence of racial oppression and reinforce the attainability of the American Dream.^[4][8][15] By using the model minority myth as a tool to perpetuate the American Dream and blame other people of color for their own struggles, critics of the model minority myth worry that it could erode support for government assistance programs.^[8]

Talk about cultish! Yes, recognition of Asian-American success undermines belief in the severity of racial discrimination. As it should. Markedly prudent non-white groups are more successful than whites, so prudent behavior probably matters more than racial discrimination. Their success predates massive government efforts to “fight discrimination.” Which shows that supporters of these government efforts have, at minimum, overstated their case. Which ought to erode support for legal remedies.

Additionally, many critics of the model minority myth argue that the model minority myth masks intra-group inequality.^[4] …The reality is that many Asian American groups face discrimination and poverty, with particular Asian American groups, such as Cambodian Americans and Hmong Americans, having poverty rates higher than that of European Americans.^[16][17][8]

Another baseless charge. Again, who is the most prominent researcher who claims that all Asian groups are successful?

Furthermore, if it were really true that many experts are blind to the differences between Japanese and Hmongs, how are laymen supposed to “discriminate” against the latter? Mistreating someone for belonging to group X is hard if you don’t even know that group X exists, much less who belongs to it.

[A] study conducted by McGowan and Lindgren found that those who view Asian Americans as hard working and intelligent are more likely to believe that Asian Americans face little discrimination in areas such as job recruitment and housing, demonstrating how positive perceptions of the model minority myth could impact an individual's ability to recognize and support instances of socioeconomic inequality.^[8]

Alternately, this could reflect the tendency of people who believe some true things to believe other true things.

Affirmative action policies that exclude Asian Americans due to their incorrectly perceived universally high rates of educational and occupational attainment are another commonly cited example used to illustrate how the model minority myth can further perpetuate social and economic inequalities.^[4]

A bizarrely inverted claim! Virtually everyone who believes in the “model minority myth” opposes race-based college admissions. Virtually everyone who quarrels with the “model minority myth” supports race-based college admissions. Indeed, the most impressive policy effect of the “model minority myth” has to be Students for Fair Admissions vs. Harvard, which banned rampant anti-Asian discrimination in college admissions.

The model minority myth is also commonly criticized for serving as a tool that divides racial minorities to ultimately maintain systemic White supremacy.^[7][8] By applying critical race theory, scholars have examined how the model minority myth fits into broader racial dynamics within the United States.^[7]…In this arrangement, the model minority term serves to present Asian Americans as self-sufficient and high achieving, whose stereotype of success is used to maintain White dominance by blaming other people of color for their struggles ^[18] and to distract individuals from noticing and criticizing systems of White dominance.^[8][19]

Or, to alert individuals to glaring counterexamples to claims of white dominance.

Reading between the lines, even the harshest critics of the MMM acknowledge that it is not a myth at all. Shakespeare’s “Methinks you doth protest too much” is on point, but it’s Homer Simpson who really gets it. When Marge asks him, “Homer, are you actually giving up your faith?,” he replies: “No. No no no no no no! Well, yes.”

The critics’ actual position is that this so-called “myth” is an Ignoble Truth. A Noble Lie is a socially helpful deception; an Ignoble Truth is a socially harmful revelation. No wonder the MMM article uses the stem “perpetuat-” six times! Yet ironically, shining a spotlight on model minorities is one of the best ways to defuse the twin social evils of antipathy and self-pity. Once you realize that prudence is a reliable unilateral path to prosperity, you won’t just stop unjustly blaming others for your own failures. You’ll also be motivated to start improving. If no one else is holding you back, the only person you need to win over is yourself.