INTRODUCTION

We all know that “there’s always an Asian better than you.” Regardless of how harmless this often repeated joke may be, it is indicative of the stereotypes faced by and embraced by Asian American youth and Asian Americans in general. From competing for the highest GPAs and highest-paying jobs to celebrating Asian child prodigies, the Asian American community generally accepts the idea that Asian means excellence. But this story of hard work and success is not merely a result of immigrant parents or cultural norms. This story has a name—the model minority myth—and its roots and significance go far deeper.

The model minority myth is the guiding narrative for the Asian American experience in the eyes of both Asian and White Americans. To the majority of people in either group, it looks like the story of success and achievement against all odds because of the unique lifestyle choices of Asian Americans. The American Dream works as a key component, falsely promising success to anyone who behaves similarly, praising independence and hard work. This perception of Asian Americans was not popularized until the mid-1900s when a form of it was created by Chinese-Americans and adopted by American politicians and news outlets. The lack of knowledge of the history of Asian Americans before that time causes many Americans today to be unaware that the model minority myth was something constructed and used as a tool, not the default and not a perception that sprung up naturally. The myth also hides existing inequalities and limits the Asian American understanding of self to fit within its bounds. It is my belief that a collective identity rooted in history is necessary to inform our understanding of who we are. The way to escape the bounds of the model minority myth is to look back and examine what it means to be an Asian American. The majority of Asian Americans are those who came after 1965 and arrived in America when the myth was being established. For those who have no experience as Asian Americans outside of this narrative, looking to the stories of those who came before them is necessary, but may cause feelings of strangeness and disconnect.

In this paper, my aim is to prove the need for a collective identity for Asian Americans that is distinctly theirs and that goes beyond the model minority myth. I begin with the testimonies of second-generation immigrants and the similar American Dream component of their stories in order to show the reality of this myth and its effects. I then address, through a Pew Research survey, the opinion from many Asians and non-Asians alike that equality has already been accomplished. Finally, I describe the the long history of the model minority myth and its implications, both good and bad. In light of the idea that remembrance and the model minority myth cannot coexist, I end with a discussion about the importance of history and public memory and how influential both are to shaping identity.

WHAT DOES “ASIAN AMERICAN” ACTUALLY MEAN?

First, a definition of terms. The term “Asian American” was not used to describe U.S. citizens of Asian descent until 1968, when activists Emma Gee and Yuji Ichioka named their student organization the “Asian American Political Alliance.” Until that year, which was approximately 200 years after the first Filipino settlement in Louisiana and over 100 years after the first wave of Asian immigrants to Hawaii and California, the only broad term for Asian immigrants was “Orientals.” There is much significance in the names we give ourselves, and Gee and Ichioka certainly proved that with their organization. While the term “Orientals” brings up the idea of foreignness and a history of racist assumptions, “Asian American” united the various scattered groups of people of Asian descent under one term. It also explicitly incorporates the word “American,” which suggests the opposite of foreignness and encourages students to see themselves as deserving of the same rights as White Americans.

In this paper, the “Asian American experience” refers to the experience of those whose lives are shaped by the model minority myth. The model minority myth is the idea that everyone, particularly Asian Americans, has equal opportunities to succeed and that through hard work, it is possible to achieve equality and prosperity. This American Dream narrative typically requires the minority to assimilate completely with the dominant culture and to be accepted by proving they are both obedient and high-achieving. Asian Americans are granted more respect, creating a cycle where elevated opinions of the minority group allow for more success for that group. Thus it convinces those who participate in it (on both sides, the minority group and the dominant group) that America is a meritocracy where not succeeding is the result of personal flaws and succeeding is the result of personal merit.

I identify as third-generation Asian American, and I regard the term “Asian American” highly for the way it brings us together and promotes action, both today and in decades past. Yet, it has been rightly criticized for at times masking the diversity of ethnicities and experiences within the group. I do not think that my attempt here to unite Asian Americans under one term is misguided because we all exist in the space of “foreigner” in a way that is somewhat unique. We share a history of discrimination and alienation. The experiences of the different groups that come together under the label “Asian American” are complex and nuanced. I do not mean, by my definition of the Asian American experience, to neglect those who have not experienced success by following the model minority myth, nor those who are limited by different stereotypes, good and bad. I would contend that although they may not possess the classic Asian immigrant success story, their lives are shaped nonetheless by the myth, precisely because success is the only story that most Americans know. And even if they are not expected to fit into that story on a personal level, they are rendered invisible because there is no other place for them to exist, no other story that will be told about them because there are not many willing to tell it, and the ones who are have no audience to hear it.

A fair understanding of Asian American history should include a variety of narratives, certainly not just those of Korean, Chinese, and Japanese Americans. A percentage of all Asian Americans have not experienced success through acceptance of the myth. This percentage is unfortunately too often neglected in conversations about the position of Asian Americans in America and indeed, the fact that such a percentage exists and is not talked about is one of the key failings of the myth.

When Lisa Sun-Hee Park interviewed 88 Chinese and Korean American children of immigrants, all high school or college-aged, she discovered that the responses were shockingly similar across classes and locations, not only in content but also in the way the story of immigration was told. All confessed that their parents never really talk about their lives before immigrating and all believed this was a way of protecting their children. They also told objectively tragic stories in very practical tones, mostly focusing on hard work instead of suffering. Park speculates that these similarities are the result of the model minority myth.

The students all sought to prove that their presence in America was legitimate, likely forever aware of how difficult it is for immigrants to be seen as true Americans and how easily that image is shattered when their story doesn’t fit the desired narrative. Park claims that the arc which their retellings follow can be traced to American Puritanism, which encouraged independence and self-reliance. Under this framework, failure and success are moral distinctions. Asian American failure to succeed is therefore seen as a result of not enough hard work. Park describes the narratives the students gave like so:

These migration narrative constructions have a generic or formulaic quality. The stories could describe almost any immigrant group in almost any historical period. It is, in fact, a retelling of the familiar American myth of “national origins," in which the nation is born with the migration of poor peasants who come to the "land of opportunity" with nothing but their determination and hard work and subsequently "melt into the pot.”

The youth who were interviewed seem to automatically fit their family’s story into the American Dream model of success through hard work. They also show a hesitancy to “sensationalize” their own stories. Park uses the example of Mike, who goes out of his way to play down the tragic points of his father’s difficult life after immigrating.

Children of immigrants are careful not to sensationalize their immigration narratives. They try to avoid falling into the easy trap of exoticization. The point of these stories is to illustrate their legitimate place within society, not to heighten their outsider status or foreignness. Mike, a Chinese-American college student illustrates this point:

It was hard on my dad. All he did was go to school and go to work. He told me that sometimes he was so tired at work at the assembly job that he would just sneak away and sleep under a desk. So I know it was pretty tough, unless he was lying about it. They don't talk about it much.

Mike could have made his point in a variety of ways. Certainly, the imagery of a man so exhausted from his daily labor that he contorts his body into the square frame of a desk for a brief reprieve can be dramatic. Instead, Mike tells the story with an even tone, as if he were reading a grocery list. His tone renders sneaking away and sleeping under a desk a normal strategy to combat sleep [deprivation]; but more important, that is not the point of his retelling. Rather, there is a clear lesson regarding necessary hard work.

Not only does keeping this information from your children shield them from harm, it also allows them (and you) to accept the American Dream ideal more easily. Mike’s parents don’t talk much about the hardship they endured because making pain the main point of the story disrupts their hope for their children. Mike accepts without question that his parents’ work paved the way for his own hard work (and hopefully future success). Bringing up painful experiences or immediate, pressing worries would ruin the belief that America is a meritocracy.

The reason this narrative, which implies that hard work, assimilation, and model behavior are the only path to success, is so problematic is because of how pervasive it is and how necessary it appears to be. It is not often acknowledged, especially among older Asian Americans and first-generation immigrants, and many have never heard the words “the model minority myth.” Park says that there are “good” immigrants and “bad” immigrants, and the instinct to survive demands that Asians choose to be “good” immigrants. Even second-generation immigrants, who usually have less immediate needs than their parents, understand that they are a reflection of their parents as immigrants and as people who must continually prove their worth to America. They also likely feel burdened by the knowledge that their parents sacrificed so much to give them these opportunities to excel. There is no easy, practical alternative and each first or second-generation immigrant understandably has little to no desire to be the one to resist the myth through disobedience.

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE “MODEL MINORITY”

The model minority myth can seem like a manipulative restructuring of history, one aimed at making Asian Americans victims who are upset with their current position. On most days, Asian Americans do not appear to be clearly discriminated against. They earn more and are more educated than any other racial group, signs that they have overcome the barrier of ignorance and racism through hard work. It is reasonable to suggest that Asian Americans are just more motivated, whether by their own belief in the power of education and hard work or the expectations of their culture. And if Asian Americans are simply more motivated, then how can we possibly claim that there is an element of manipulation? If this is a narrative freely chosen by Asian Americans, then has it not brought them success?

Asian Americans themselves seem to express the same opinion. In a survey of the six largest Asian origin groups conducted by Pew Research, 88% of the Asian Americans surveyed said they believe U.S. Asians have been more or equally successful compared with other racial or ethnic minority groups. About eight-in-ten say their group gets along very well or pretty well with White Americans. Among all racial groups, Asian American newlyweds are most likely to be intermarried. And perhaps most surprising, around 75% say that being Asian American helps or makes no difference when it comes to getting a job or gaining admission to college.

From these responses, which were gathered in 2012, racism does not appear to be an issue for Asian Americans. The majority of those surveyed reported that they do not feel negatively impacted by their race and, in general, have been successful in school and their careers. Asian Americans are the highest-income and best-educated racial group in America.

However, one of the paradoxical features of the myth of the American Dream is its stealth. Its success is based in its acceptance by both Asian Americans and White Americans (and to an extent every person of every race in America), so its existence will not be revealed through surveys of opinions like the aforementioned one. If those surveyed believed their race was detrimental to their success, the myth would have failed. The truth is that people of Asian descent have achieved economic success in America, far more, for certain, than they would have had this myth not become the primary narrative for Asian immigration. It is unfair to expect first-generation immigrants to recognize and reject this limited path and it is unkind to portray them as having any other option. For those trying to give their families a better life, forcing their realities into this American Dream model was hardly something they could have deliberated. Those of us who have benefited from the hard choices our parents and grandparents made are the ones who now have the privilege and responsibility of changing the narrative.

A few things stand out in the same Pew Research survey that nuance the Asian American success story. First is that those who responded clearly believe in the traditional components of the American Dream: hard work, opportunity, and freedom. Sixty-nine percent of U.S. Asians said people can get ahead if they are willing to work hard (11% more than the national average), and 93% said people in their country of origin group are very hardworking. In contrast, only 57% thought Americans overall were hardworking. An overwhelming majority believes that the U.S. offers a better life than their country of origin in terms of freedoms, opportunities, and treatment of the poor. This belief that America is a meritocracy gives hope and disappointment in equal measures. While many immigrants find economic success, Pew Research reports poverty rates are higher than the national average in eight of nineteen groups that were analyzed in a separate study. The overall poverty rate for Asians is 12.1%, but groups like the Burmese have poverty rates of over 30%. Believing that every Asian immigrant story is the same blinds Asian Americans and all Americans to the realities of inequality among Asian ethnic groups.

THE HISTORY BEHIND THE MYTH & THE MYTH IN AMERICAN MEDIA

The history of this single, ideal American Dream story is a long one. Manifestations of the model minority myth from its origins to today differ greatly from the original perception of Asian Americans. When asked about the stereotypical Asian, one might think of a diligent, East Asian student in medical school or a brilliant, unassuming child pianist. However, until the mid-1900s, Asian immigrants were more likely to be stereotyped as coming to steal your job—people who were filthy, uneducated, and ineligible for citizenship. The first whispers of the model minority myth date back to the 1950s. Even before then, there was beginning to be a shift in the way Asians were treated in America. Since the first waves of immigration in the 1800s, Asians were thought of as the “yellow peril.” Chinese men arrived to work on the railroad and many ended up working in the cities in manufacturing. White workers first grew nervous about their jobs being stolen, then angry at the Chinese. They claimed their independence was being taken away and clamored for a stop to immigration from China. Soon, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed.

With immigration prohibited, no way to become citizens, and very little social mobility, Asian Americans began to try to assimilate. In short, their goal was to look like a “good American.” Some groups tried to prove their worth through military service, some through hard work, and some through displaying good family values. The Exclusion Acts were not overturned until WWII when leaders thought that the act would be bad for maintaining an alliance with China. Similarly, the Japanese Exclusion Act was not overturned until Japan had been converted into a democratic, capitalist country; overturning the act was clearly just a matter of political advantage rather than morality. After WWII and the Cold War, Americans’ opinions on Asians tended to be less hostile, perhaps because of guilt for Japanese internment and past treatment.

In the 1950s and 60s, the model minority myth began to take shape, gaining popularity by word of mouth and news articles. Knowing Americans were terrified of juvenile delinquency, Chinatown leaders took the chance to spread the first rumors that children of Chinese parents were nowhere close to juvenile delinquents and instead were very hardworking and obedient. At the time, Americans latched onto this narrative and propped it up as something to be admired. Soon, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 was passed which abolished a previous quota system and is the reason the Asian American population has risen from being less than 1% of the population to about 6%.

After the civil rights movement, Asian Americans were promoted across the political spectrum as the solution. At a time when America was fearful of or fed up with civil disobedience from Black communities, Asian Americans were supposedly everything not Black: patriotic, calm, content, hardworking, and successful. An article published in The New York Times on December 13, 1970, titled “Orientals Find Bias Is Down Sharply in U.S.” reads:

When J. Chuan Chu came to the United States as a student at the end of World War II from his home in North China, he had trouble finding a place to live. Having an Oriental face, he discovered, was a liability.

But Mr. Chu, with an engineering degree from the University of Pennsylvania, has now risen to become a vice president of Honeywell Information Systems. He lives today in the wealthy Boston suburb of Wellesley, near his concern's headquarters.

“If you have ability and can adapt to the American way of speaking, dressing, and doing things,” Mr. Chu said recently, “then it doesn't matter any more if you are Chinese.”

His story reflects a quiet, little noted American success story—the almost total disappearance of discrimination against the 400,000 Chinese and 500,000 Japanese Americans since the end of World War II and their assimilation into the mainstream of American life.

Chu’s story is framed as an “American success story,” under the assumption that complete assimilation is praiseworthy and natural and that this is the path to happiness and equality that is open to every immigrant if they will only choose to reap the rewards of embracing the American Dream.

The article goes on to describe the decrease in discrimination faced by Asian Americans, citing reasons like the second generation’s refusal to accept humiliating stereotypes and replacement with the stereotypes of good student and high-achieving professionals in addition to White guilt over Japanese internment. However, being written as it was in 1970, the metric used to measure equality was no “artificial barriers to becoming doctors, lawyers, architects, and professors.” It is hard to determine what the people interviewed for the article might consider to be “discrimination,” as some of them claimed there was no longer any discrimination. 

Alternatively, the article also seems to shame younger Asian Americans for being “sensitive.” It dismisses the idea of discrimination still existing and proceeds to highlight Asian American success stories.

And some younger Asian Americans have become increasingly sensitive, like blacks and Indians, to what they consider white Americans’ patronizing attitude toward them. They resent the tourists in Chinatown who politely ask if they can speak English. They indignantly reject the old Oriental stereotype of the slant‐ eyed, pig‐tailed Chinaman, eating chop‐suey and mumbling “ah‐so.” And they insist that many whites, behind a facade of believing in equality, are still prejudiced.

Some [Asian Americans] have achieved national reputations, a feat unimaginable 20 years ago: I.M. Pei and Minour Yamasaki as architects, Gerald Tsai as head of the Manhattan Fund; Tsung Dao Lee and Chen Ning Yang as Nobel prize winners in physics; S.I. Hayakawa as President of San Francisco State College, and Daniel Inouye as Senator from Hawaii.

Including these stories of Asian excellence emphasizes that perhaps we have come far enough and “younger Asian-Americans” ought to be thankful and content. To its credit, the article does give context as to what people may have considered to be real, traditional discrimination.

A report written by the San Francisco Board of Aldermen in 1854 typified the 19th century American view. “The Chinese live in a manner similar to our savage Indians,” the report said. “Their women are the most degraded prostitutes and the sole enjoyment of the male population is gambling.” The aldermen recommended “the immediate expulsion of the whole Chinese race from the city.”

This article, written a century later, is an excellent example of the new narrative that was being told about Asian Americans after the civil rights movement of the 60s. Similar articles were written around the same time, such as William Petersen’s article "Success Story, Japanese-American Style” which was published in The New York Times in 1966. It is considered to be the first of this kind of news story and used the Japanese story of “success” after internment to drive a wedge between Asian Americans and African Americans. It implied that the success achieved by the Japanese could be replicated by African Americans through hard work and self-reliance and that their lack of success was due to personal and cultural failure. The same year, the U.S. News & World Report published “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.” The article opens with, “At a time when Americans are awash in worry over the plight of racial minorities— One such minority, the nation’s 300,000 Chinese-Americans, is winning wealth and respect by dint of its own hard work.” The piece also compares Chinese Americans to African Americans and implies that the Chinese faced discrimination and overcame it, unlike African Americans. By 1987, the image of the obedient, genius student was cemented. Time magazine’s cover that year bore the headline “Those Asian-American Whiz Kids.”

EFFECTS OF THE MYTH & THE FALSE DICHOTOMY

During this same period, despite the fact that many African Americans made similar efforts to be viewed as respectable, they were never given the opportunities that Asian Americans gained through stories of discipline and excellence. Asian American social mobility satisfied liberals and their lack of political involvement satisfied conservatives. Now that Asian Americans had been defined as distinctly not Black, a shift took place in the public attitude toward Asian people. Ellen Wu describes the shift in perceptions of Asian Americans and examines the many causes in her book “The Color of Success.” By the end of the 1960s, in a space that can feel like it is between White and Black, Asians were finally closer to White.

Asian Americans were and are allowed to succeed because the existence of a model minority allows American society to retain its race-based hierarchy. It is both true that we had opportunities to achieve a lot of measurable success because of our proximity to Whiteness and that we excelled in those opportunities through our hard work. Proximity to Whiteness refers to the fact that many Asian Americans forsake the distinction of Asian and express that they are just American. This is most commonly apparent in the way they live and the traditions they keep. Popular theories on immigration anticipate that by the third and fourth generation, members of the group will almost completely assimilate and cultures will “melt” into one. This idea assumes that the dominant culture will eventually become the culture that defines what it means to be a citizen of the country. In the case of these Asian immigrants, this is the culture of White Americans.

The perceived dichotomy between complete assimilation and foreigner status may be reflected in one of the questions asked by the 2012 Pew Research survey. When asked how they describe themselves, only 19% of Asian Americans overall selected the label “Asian American.” Instead, they used either just “American” or a label involving their country of origin. Among foreign-born U.S. Asians, 69% used their country of origin and a mere 9% used just “American.” Among native-born U.S. Asians, 43% used their country of origin, 28% used just “American,” and 22% used “Asian American.” In line with the necessary outcomes of embracing the model minority narrative, these respondents did not identify as Asian American, a group that is distinctly both Asian and American. Ideally, the term should stand for a collective identity that is at once Asian and American and that is more than just the sum of the two. Instead, they chose to distinguish themselves by country of origin or to claim they were only “American.” This may indicate that their concept of themselves as not merely Asian or American but Asian American is lacking. It is difficult for many Asian Americans to feel as though they belong to a community that is uniquely Asian and American in a way that is harmonious and not discordant.

Trying to escape being seen as a foreigner has always been central to the Asian American experience. The most common description of what it feels like to be Asian American is to be pulled between two cultures, two sets of values, and two ways of living. In some ways, this sensation is natural for all first and second-generation immigrants. However, I would argue that for Asian Americans, an identity that is distinctly theirs has never fully developed. Identity for Asian Americans is instead too often a choice between being completely the same and feeling too different from the dominant culture. Second- and third-generation Asian Americans in particular have the conundrum of constantly proving they merit their status as “real” Americans, normally through good behavior and exceptional performance.

POSITIVE STEREOTYPING

Believing that you cannot be fully American while you appear Asian, Asian immigrants often try to assimilate completely and to adopt White American culture. From food to fashion to accent, presenting themselves as “real” Americans helps Asian immigrants be accepted in their communities, schools, and workplaces. In return, Americans in general assume that Asian immigrants will be easy for them to accept. While a survey done by Pew Research in 2015 showed that only 20% of Americans think immigrants from the Middle East have a positive impact on American society (39% think they have a negative impact), 47% think Asians have a positive impact (only 11% think they have a negative impact). A study in the Asian American Journal of Psychology found that Americans widely share the perspective of Asian Americans as diligent, high-achieving, and submissive and that they expect Asian Americans to conform to this image. Enforced by portrayals of Asian Americans in the media, the model minority standard is something acknowledged and upheld by Americans in general.

Some people call this “positive stereotyping,” often with the implication that Asian Americans should be thankful for the help that these stereotypes have given them. Pew Research did find in their 2012 survey that 20% of Asian Americans thought their race helped them be admitted to schools and colleges and find a job. It is true that Asian American students perform better in part because others believe they can, as opposed to the experience of other minority students, who are commonly not taken seriously when pursuing AP and honors courses. Asian American students are more frequently given the benefit of the doubt and are sometimes placed into APs without testing. Asian Americans may also be favored in the hiring process because they are assumed to be hard workers, quiet, and obedient.

Positive stereotyping, however, is incredibly harmful in the long run. Not only does assimilation strip a community of its own culture, values, and practices, it persuades those who choose to assimilate that they have achieved equality and will truly be seen as equals to those of the dominant culture (in this case, White Americans). Asian Americans have not achieved equality, no matter how close to Whiteness they believe themselves to be. This kind of stereotyping hurts Asian Americans in poverty, who are less likely to receive aid because of the misconception that all Asians are rich. Asian American children also often feel pressured by the expectations of Asians and non-Asians to do well in a way that satisfies the myth. Becoming a doctor is satisfactory while becoming a comedian is not.

And because many Americans (Asian and non-Asian) expect Asian Americans to be doctors or lawyers or professors, less stereotypical and less highly-respected paths are even more closed to the Asian Americans who do pursue them. As recently as 2017, more than 64% of television series had no Asian American or Pacific Islander series regular. In contrast, 96% of series have at least one White regular. If Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders are cast, most are on screen about three times less than White regulars.

Choosing certain other careers like writing means being one of the first and exposing yourself to ignorance and bias. In 1982, acclaimed Asian American writer Maxine Hong Kingston wrote “I am an American writer, who, like other American writers, wants to write the great American novel.” In an interview in 2006, she speaks about how texts written by ethnic minorities are often not seen as “real literature” that can be studied as any other American literature. In her own experience, she has been portrayed as a Chinese author, as though “Chinese” and “American” are mutually exclusive identifiers.

Not only does positive stereotyping limit opportunities for Asian Americans, it puts a great deal of stress on the next generation. A study published in The Journal of Family Theory & Review revealed “several common sources of stress that have an impact on [1.5 or second-generation young adults’] overall mental health, including having to live up to the model minority stereotype, discrimination due to racial and cultural background, parental pressure to succeed, and difficulty balancing two different cultures and communicating with parents because of differences in acculturation levels.” The idea that Asian Americans will and should easily adjust to every situation causes them to be unwilling to seek help and also unlikely to receive offers of help from others.

“BAMBOO CEILING”

Positive stereotyping and the model minority myth also affect Asian American professionals. The “bamboo ceiling” is a term used to indicate the fact that Asian Americans are incredibly underrepresented among board members or executive officers and have trouble advancing in their careers compared to their White colleagues. Asian Americans make up 47% of professional jobs in Silicon Valley tech companies but only 25% of executive positions. Despite being more educated as a population and hired at a higher rate, White men and women are 154% more likely than Asians to hold an executive role.

Interestingly, the Asian Americans in the Pew Research survey who thought their race was helpful in college admissions and getting hired were less educated. When asked about the effect on being promoted, a similar percentage said their race made no difference, but only 14% said it helped whereas 15% said it hurt. It may be the case that the same stereotypes that caused Asian students to be perceived as better students harmed them once they entered the workforce. As professionals, they found that they were assumed to be quiet and hardworking but not creative or vocal. As a result, competing for management and leadership positions was much harder.

A 2017 survey conducted for National Public Radio, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health found that a quarter or more of Asian Americans say they have been personally discriminated against because they are Asian when applying for jobs (27%), when being paid equally or considered for promotions (25%), and when trying to rent or buy housing (25%). In addition to institutional forms of discrimination, a third of Asian Americans say they have personally experienced racial or ethnic slurs (32%) and people making negative assumptions or insensitive or offensive comments about their race or ethnicity (35%). In summary of national beliefs, the report says, 

Overall, 61% of Asian Americans believe that there is discrimination against Asian Americans in the U.S. today, and younger Asian Americans are significantly more likely to believe such discrimination exists.

Among all those who believe anti-Asian discrimination exists in America today, a two- thirds majority (68%) say that discrimination based on the prejudice of individual people is the bigger problem, while only 14% say discrimination based in laws and government policies is the bigger problem. Another 16% say both are equally problematic.

So although portrayals of Asians in media and the quintessential American Dream narrative promote the idea that Asian Americans have achieved equality and are “real” Americans, the lived experience of those surveyed suggests otherwise. Often measures of success are limited to salary, employment, education level, and exceptional achievements. Missing from this list are the things Asian Americans believe they were promised and the things they deserve. For example, Asian Americans are hired at a higher rate, but they also are much more educated as a population. However, Asian American professionals do not see the same returns on their educational investments as their White counterparts.

It is impossible to prove (and unlikely) that racism is behind every situation where a qualified Asian American is not promoted. Still, the plethora of stories and survey responses show that inequality in the workplace is felt by a significant number of Asian Americans. In the article “Silent No Longer: ‘Model Minority' Mobilizes,” Andrew Lawler details the reactions of researchers at National Laboratories after the Wen Ho Lee case in 1999. Lee was a Los Alamos National Laboratory physicist who was investigated for espionage and put in solitary confinement for nine months. Investigators were unable to prove the initial accusations that he was stealing information for China. The interviewees are remembering the time before his trial for mishandling classified data. One physicist, Shao-Ping Chen, remembers receiving an angry email demanding for Lee to be lynched. Researchers all across the country were understandably upset, but for these researchers, this case was only the beginning. Lawler writes that “Asian Americans at the nation’s weapons labs are now aggressively protesting a culture that they believe has not only singled them out as potential security risks but has also held back their careers. They also have compiled figures, which are disputed by lab officials, indicating that on average they lag in terms of pay.”

Many of those interviewed expressed being hesitant at first to complain about discrimination and reluctant to take action but they are now most concerned with smashing the glass ceiling and readdressing pay inequality. Chao was one such hesitant critic: 

Chao, like many Asian-American researchers, is not vocal about his own experiences as a minority scientist. The Taiwanese-born physicist says he has avoided senior managerial positions because he prefers research to bureaucracy. But when pressed, he says that wasn't always so. While serving in the 1980s on the doomed Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) project, he applied for an important management job for which he felt he was well qualified. "I cannot of course say why," Chao says. "But I just had a feeling that I was just not being considered for the job" despite his impressive resume. "At that time-I was young-I really cared about having a position." But he also adds that he did not feel comfortable lobbying for the job. When the position went to a white male, he let it go and returned to SLAC, where he had worked previously. He says he is happy doing research, and he has since eschewed the management track. "I said, 'Why should I bother?’"

Chao says he's aware of a glass ceiling separating many Asian-American researchers like him from senior management. It exists even at the ethnically diverse SLAC, which solely does unclassified research and is open to scientists from around the world. “If a position comes open, or there is an important talk to give," Chao says, managers "have a tendency to think of a person close to the person in power." And Asian Americans "tend to be on the second list." The discrimination is largely unconscious, he says, guided by the social net that runs through every lab. And Asian Americans themselves bear some of the responsibility, he says, because they are reluctant to voice complaints or promote their own interests. "Cultural differences make it harder to speak up," he says, adding that this probably accounts for his own failure to pursue the SSC job more aggressively.

"My respect for our system has gone down a notch because of this," he says. "I don't want all Chinese Americans to be seen as potential spies-I would like to have the innocence returned to this group of people.”

Of course, there could be various other reasons his application was rejected and there is no way to know of the true reason or any hidden biases. However, his suspicion that race was a factor in his career shows that the model minority is growing dissatisfied with not having an answer. Despite his hesitancy to share his views, “the Wen Ho Lee case turned Chao into a reluctant activist who has contributed money for Lee's defense, helped organize rallies in the San Francisco Bay area, and talked to his neighbors about the injustice he believes Lee and other Asian Americans have suffered.”

Employees at other labs have also been suspicious of racial bias in pay and promotions. Lawler writes,

At Livermore, nearly one in 10 members of the professional staff is Asian American, but only one in 25 is a manager or supervisor. Similarly, at Los Alamos, about one in 25 professionals is of Asian heritage, but just one of 99 top managers at the lab is Asian American. Employees and lab managers alike acknowledge this glass ceiling, although there is disagreement over why it exists and how it should be broken.

The data seems to support the experiences revealed by Asian American employees after the Lee case. One employee from the Livermore lab claimed she had not received a promotion in sixteen years. Eight others joined her in complaining to UC about discrimination in pay and promotion opportunities.

One theme across the article is that mobilizing does not come easily to the model minority. Computer science grad student Roger Hu said his immediate reaction was that protesting was not “the way to go.” He said it felt like something reserved for other people. But despite feeling “entirely Westernized” and not a victim of racial bias himself, he chose to acknowledge the discrimination and ask his peers at MIT to do the same. The confusion Hu felt after his anger at the injustice of the Lee case is natural for most Asian Americans. He expressed not knowing what to do in response because he did not think he was the type of person who could be an activist. Part of the model minority myth is that Asian Americans are politically inactive and do not demand change through protests and uproar. For the most part, this belief is unchallenged because clear violence against Asian Americans is fortunately rare. In an odd circular relationship, blatant racism towards Asian Americans is not prevalent because of their political inactivity, and thus their inactivity is maintained.

WHAT SHOULD OUR RESPONSE BE? (AWARENESS & IDENTITY)

I believe the solution to this confused state, in which the Asian American is attracted to the model minority myth and yet shocked by the disconnect with their lived experience, is the formation of a collective identity that is based in history. Unlike African Americans, many of whom believe their life fits into a narrative that is commonly acknowledged and that begins with the first enslaved person from Africa, Asian Americans do not, in general, recognize that their lives are a part of one continuous story. For although Roger Hu expressed that protesting did not seem like something someone like him would do, it is exactly what Asian Americans did during the civil rights movement. Organizers like Yuri Kochiyama encouraged Asian Americans of the 60s to join the fight for human rights and ethnic studies, among other things. And though the researchers at National Labs were stunned and blindsided by the Wen Ho Lee case, extremely similar and perhaps more horrifying accusations were made against Japanese Americans in the 1940s under President Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066.

We are at a time when the model minority myth has been acknowledged and proven as the current primary narrative for Asian Americans, though it has not always been so. Choosing to embrace the model minority myth blinds us as a society to the reality of America’s long history of discrimination against Asian immigrants and all Asian Americans, beginning with exclusion acts of the 1800s and persisting through the myth itself. Terrible and tragic events like the murder of Vincent Chin and the Wen Ho Lee case are often catalysts for critical reflection and increased demands for fairness among Asian Americans. My hope is that future generations of Asian Americans will not need catalysts to critically reflect upon the way they are treated and perceived by others.

The harsh reality is that we do not lack reminders that Asian Americans are still seen as foreigners by many. This reality is currently manifesting itself most obviously through the hate crimes inspired by the COVID-19 pandemic and the presidential response. A report by United Nations officials claims “hate crimes against Asian-Americans have reached an ‘alarming level’ across the United States, in part because President Donald Trump appears to validate the perpetrators' bigotry.” Researchers at Stop AAPI Hate, a coalition aimed at combatting racism during the pandemic, list 2,583 incidents of bigotry reported by Asian Americans between March and August 2020. Of those, 789 included anti-Chinese language and could be categorized under “Virulent Animosity,” “Scapegoating of China,” “Anti-Immigrant Nativism,” “Racist Characterizations of Chinese,” or “Racial Slurs.” The characterization of Asian Americans as perpetual foreigners is also maintained more subtly through questions like “Where are you really from?” and references to exoticness. Even when assimilation into White culture is largely successful, parts of Asian culture like traditional food and dress remain as reminders of this exoticness and, for many, the need to reject them in exchange for being seen as American.

There is room for Asian American identity to exist beyond a dichotomy between Asian and American. Making that room may require a change in our collective idea of what constitutes an American. Learning Asian American history, which is rarely taught and yet varied and complex, can inform us of what it means for someone to be distinctly Asian American, not just constantly pulled between being Asian and being American. By understanding what it meant to be Asian American in the past, we as a society are more equipped to talk about the position of Asian Americans currently and are more able to acknowledge the inequalities that still exist. Knowing about the history of the model minority myth and the flip from “yellow peril” to “model minority” also allows us to understand the reality of African Americans. The model minority myth causes many Asian Americans and Americans in general to believe that America is a meritocracy. This belief not only causes Asian Americans to see other Asian Americans’ failure to succeed as a personal flaw, but African American failure to succeed as well. With this understanding, it is not the system that is flawed but the personal choices and work ethic of African Americans. We must recognize the shift that preceded the success we see today in certain Asian ethnic groups as something that could not have been accomplished entirely by force of will and hard work, but was instead permitted because it was a tool that enforced the current racial hierarchy and muffled demands for equality.

KNOWING OUR HISTORY IS NECESSARY

Knowing Asian American history means knowing a past that is full of hatred and inequality. It means we are saddened and angered, but not shocked when violence against Asian Americans occurs. It means we can critically approach our identity and our place in American society with the understanding that the Asian American experience was not always that of the model minority. Tracing a continuous narrative through Asian American history gives proof that our story is far more nuanced and far less black and white than the model minority myth claims.

I believe the model minority myth is the main reason Asian Americans who immigrated after 1965 are not inclined to learn the stories of the Asian Americans who immigrated before them. If it is true that Asian Americans now experience complete and total equality, if anti-Asian sentiment is indeed vanquished by the power of hard work and the American Dream, then there is no reason to dwell on a past that is oddly and inexplicably full of discriminatory laws and actions by the American government. This could also work conversely, where no American sees the need to teach Asian American history. In this case, it is not my aim to shame anyone who identifies as American for not seeking to learn Asian American history. It is hard to ask questions when you did not know there were questions to be asked.

Regardless, the model minority myth eliminates the need to know history by emphasizing itself as the only narrative of the Asian American experience. The majority of Asian Americans today are those who came through the 1965 Immigration Act. The act itself symbolizes the shift in America’s perception of Asians, and as a result, those who entered America in the following years entered with no knowledge of any narrative for an Asian immigrant besides the model minority myth. For many of these Asian Americans, the reality of those living before the 60s does not match their own reality. The model minority myth holds no space for history. In fact, it demands that we forget the pain and discrimination experienced by past generations of Asian Americans and it discourages us from identifying with them, thus leaving us ill-equipped to deal with widespread discrimination when it inevitably reappears, as it has during the COVID-19 pandemic.

I imagine many Asian Americans have grown up believing their story began not with the Asian immigrants of the 1800s and early 1900s, but with themselves, or their parents, or maybe even the country of their parents’ birth. Nevertheless, we benefit from our predecessors, the Asian Americans of past decades, in that they fought for the right to be citizens and for the opportunity to work in America, without which the model minority myth would never have come about. The basis of the model minority myth is that without trouble and without assistance, Asian immigrants and their families excelled in America. In truth, early waves of immigrants faced extensive discrimination and hardships. Chinatowns were said to be communities of wonderful, well-behaved children in the 60s and 70s, yet they only existed because of the racism early immigrants experienced. Asian Americans owe the lives we live today to the immigrants who we may not be related to, but who fought all the same for the rights which we could not imagine being without: among these are the right to be citizens, to own land, the ability to immigrate, and to marry a person of another race. First-, second-, and third-generation immigrants who arrived or whose families arrived after the civil rights movement are not related by blood to any of the Asian Americans who fought for these rights through protests and legal battles. Yet their lives would be utterly different without the work of those who came to America before them. We expand our view of who Asian Americans are when we recognize the realities of the Asian American experience that exist outside of and beyond the model minority myth.

Embracing Asian American history also means embracing the beautiful and inspirational parts of it that are too often lost to us because they do not fit into the stereotypical story. In her article, “At Least You’re Not Black: Asian Americans in U.S. Relations,” Elaine Kim writes about “the buried coalition work and activism in the past.” The African American community has a history of fighting for the rights of Asian Americans, even when they had nothing to gain. And Chinese Americans joined them in court to fight against discriminatory legislation. From the beginning, Asian Americans have fought for equality and fair treatment, whether in court, marching in the streets, or boycotting grapes. In “Significant Lives: Asia and Asian Americans in the History of the U. S. West,” Gail Nomura claims,

In truth, the idea of freedom and revolution has a long history in Asia. Confucianism carries the seeds of revolution, making it the duty of the people to overthrow a tyrant and to institute a humanistic government working for the benefit and welfare of all. Asian immigrants recognized injustice; they protested and opposed oppression not because they were "Americanized," but because their own traditions had  taught them to resist injustice.

We continue to see the same spirit of resistance and persistence in Asian American politicians and activists of the 1960s like Yuri Kochiyama (a friend of Malcolm X), Patsy Mink (the first woman of color in Congress), and Emma Gee and Yuji Ichioka (creators of the term “Asian American”).

Ichioka believed that organizing Asian Americans into a single group at political demonstrations would lead to the increase of their influence, especially among other Asian Americans who would clearly see them as one entity. The 1968 Third World Liberation Front proved just how successful a union of multi-ethnic students could be. At San Francisco State University, the AAPA, the Black Student Union and other groups formed and participated in the longest student strike in U.S. history. To demand the establishment of an ethnic studies department, college students organized sit-ins, disrupted classes to the point where schools closed down, and were involved in violent conflict with the police. The five-month strike at San Francisco State prompted coalitions of students at other schools to do the same. As a result, many universities across America offer courses in ethnic studies, including Asian American studies. If Asian American involvement in the TWLF was cemented in public memory like the Montgomery bus boycott and the March on Washington, would Roger Hu have felt he was not the type of person who protested?

HISTORY & COLLECTIVE IDENTITY

I argue that Asian Americans need a collective identity founded in history because history gives us an anchoring point. It shows us who we are, what we have been, and what we can be. As Paul Shackel writes,

Americans often turn to the past to explain current social conditions, to comfort themselves, to build self-esteem, and to create cultural pride. What aspects of the past are remembered and how they are remembered and interpreted are important issues that allow us to see how public memory develops.

It is common for subordinate groups explicitly or implicitly to challenge the dominant meanings of public memories and create new ones that suit their need.

People experience and remember or forget collectively, and they figure out how to interpret these experiences. They develop a collective memory by molding, shaping, and agreeing upon what to remember, although this process may not be always consciously planned.

We use histories and narratives to form communities, and I believe the general lack of knowledge about Asian American history has limited the Asian American community today. To fully understand who we as a community are today, it is imperative that we understand who we were in the past.

Mario Carretero, in his article “Imagining the Nation throughout School History Master Narratives,” writes about the impression of the narratives we teach upon students. He insists that “official narratives on the nation’s origin” shape students’ understanding of historical events. The story we are told from infancy about our country is the template that can change everything. Carretero also says that “processes of resistance, expressed by counter narratives, have been found to occur.” The way to create a shift in this society’s perception of both the past and the present—a need that has become terrifyingly evident with the rise of anti-Asian hate crimes—is to introduce a counter narrative.

Research on collective memory has “stressed the importance of historical perceptions in shaping national identity.” Collective memory is what dictates the common understanding of who we, as citizens of America, are to each other, considering who we have been. It tells us how we are obligated to behave in light of historical experience, and it is “transmitted from one generation to another.” It is for this reason that Asian American history, and the history of all marginalized Americans, ought to be incorporated into our history books as mandatory American history. It must be taught with a mind for the present, as well, because it is not a series of disconnected fairy tales but the prequel to our today.

History empowers us in a way that is unique from fictional stories. Historical figures were real people whose actions make a difference for our lives. Knowing our past, we can place ourselves within some grander timeline and understand our “now” as a continuation of our predecessors’ “then” and as the “then” of our descendants’ future. Unlike Roger Hu, who had no reference, we can see by Asian American activists through the centuries that change through us is possible. Unlike the researchers in the National Labs and the first-generation immigrants who arrived in the 70s, we can see by past laws and actions of the American government and people that the Asian American experience is more than economic success through the model minority myth.

My hope is that a historical identity will bring Asian Americans into a space that is uniquely theirs, where their experience is informed but no longer limited by the model minority myth. I hope future generations will realize, as I do believe they are beginning to realize, that the Asian Americans who have only ever known the model minority narrative do not exist completely separate from the filthy unskilled worker narrative. I hope that someday soon, they are taught in school that the Asian American experience and identity is varied and complex, that it began generations ago and is ongoing. The current position of Asian Americans in America is a result of a narrative that has been deliberately constructed and is daily maintained.

CONCLUSION

I recognize once again that it is a privilege to be able to speak as I did about the model minority myth. It is to be blamed for the ways it has hurt Asian Americans and other minority ethnic groups but, at the same time, the fact that it allowed certain Asian Americans to gain an advantage to some extent cannot be denied. It is often the second and third generations who can critique the systems our families used to provide for themselves. As I believe more young Asian Americans become dissatisfied with the current situation in America (evidenced perhaps by the switch among Asians from voting Republican to voting Democrat as the children of immigrants of the late 1900s reach adulthood and middle age and by the demand of more representation for Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in all media), I hope they will start critically considering who they are and collaborating with other minority groups.

Defining what it means to be Asian American in light of history can give a fuller sense of identity to Asian Americans. While it necessitates seeing the blatant, violent hatred that is foreign to many of us but was normal to Asian Americans of the past, it also necessitates seeing the many Asian Americans who courageously stood up for what they believed in and made the country a better place for Asian Americans today.

I find it inspiring that so many of those who make up the Asian American population are people who are brave enough to dream, to put their hopes in the American promise of equality and belonging. It makes me long for a society where race and culture are not barriers to their dreams, not because they have assimilated until no differences remain, but because their differences are seen as their strength. I want to change the narrative of the Asian American experience precisely because I long for such a reality, because I know that if the model minority myth “works” for some it works for no one. If hard work only leads to success for some, then those select few have more than hard work on their side (at the expense of those for whom hard work rarely ever leads to success).

In order to change the narrative, we, as Asian Americans, must insist upon a place in society in which we can exist comfortably without fear of losing the status of “American.” We must insist that we are given a respect that does not vanish when a pandemic originates in China, that does not hinge upon sexualization, stereotypes, and silence. We must be able to hold space that is not conditional upon behavior. We are not foreigners, but Asian Americans.

Bibliography

Abney, Saya. ”A project of love: Ethnic studies and the legacy of the Third World Liberation Front.” The Daily Californian, last updated: September 29, 2019. www.dailycal.org/2019/09/27/ethnic-studies-legacy-third-world-liberation-front/.

Asia Society. “Asian Americans Then and Now: Linking Past to Present.” Accessed November 17, 2020. asiasociety.org/education/asian-americans-then-and-now.

Bloomberg News. “ ‘Bamboo ceiling’ seemingly keeping a lid on Asians in top ranks of corporate America.” South China Morning Post, November 22, 2017. scmp.com/news/ world/united-states-canada/article/2120983/bamboo-ceiling-seemingly-keeping-lid- asians-top.

Braxton, Greg. “Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders remain underrepresented on television, study finds.” Los Angeles Times, September 12, 2017. latimes.com/ entertainment/tv/la-et-st-asians-on-television-study-20170913-story.html.

Burton, Jeffery F., Mary M. Farrell, Florence B. Lord, and Richard W. Lord. “A Brief History of Japanese American Relocation During World War II.” National Park Service, Last Updated: April 1, 2016. nps.gov/articles/historyinternment.htm.

Carretero, Mario. ”Imagining the Nation throughout School History Master Narratives.” In Public History and School: International Perspectives, edited by Demantowsky Marko, 97-108. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 2018, jstor.org/stable/j.ctvbkk2pq.9.

Chao, Melody Manchi, Chi-yue Chiu, Wayne Chan, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton, and Carolyn Kwok. “The Model Minority as a Shared Reality and Its Implication for Interracial

Perceptions.” Asian American Journal of Psychology 4, no. 2 (2013): 84-92. doi.org/10.1037/a0028769.

Chow, Kat. “ ‘Model Minority' Myth Again Used As A Racial Wedge Between Asians And Blacks.” Code Switch. NPR, April 19, 2017. npr.org/sections/codeswitch/ 2017/04/19/524571669/model-minority-myth-again-used-as-a-racial-wedge-between- asians-and-blacks.

Davis, Charles. “Trump 'seemingly legitimizing' the rise in hate crimes against Asian Americans, according to a UN report.” Business Insider, October 14, 2020. www.businessinsider.com/un-report-trump-seemingly-legitimizing-hate-crimes-against- asian-americans-2020-10.

Fish, Eric. “From 'Unassimilable' to 'Exceptional': An Evolution of Asian American Stereotypes.” Asia Society, May 10, 2017. asiasociety.org/blog/asia/unassimilable-exceptional- evolution-asian-american-stereotypes.

Guo, Jeff. “The real reasons the U.S. became less racist toward Asian Americans.” The Washington Post, November 29, 2016. washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/ 2016/11/29/the-real-reason-americans-stopped-spitting-on-asian-americans-and-started- praising-them/.

Jeung, Russell, Tara Popovic, Richard Lim, and Nelson Lin. “Anti-Chinese Rhetoric Employed by Perpetrators of Anti-Asian Hate.” Stop AAPI Hate, August 2020. secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.231/a1w.90d.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2020/10/Stop_AAPI_Hate_Anti-China_Rhetoric_Report_201011.pdf.

Johnson, Stefanie K. and Thomas Sy. “Why Aren’t There More Asian Americans in Leadership Positions?” Harvard Business Review, December 19, 2016. hbr.org/2016/12/why- arent-there-more-asian-americans-in-leadership-positions.

Kambhampaty, Anna Purna. “In 1968, These Activists Coined the Term 'Asian American'—And Helped Shape Decades of Advocacy.” Time, May 22, 2020. time.com/5837805/ asian-american-history/.

Kim, ChangHwan and Arthur Sakamoto. “Have Asian American Men Achieved Labor Market Parity with White Men?” American Sociological Review 75, no. 6 (2010): 934-957. doi.org/10.1177/0003122410388501.

Kim, Elaine H. “ "At Least You're Not Black": Asian Americans in U.S. Race Relations.” Social Justice 25, no. 3 (73) (1998): 3-12. jstor.org/stable/29767082.

Lawler, Andrew. ”Silent No Longer: 'Model Minority' Mobilizes.” Science 290, no. 5494 (2000): 1072-077. jstor.org/stable/3078378.

Lim, Bernadette. “ “Model Minority” Seems Like a Compliment, but It Does Great Harm.” The New York Times, updated October 16, 2015. nytimes.com/roomfordebate/ 2015/10/16/the-effects-of-seeing-asian-americans-as-a-model-minority/model-minority- seems-like-a-compliment-but-it-does-great-harm.

López, Gustavo, Neil G. Ruiz, and Eileen Patten. “Key facts about Asian Americans, a diverse and growing population.” September 8, 2017. pewresearch.org/fact-tank/ 2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans/.

Low, Elaine. “An Unnoticed Struggle: A Concise History of Asian American Civil Rights Issues.” Japanese American Citizens League, 2008. jacl.org/wordpress/wp-content/ uploads/2015/01/Unnoticed-Struggle.pdf.

National Public Radio, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Harvard T.H.Chan School of Public Health. “Discrimination in America: Experiences and Views of Asian Americans.” November 2017. legacy.npr.org/assets/news/2017/12/discriminationpoll-asian- americans.pdf.

Nomura, Gail M. "Significant Lives: Asia and Asian Americans in the History of the U. S. West.” The Western Historical Quarterly 25, no. 1 (1994): 69-88. doi:10.2307/971070.

“Orientals Find Bias Is Down Sharply in U.S.” The New York Times, December 13, 1970. www.nytimes.com/1970/12/13/archives/orientals-find-bias-is-down-sharply-in-us- discrimination-against.html.

Park, Lisa Sun-Hee. "Continuing Significance of the Model Minority Myth: The Second Generation.” Social Justice 35, no. 2 (112) (2008): 134-44. jstor.org/stable/ 29768492.

Pettersen, William. “Success Story, Japanese-American Style.” The New York Times, January 9, 1966. nytimes.com/1966/01/09/archives/success-story-japaneseamerican- style-success-story-japaneseamerican.html.

Pew Research Center. “Modern Immigration Wave Brings 59 Million to U.S., Driving Population Growth and Change Through 2065.” Hispanic Trends. September 28, 2015. www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wave-brings-59-million- to-u-s-driving-population-growth-and-change-through-2065/.

Pew Research Center. “The Rise of Asian Americans.” Social & Demographic Trends. June 19, 2012. pewsocialtrends.org/2012/06/19/the-rise-of-asian-americans/.

Ruiz, Neil G., Juliana Menasce Horowitz, and Christine Tamir. “Many Black and Asian Americans Say They Have Experienced Discrimination Amid the COVID-19 Outbreak.” Social & Demographic Trends. Pew Research Center, July 1, 2020. www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/07/01/many-black-and-asian-americans-say-they-have- experienced-discrimination-amid-the-covid-19-outbreak/.

Shackel, Paul A. ”Public Memory and the Search for Power in American Historical Archaeology.” American Anthropologist 103, no. 3 (2001): 655-70. jstor.org/stable/683605.

Shih, Kristy Y., Tzu‐Fen Chang, and Szu‐Yu Chen. “Impacts of the Model Minority Myth on Asian American Individuals and Families: Social Justice and Critical Race Feminist Perspectives.” Journal of Family Theory & Review 11 (August 2019): 412-428. doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12342.

Starkey, Brando Simeo. “Why we must talk about the Asian-American story, too.” The Undefeated, November 3, 2016. theundefeated.com/features/why-we-must-talk- about-the-asian-american-story-too/.

“Success Story of One Minority Group in the U.S.” U.S. News & World Report, December 26, 1996. dartmouth.edu/~hist32/Hist33/US%20News%20&%20World %20Report.pdf.

Tures, John A. “Asian Americans’ political preferences have flipped from red to blue.” The Conversation, September 14, 2020. theconversation.com/asian-americans- political-preferences-have-flipped-from-red-to-blue-145577.

Wu, Ellen D. The Color of Success: Asian Americans and the Origins of the Model Minority (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013).

Wu, Judy Tzu-Chun. "The Origins of the Model Minority." Journal of American Ethnic History 36, no. 2 (2017): 99-101. doi:10.5406/jamerethnhist.36.2.0099.

Wu, Yuning. "Chinese Exclusion Act." Encyclopedia Britannica, November 22, 2019. www.britannica.com/topic/Chinese-Exclusion-Act.

Zagni, Nicoleta Alexoae. “An Interview with Maxine Hong Kingston.” Revue française d’études américaines 110, no. 4 (2006): 97-106. doi.org/10.3917/rfea.110.0097.