The Model Minority Myth

In 2014, conservative commentator Bill O’Reilly went on air in an attempt to dismantle the idea of racial privilege in America. In his rantings, he stated that “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate for black Americans is 11.4 percent.  It is just over 5 percent for whites; 4.5 percent for Asians. So do we have Asian privilege in America? Because the truth is that Asian-American households make far more money than anyone else… Also, just 13 percent of Asian children live in single parent homes compared to a whopping 55 percent for blacks and 21 percent for whites. There you go.  That's why Asian-Americans, who often have to overcome a language barrier, are succeeding more than African-Americans and more than white Americans. Their families are intact and education is paramount”. 

This sentiment is not exclusive to O’Reilly but common among the general population. The idea that Asian Americans have “succeeded” (even compared to their white counterparts) plagues the nation under what is deemed the “Model Minority Myth”. The "Model Minority Myth" perpetuates harmful stereotypes that obscure the realities of systemic racism in America, especially for Asian American communities. While this myth suggests that Asian Americans are universally successful and self-reliant, it overlooks the historical context of racial discrimination, disregards the diversity within Asian communities, and ultimately distracts from addressing the broader issues of racial inequality. By positioning Asian Americans as a contrast to other marginalized groups, the myth not only fails to acknowledge the unique struggles of various Asian subgroups, but also serves to perpetuate divisiveness and hinder solidarity in the fight against systemic racism.

Historically, this myth was only relatively recently enacted in American society. Asian immigrants were once deemed a “peril”, with American policies banning immigration from many Asian countries for a number of years. However, after the attack on Pearl Harbor in December of 1941, this narrative was forced to shift in order for the American government to not scorn non-Japanese Asian nationals in hopes for a larger pool to draw from for the draft. Meanwhile, anyone of Japanese descent was forced into internment camps for a majority of the war. They would only be demeaned further into being forced to participate in a loyalty questionnaire which would strip them of their heritage. After the war, Asian American communities would be divided between those who proved their allegiance to America and those who did not. Soon after, the rise of communist regimes throughout Eastern Europe and Asia would cause another call to action in US politics. 

In his article “The Cold War Origins of the Model Minority Myth”, author Robert G. Lee explains how this reaction to the rise of communism would solidify the perspective of Asian Americans as the “Model Minority” as a response to, what he refers to as, the three “specters haunting” the Cold War; “the red menace of communism, the black menace of race mixing, and the white menace of homosexuality” (Lee, 257). Internationally, the United States would present itself as a beacon of freedom as opposed to Soviet-style communism. However, this facade would be external only as domestic issues surrounding race and social freedoms were vehemently pervasive. Social-change groups, such as the Black Panthers, who tried to combat such injustice would only face backlash from the white majority and experience violence from authorities. Authorities’ responses would vary, sending mixed signals of which direction the country would be heading. On one hand, President Johnson would speak on systemic racism’s influence on modern inequities. However, Johnson’s secretary of Labor, Daniel Patrick Moynihan would lay blame on black families, speaking on the “tangle of pathology” and urging for rehabilitation of home life if searching for social and economic success (Lee, 260).

Out of this tumultuous time the origins of the myth arose. One of the most prominent purveyors of the myth came from an article in US News and World Report entitled “Success Story of One Minority in the US”. Focusing on Chinese-Americans, the article reported that “Few Chinese-Americans are getting welfare handouts - or even want them” (US News and World Report, 1966). What is not explained, however, is the distrust that many Asian-American communities had for government support due to unfair treatment for the last 100 years; a distrust that drove a survival instinct of self-sufficiency. 

Following Moynihan’s criticism of the black population in a series of similar articles, this story of Asian “success” admonished other minority groups in search of aid while setting an unachievable standard for many within Asian-American communities. Dissent between Asian Americans and other minorities (most notably African Americans) developed as a result. In one such case, a Japanese-American author wrote that they have “yet to hear of any (African American) voice “blaming” themselves for their social maladjustment” (Imazeki, Howard M.). Once originally coined as a term for political unification, the term Asian-American had become a monolith for white commentators to throw as a retort to criticism of social injustice; as was the case in Bill O’Reilly’s commentary. Author Gary Duong, in an article for NPR, retaliates against the aforementioned claims, citing them as a clear example of shifting the focus away from real systemic issues, stating that “Asian Americans are more likely than other groups to have three or more workers per household, one reason why the averages seem so inflated. We also often tend to live in some of the nation's most expensive cities, so when you factor in those costs, the apparent advantage in household income starts to evaporate” (Duong). 

Ripples of this usurpation are felt among both those within the Asian-American community and other racially minoritized groups. Author Hua Hsu writes in an article for The New Yorker that “needs and disadvantages of refugee communities and poor Asian Americans have been obscured”. Historically disenfranchised groups have been denied social support, as officials use the perceived 'success' of their counterparts, fueled by the Model Minority Myth, as justification for withholding assistance. One belief that is perpetuated by the myth claims that students of Asian descent achieve more in school. Yet “particularly vulnerable (groups like) Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander students — such as the Vietnamese, Laotian, Hmong, Tongans, and Native Hawaiians —  (have) dropout rates…among the highest of any group” (Chow, Giselle W.). Along the same lines of educational injustice, Gary Duong speaks once again on the weaponization of the myth as an argument for opposing affirmative action in college applications. He maintains that Asian students are being used “as examples of the heads-down, study-hard students who would be upset by any change to race-based affirmative action in college admissions. The thinking goes that given how hard we work, we should be upset anytime someone else might take our rightful spot” (Duong). This sort of rhetoric, he asserts, shifts blame onto minorities instead of focusing on the systemically racist issues at play in these systems (i.e. “legacy” white families given special treatment at institutions). 

An article by Claire Jean Kim posits that “this process of stereotyping Asian Americans in these opposing ways maintains White power and privilege by situating Asian Americans in the middle between Blacks and Whites” (Kim). This middle-ground was devised and is perpetuated as a distraction from the deeper underlying causes of social and political issues plaguing modern American society. Under the guise of a “positive stereotype”, it ultimately serves to dismiss the diverse experiences of Asian American communities, ignoring the historical and contemporary struggles that many still endure. Ultimately, dismantling the Model Minority Myth is essential not only for the well-being of Asian Americans but also for fostering greater solidarity among all communities of color in the collective fight for racial justice. Only through recognizing the complexities of racial dynamics and addressing the root causes of inequality can we hope to create a truly inclusive and equitable society.