1989
DOI: 10.1080/01419870.1989.9993640
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Asian immigration and American race‐relations: From exclusion to acceptance?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

1993
1993
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They are more likely to hold high-paying jobs and are less likely to be unemployed than the average American. Because of these achievements, Asian Americans are often portrayed as the "model minority"-a paragon of economic success and integration into the American mainstream (Bell 1985;Kim and Hurh 1984;Lee 1989). 3 …”
Section: Asian Americansmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They are more likely to hold high-paying jobs and are less likely to be unemployed than the average American. Because of these achievements, Asian Americans are often portrayed as the "model minority"-a paragon of economic success and integration into the American mainstream (Bell 1985;Kim and Hurh 1984;Lee 1989). 3 …”
Section: Asian Americansmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The heterogeneity of the Asian population, the economic distress of South east Asian refugees, and the existence of unskilled workers employed in the low end of the split labor market (Poston 1988, Hein 1993, Lee 1989). These authors stress that there are dangers in viewing all Asians as successful, because the extreme poverty of Southeast Asians and the pov erty of low skilled members of other groups will then not receive the public policy interventions that are needed.…”
Section: Asiansmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 1854 the Supreme Court of California ruled that Chinese were barred from testifying against whites, reasoning that since the Indians were not allowed to testify against whites and since the Chinese were of the same race as Indians, “Indians having many centuries ago come from China, the law which applied to the Indians should also apply to the Chinese” (Coolidge 1909: Zo 1978: Omi and Winant 1994: Gossett 1997). This decision in People v. Hall (1854) crystallized the “legal categorization of Chinese as non‐white” (Lee 1989: 376). As Omi and Winant (1994) contend “throughout the 19th century, many state and federal legal arrangements recognized only three racial categories: ‘white,’‘Negro,’ and ‘Indian’ ” (p. 82).…”
Section: Racialization and Transpositionmentioning
confidence: 99%