Are Asian Americans “White Adjacent”?

[McDad]

What does this mean? Are you saying because Asian Americans succeed that there is no institutional racism?

Asian Americans are basically all self-selected immigrants or the children/grandchildren of immigrants. You are comparing them to people who were slaves for generations then also conditioned by generations of the Jim Crow era (many of the laws are still on the books) and then generations in the era of the war on drugs...it's not a valid comparison for discussing institutional racism and CRT.

All this proves is that you don't have to be white to succeed in America, which all of us know, and in no way refutes CRT.

I sincerely do not understand your reply. X-adjacent is dumb as a stand alone concept, isn't it?

 

[Fun coupon VOL]

I thought Asians were considered yellow?

 

[VolStrom]

I thought Asians were considered yellow?

But yellow is not white, therefor Asians are POC and are to be revered like all people not white.

 

[Fun coupon VOL]

But yellow is not white, therefor Asians are POC and are to be revered like all people not white.

That was my thought.

Special treatment, whiteman bad, and get into school easier. Wait. Hmmmm

 

[NCFisher]

It's not the math skills that's keeping you out. It has to do with how much light your eyes take in:

okay - now what?

And hurry, please; as you can see, inscrutability is hard for me.

 

[NCFisher]

What does this mean? Are you saying because Asian Americans succeed that there is no institutional racism?

Asian Americans are basically all self-selected immigrants or the children/grandchildren of immigrants. You are comparing them to people who were slaves for generations then also conditioned by generations of the Jim Crow era (many of the laws are still on the books) and then generations in the era of the war on drugs...it's not a valid comparison for discussing institutional racism and CRT.

All this proves is that you don't have to be white to succeed in America, which all of us know, and in no way refutes CRT.

Huff....you can smoke your pot without using black Americans as deflective shields.
We won't out you, bro.

 

[n_huffhines]

I sincerely do not understand your reply. X-adjacent is dumb as a stand alone concept, isn't it?

My reply isn't about the classification "white adjacent". It's about the implications of other things OP said.

People are really resistant to new labels and the ideas they represent. I don't think the concept of white adjacency is very important at all to the conversations I'm trying to have about race, but I can accept the concept as plausible and that the label facilitates discourse.

 

[n_huffhines]

I had not heard this term - “White Adjacent”

Asian Americans have long thrown a wrench in Identity Politics. They completely upend the narrative. Is this the new method to discount them and separate them out from under the ubiquitous “POC” umbrella?



Critical race theory has no idea what to do with Asian Americans | Opinion

What say you?
Are Asian Americans “too white” to be considered a real minority, or are they just White-ish?

BTW, this thread started out on the wrong foot. You guys are roasting a concept that you don't seem to fully understand. Being "too white" or successful isn't what makes someone/some group white adjacent. It's benefiting from upholding the power structure that exists. So a black cop in Baltimore who is getting ahead in his career by violating minority rights would be considered white adjacent.

It's hard to find who is actually calling Asian Americans white adjacent as a group. I googled a few queries and came up with OP's article and little else, and that article is short on those details.

 

[n_huffhines]

If successful results dictates Asians are white-adjacent (ridiculous racist term, btw) then Nigerians are also white adjacent.
Unfortunately, and I apologize preemptively, the term must also mean white failures are black-adjacent.

I dont think the coiners of the term thought things through. It isn't wise to permanently associate ethnicity with ends of the socioeconomic spectrum.

That's not what it is, lol...but also, yes, Nigerians and anybody non-white can be white adjacent

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Who cares about this ****. We're all humans, wtf does it matter

Lol. That’s rich coming from someone who supports the party that makes everything about race. If this article were talking about black people you would be losing it. But because it’s Asians it doesn’t matter right?

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

BTW, this thread started out on the wrong foot. You guys are roasting a concept that you don't seem to fully understand. Being "too white" or successful isn't what makes someone/some group white adjacent. It's benefiting from upholding the power structure that exists. So a black cop in Baltimore who is getting ahead in his career by violating minority rights would be considered white adjacent.

It's hard to find who is actually calling Asian Americans white adjacent as a group. I googled a few queries and came up with OP's article and little else, and that article is short on those details.

Here you are, as usual, thinking you know more than anyone else.

 

[McDad]

My reply isn't about the classification "white adjacent". It's about the implications of other things OP said.

People are really resistant to new labels and the ideas they represent. I don't think the concept of white adjacency is very important at all to the conversations I'm trying to have about race, but I can accept the concept as plausible and that the label facilitates discourse.

Morgan Freeman said in a 60 minutes interview if we want to move on from our racism, we should stop talking about it. I tend to agree. Therefore, I see little value in this type of discourse. I'm in complete favor of Daryl Davis's form of discourse.

 

[McDad]

That's not what it is, lol...but also, yes, Nigerians and anybody non-white can be white adjacent

In that case, I have many black-adjacents in my extended family.
It's a ridiculous notion.

 

[n_huffhines]

In that case, I have many black-adjacents in my extended family.
It's a ridiculous notion.

So you say there are no minorities who benefit from upholding the power structure? I would say we have one in the WH.

 

[C-south]

Lol. That’s rich coming from someone who supports the party that makes everything about race. If this article were talking about black people you would be losing it. But because it’s Asians it doesn’t matter right?

We know his stance on gun violence.

 

[McDad]

So you say there are no minorities who benefit from upholding the power structure? I would say we have one in the WH.

The ridiculous part is permanantely assigning ethnicity to socioeconomic status. I don't find it to to be white, black or adjacent. I find it to be mostly characteristics outside of ethnicity.

The article linked discussed the college admission process and how asians were selectively excluded (I think). In that world, there is preferential benefit in the power structure.

 

[n_huffhines]

Morgan Freeman said in a 60 minutes interview if we want to move on from our racism, we should stop talking about it. I tend to agree. Therefore, I see little value in this type of discourse. I'm in complete favor of Daryl Davis's form of discourse.

Yeah that's nice, but it's never going to happen so I'm trying to make sure we don't talk past each other and that we get the most out of the conversations.

A good portion of the country has been pretending IR doesn't exist and that hasn't helped anything, and I think it's made things worse. Imagine if we ended the war on drugs 25 years ago because we actually talked **** out and found some common ground? Honestly, our differences in America are why the WoD existed and ramped up but if we focused on anything other than our differences, we would've figured out what a detriment it has been.

 

[C-south]

BTW, this thread started out on the wrong foot. You guys are roasting a concept that you don't seem to fully understand. Being "too white" or successful isn't what makes someone/some group white adjacent. It's benefiting from upholding the power structure that exists. So a black cop in Baltimore who is getting ahead in his career by violating minority rights would be considered white adjacent.

It's hard to find who is actually calling Asian Americans white adjacent as a group. I googled a few queries and came up with OP's article and little else, and that article is short on those details.

We understand. The entire phrase and concepts are dumb as hell. The race hustlers have to keep coming up with more and more stupid s*** though.

 

[n_huffhines]

The ridiculous part is permanantely assigning ethnicity to socioeconomic status. I don't find it to to be white, black or adjacent. I find it to be mostly characteristics outside of ethnicity.

The article linked discussed the college admission process and how asians were selectively excluded (I think). In that world, there is preferential benefit in the power structure.

I see the opinion piece attributing this concept of white adjacency to all of Asian America. I do not see any evidence that a leading scholar or a consensus has said this. The author says CRT guides Harvard admissions and then goes on to explain that white adjacency is being applied to Asian Americans in this case....but I can't tell what he's basing this on. I maybe need to give the article another once over, but I don't see anything that he references that helps me with my research.

 

[McDad]

Yeah that's nice, but it's never going to happen so I'm trying to make sure we don't talk past each other and that we get the most out of the conversations.

A good portion of the country has been pretending IR doesn't exist and that hasn't helped anything, and I think it's made things worse. Imagine if we ended the war on drugs 25 years ago because we actually talked **** out and found some common ground? Honestly, our differences in America are why the WoD existed and ramped up but if we focused on anything other than our differences, we would've figured out what a detriment it has been.

It's idealistic to fantasize our government doing anything EXCEPT consolidating power. WoD, IR, social freedoms, financial liberty, etc. ...all are evidence of the effort to amass power. Uncle Sam's caretakers are beyond salvageable and have been beyond redemption for decades. I wish it wasn't the case.
My reaction to this topic is about the attempt to further wedge Americans by well-intentioned people outside of government. Ironically, our ubiquitous government should be the ultimate uniter. White trash, middle class Hispanics, professional asians, and wealthy black people all have a common enemy.

 

[McDad]

I see the opinion piece attributing this concept of white adjacency to all of Asian America. I do not see any evidence that a leading scholar or a consensus has said this. The author says CRT guides Harvard admissions and then goes on to explain that white adjacency is being applied to Asian Americans in this case....but I can't tell what he's basing this on. I maybe need to give the article another once over, but I don't see anything that he references that helps me with my research.

I cannot recall off the top of my head. Apparently the author was motivated by a book titled. White Fragility, by Robin DiAngelo.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Love the avi

It came to me in a drunken stupor.

 

[EasternVol]

So you say there are no minorities who benefit from upholding the power structure? I would say we have one in the WH.

Do you mean Biden's low IQ qualifies him as a minority? If not him, who?

 

[Weezer]

Are Native Americans considered "white adjacent"? All we did to them was murder their people in droves and take their land.

 

[EasternVol]

I thought Asians were considered yellow?

Many are called yellow, many brown, and many white. Asian covers a lot of mankind.