Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So a TINY sliver of a population is criminal therefore all of the overwhelming success of the other 94% is just a fantasy?
I can say the exact same thing about any other community. The majority of African Americans are not criminals however it does not stop people like you from bashing the entire community. So why are Asians Americans immune?
So again I ask the question. Why are the Asian gangs when they are supposed to be ruled by "family honor", "respect for learning and higher education", "hard workers", etc.
Oh -- in THEIR own country, I thought you meant this one --- as we're talking about the experience of groups in the USA --not India.
Well -- we also had a British Colonial era in the USA -- so we share the advantages that gives a country.
Yes -- advantages -- because in the Western Hemisphere, the top countries for standard of living are Canada, the USA, and Barbados -- all had British colonial eras. As did Australia, Hong Kong and other places that are doing quite a lot better than those countries who did not have a British colonial era.
So once they crossed the Pacific all of the pain they endured disappeared?
The fact is blacks have ZERO excuses. That is why so many blacks are successful...they ignored the "whoa is me" crap and just worked hard.
I can say the exact same thing about any other community. The majority of African Americans are not criminals however it does not stop people like you from bashing the entire community. So why are Asians Americans immune?
So again I ask the question. Why are the Asian gangs when they are supposed to be ruled by "family honor", "respect for learning and higher education", "hard workers", etc.
Hampton and Morehouse are filled with black scholars whose families were dirt poor for generations.
So there goes that argument.
And not really -- most black families have made it, most are middle class, most blacks finish high school, most are working. Many were making it way back when before the Civil War.
Unfortunately there is too large a portion that don't make it, never have made it. And with a high unemployment rate, many will not make it yet again. Only jobs can really save them and no one cares if they ever have jobs.
We're really only talking about the under class that isn't making it -- after all many blacks, the descendents of slaves work the same jobs as everyone else and do just fine, they work very hard, their parents worked hard.
Asians didn't have it any worse than Irish, Germans, Polish, Italians.
Actually the is completely false. There was any any law like the Chinese Exclusion Act that specifically denied Irish, Germans, Polish or Italians citizenship. At no time was U.S. immigration policy specifically state that made any European "Racially Ineligible For Citizenship" as it was for Asian people.
The Chinese Exclusion Act was one of the most significant restrictions on free immigration in U.S. history. The Act excluded Chinese "skilled and unskilled laborers employed in mining" from entering the country for ten years under penalty of imprisonment and deportation. Many Chinese were relentlessly beaten just because of their race.[7][8] The few Chinese non-laborers who wished to immigrate had to obtain certification from the Chinese government that they were qualified to immigrate, which tended to be difficult to prove.[8] Volpp argues that the "Chinese Exclusion Act" is a misnomer, in that it is assumed to be the starting point of Chinese exclusionary laws in the United States. She suggests attending to the intersections of race, gender, and U.S. citizenship in order to both understand the restraints of such a historical tendency and make visible Chinese female immigration experiences, including the Page Act of 1875.[9]
The Act also affected Asians who had already settled in the United States. Any Chinese who left the United States had to obtain certifications for reentry, and the Act made Chinese immigrants permanent aliens by excluding them from U.S. citizenship.[7][8] After the Act's passage, Chinese men in the U.S. had little chance of ever reuniting with their wives, or of starting families in their new homes.[7]
Amendments made in 1884 tightened the provisions that allowed previous immigrants to leave and return, and clarified that the law applied to ethnic Chinese regardless of their country of origin. The Scott Act (1888) expanded upon the Chinese Exclusion Act, prohibiting reentry after leaving the U.S. The Act was renewed for ten years by the 1892 Geary Act, and again with no terminal date in 1902.[8] When the act was extended in 1902, it required "each Chinese resident to register and obtain a certificate of residence. Without a certificate, he or she faced deportation."[8]
Now go find a German Exclusion Act, a Polish Exclusion Act, an Irish Exclusion Act or an Italian Exclusion Act.
Also the Immigration Act of 1924 was specifically designed to increase the immigration of northern Europeans, limit it for southern Europeans and severely restrict Asian immigration.
The 1924 Act also established the "consular control system" of immigration, which divided responsibility for immigration between the State Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. It mandated that no alien should be allowed to enter the United States without a valid immigration visa issued by an American consular officer abroad.
It provided that no alien ineligible to become a citizen could be admitted to the United States as an immigrant. This was aimed primarily at Japanese and Chinese aliens.
Quote:
Restriction of Southern and Eastern European immigration was first proposed in 1909 by Senator Henry Cabot Lodge.[3] Congressman Albert Johnson and Senator David Reed were the two main architects. In the wake of intense lobbying, the Act passed with strong congressional support.[4] There were nine dissenting votes in the Senate[5] and a handful of opponents in the House, the most vigorous of whom was freshman Brooklyn Representative Emanuel Celler. Over the succeeding four decades, Celler made the repeal of the Act his personal crusade.
Proponents of the Act sought to establish a distinct American identity by favoring native-born Americans over Southern and Eastern Europeans in order to "maintain the racial preponderance of the basic strain on our people and thereby to stabilize the ethnic composition of the population".[6][7] Reed told the Senate that earlier legislation "disregards entirely those of us who are interested in keeping American stock up to the highest standard – that is, the people who were born here".[8] Southern and Eastern Europeans, he believed, arrive sick and starving and therefore less capable of contributing to the American economy, and unable to adapt to American culture.[6]
Some of the law's strongest supporters were influenced by Madison Grant and his 1916 book, The Passing of the Great Race. Grant was a eugenicist and an advocate of the racial hygiene theory. His data purported to show the superiority of the founding Northern European races. Most proponents of the law were rather concerned with upholding an ethnic status quo and avoiding competition with foreign workers.[9] Samuel Gompers, a Jewish immigrant and founder of the AFL, supported the Act because he opposed the cheap labor that immigration represented, despite the fact that the Act would sharply reduce Jewish immigration.
Race has been at the core of U.S. immigration policy since this country was founded the Naturalization Act of 1790 specifically stated:
Provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were "free white persons" of "good moral character". It thus left out American Indians, indentured servants, slaves, free blacks, and later Asians.
In fact prior to the Immigration Act of 1965 the principle objective of immigration laws in the United States was to preserve White racial dominance.
Please find where I said the majority of blacks are criminals.
Since the facts aren't going your way you intend to make up your own facts?
You don't want to try to compare crime stats between the Asian and black communities.
Trust me.
Well what possible excuse do Asian criminals have? You'd think with all that superior race stuff they have, the culture with the work ethic, the Bell Curve IQ's and all that there could be no failures. Yet there are.
Actually the is completely false. There was any any law like the Chinese Exclusion Act that specifically denied Irish, Germans, Polish or Italians citizenship. At no time was U.S. immigration policy specifically state that made any European "Racially Unsuitable For Citizenship" as it was for Asian people.
Now go find a German Exclusion Act, a Polish Exclusion Act, an Irish Exclusion Act or an Italian Exclusion Act.
Also the Immigration Act of 1924 was specifically designed to increase the immigration of northern Europeans, limit it for southern Europeans and severely restrict Asian immigration.
In fact prior to the Immigration Act of 1965 the principle objective of immigration laws in the United States was to preserve White racial dominance.
Well there were Germans put into camps during WWII, but all those exclusion acts did was keep those groups out. That's why they don't have a long history in this country, they didn't suffer here back when things were tough. They simply weren't here.
Most Asians are recent arrivals. Most have arrived after all the Civil Rights stuff has been worked out.
Well what possible excuse do Asian criminals have? You'd think with all that superior race stuff they have, the culture with the work ethic, the Bell Curve IQ's and all that there could be no failures. Yet there are.
Weak counterargument.
No race or ethinic group is 100% anything. But some ethnic groups lead all others in bad categories while others lead all others in good categories.
Well there were Germans put into camps during WWII, but all those exclusion acts did was keep those groups out. That's why they don't have a long history in this country, they didn't suffer here back when things were tough. They simply weren't here.
Most Asians are recent arrivals. Most have arrived after all the Civil Rights stuff has been worked out.
Most blacks alive today were born after all the Civil Rights stuff had been worked out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
