« Shootings and the MSM double standard | Main | Amy Chua is married to a white guy »

January 11, 2011

Comments

The Chinese have average IQ's higher than white's. Especially those white's and black's that excel in sports. Michael Vick is an excellent example!

Your concluding paragraph is well put and true to my experience.

Perhaps a more careful reading of your earlier postings would answer my question, but what is your opinion regarding the sustainability of a society where value transference activities are rewarded greater than value creation activities? Also, how might a "correction" play out?

The internet is a better place with at least one person who can tell it like it is. Thanks, Half.

HS, per usual you have written an excellent piece about the critical importance of social status and people skills to success in life. That said, I think "Chinese mothers" are onto something with respect to hard work, lack of concern for self-esteem, and making choices for their children.

Despite the primacy of people skills over technical proficiency, it remains true that the secret to success in just about anything is hard work. The "Chinese mother" style of parenting is a surefire way to create a very powerful work ethic in their offspring which will be lifelong. The error they make you've already identified: assuming that success in academia readily transfers into career and business success later. Instead, they would do well to encourage their kids to work very hard to master things like people skills, body language, and high-status team sports (lacrosse for boys, field hockey for girls). An excellent example of where hard work has a high payoff is in womanizing--Mystery encouraged his pupils to hit on girls for four hours every night. Think any "Chinese mothers" are forcing their kids to do this?

Lack of concern for children's self-esteem is a mostly positive trait of "Chinese mothers". The SWPL emphasis on self-esteem without achievement leads not to confidence and success, but an inability to appraise oneself realistically or navigate hardship. It's raising a generation of dishonest pussies who will finish off our civilization. True self-esteem arises much more from social status, inner fortitude, and accomplishment. These are not well-served by SWPL parental beliefs that every child is a special little snowflake to be coddled at every turn. A mediocre performance is mediocre and deserves to be berated.

The "Chinese mother" practice of making choices for their children is something you could approve of. You've previously written about the absurdity of eighteen year-olds being expected to select proper career tracks, so why would you expect children to make the correct choices in extracurricular activies or even friends? This is where the informed parent can have a great role. The trouble is that these "Chinese mothers" are making poor decisions that prevent their kids from being cool.

For some perspective, I am a cool white guy who works in sales! My job is easy and feeds off of my personality and organizational skills, allowing me to make a lot of money and comment on blogs like yours while I am supposedly working.

Incidentally, I will note that Amy Chua did make the correct choice in not allowing her daughters to participate in theater. Theater kids are weirdos generally disliked by everyone else in school. I think this is what largely explains why so many Hollywood leading men are short compared to past generations of stars--short boys aren't cool and end up with theater weirdos.

"Also, those sleepovers and playdates are extremely important for learning the social skills needed to get ahead in corporate America where schmoozing is more important for getting promoted than creating real value."

What makes you think charismatic white people are rarely intelligent?

High IQ whites in the 130-155 range tend to be the most charismatic (on average) in my experience.

For whites, the "nerd cliff" doesn't really come into effect until you go over hit 155 IQ. And then, many many whites with +160 IQs are charismatic and charming. Da Vinci and Feynman among many others are white geniuses who had great charisma.

Its very true observation. But to a degree. You cant mooch forever. Without being able to do actual value creation you wont have anything to sell.

Leadership and social skills are important.Amy Chua certainly doing it wrong. But a culture producing nothing but salesmen, politicians and CEO will run out of steam . Those super high self esteem leaders of US keep squandering capital they didnt create.

Most of the wealth of US is a result of 2 world wars when US became defacto world creditor and acquired massive amount of human capital (without massive immigration of european jews there would no manhattan project, nor silicon valley)

That lasted for about 50 years. US still has many smart people, so it wont deterioriate overnight, but China will take its rightful place as world leader. US salesmen will be put to the rightful place on a comission instead of couchy CEO seats.

'Tis a sad sign of the times when expecting one's children to be disciplined and productive is worse for their future than expecting them to feel good about themselves in spite of the inability to create or do anything of measurable value.

"American society doesn’t value violin or piano playing. When elite colleges select applicants, they value sports-playing far more highly than all other extra-curricular activities. "

Indeed, but some sports are better than others, especially for girls. Even non-profit schools need money, and applicants who can pay their own way are valued over those who need loans or scholarships, even though the colleges will deny this. I once had a member of the admissions committee of an elite school tell me that, when considering an applicant who is the offspring of one of their own graduates, they expect that the applicant will not require financial aid unless the parent has intentionally chosen a profession that does not pay well, such as the clergy. Otherwise, they wonder why the parent turned out so badly.

As for girls' sports, the best by far is equestrian, because it almost always means that the parents have money (even elite colleges will take notice when young Madison takes her prize-winning mare to the national horse show and wins a ribbon). Golf is pretty good too. Volleyball, basketball and swimming are just about worthless unless the girl can make some sort of all-state team or even be invited for Olympic trials. Basically, no one cares too much about college female athletes, but the schools are always looking for them to balance Title IX requirements so they won't have to cut male athletic programs. But there's only one female basketball team or volleyball team or swimming team, so extra bodies for these sports are of little value. The real sleeper here is crew, which costs next to nothing and where there's always room for another boatload of girls.

Great post, and as usual it would have been better if you dropped your value transference shtick.

Good white leaders create plenty of value. As someone noted, the type of white leader that usually earns a lot if *both* reasonably smart and charismatic.

Asian nerd are only effective when someone organizes them and tells them exactly what to do.

This should be clear from experience, and the fact that Asians earn far more in the west than in their home country, because in the west they are led and organized by white westerners.

I am sure Half Sigma has read plenty of military history, yet claims that good leaders don't create value.

From Wikipedia:

"[Amy Chua] is the eldest of 4 sisters: Michelle, Katrin, and Cynthia. Katrin is a professor at Stanford University. One sister has Down Syndrome and holds two International Special Olympics gold medals in swimming."

Even the retards in that family are go-getters.

I think your take summarizes just about everything that is wrong with America. We define leadership in terms of popularity contests, superficiality, and pushy “alpha male” competitiveness. We play organized sports that risk injuries, make exercise less spontaneous and individualized, and teach us to value spectator sports. Thus, we set ourselves up for adulthood obesity and distraction. Also, intelligent Americans do value piano musicianship. Where would David Bowie or Trent Reznor be without their classical training? The Western economic approach assumes that economies are run on budding Thomas Edisons inventing the next big thing in the garages. Asians might benefit from more risk taking and tolerance of chaos in their lives, but I think (or hope) that the times are shifting away from the Western strategy. I understand that your point is partly that we should appreciate value creation more, but the Chinese have a fine niche that allows them to live relatively comfortable lives free of most Western degeneracy.

"First of all, I should point out how highly politically incorrect it would be for a white woman to write about how white mothers are superior, but we’ll let that slide for now. "
_________
Why Portugese or why Spanish mons are superior wouldn't be considered that politically incorrect.

I find it hard to believe that the Nerd Cliff seldom hits below an I.Q. score of about 150. There just aren't many people with those scores.

Let's say Asians produce value and whites transfer value to themselves. What prevents Asians from quitting and starting their own firms, and keeping all the value? In many sectors there are plenty of room for start-ups.

Yet Asians are far less entrepreneurial than whites, even though this is a sector where the link between your input and output is stronger than within large organizations.

Similarly, Asians are smarter but less successful than whites in many sciences, where the link between output and input is extremely strong (basically number of creative papers you have written).

The big problem with Half Sigma's value transference theory is that it is completely non-falsifiable. Blacks could as easily claim that they are poor because whites transfer all the value they create. In fact, this is exactly what the left has been saying about Africa for decades.

Economists are not as stupid as Half Sigma things. Value transference (which is referred to "rent seeking" by economists) has been studied extensively. It clearly exists, and is important especially in the third world. But plenty of evidence suggests rents are a smaller part of the U.S economy, mainly because of fierce competition.

The other problem with Half Sigma is that HE wants to decide what is value, rather than allowing corporate or national performance to decide what is value.

So for instance he has decided that multi-billion dollar companies giving one decisive guy at the top who makes crucial decisions 0.02 billion per year is somehow theft. Even though we know from history that corporate performance depends on having competent leaders at the top.

Do some of these leaders abuse their authority for rent seeking? You bet! But if they are incompetent or if they steal too much, they are usually fired sooner or later, or their firms goes bankrupt.

No one denies that nepotism exist in the American corporate world. The point is simply that we have less nepotism and more meritocracy than Asia, and that most of the 14 trillion of goods and services produces in America in 2009 were not stolen from others.

Ipod represents tangible value produces by charismatic, creative whites. Asians (either in America or in Asia) were in no way prohibited from building it, yet they failed to.

"Most of the wealth of US is a result of 2 world wars when US became defacto world creditor and acquired massive amount of human capital."

Bzzzzzzzzt, wrong. Firstly, the US would not have won those wars if it were not ALREADY a wealthy country as a result of pre-war industrialization. WW1 and WW2 did not "create" US wealth, though the wars did damage and destroy competitors. Secondly, the US did not get "massive" amounts of human capital as a result of the two world wars -- the US acquired massive human capital BEFORE World War 1 (1880-1914) and long AFTER World War 2 (post-1965).

Jews were helpful but not critical to the Manhattan Project. The bomb would most certainly have been built without them.

The Chinese parenting style will no doubt produce workers who are good value creators, and their corporate employers will love them, and they will be paid far less money than the value they create, the excess value being transferred to white people who got into better colleges because their curricula vitae had more leadership and sports activities, and with those more prestigious educational credentials they got into higher paying value transference career tracks like investment banking and upper level management, and now enjoy the value created by those Chinese cubicle employees who are doing the real work and the real value creation.
-------------------

Actually Sigma has it wrong. Native born Chinese Americans already have income and educational levels above whites, including "over-representation" in higher paying value transference" career tracks. The value they create is being enjoyed primarily by them and their children, not by white people.
------------------------------------------


Also, those sleepovers and playdates are extremely important for learning the social skills needed to get ahead in corporate America where schmoozing is more important for getting promoted than creating real value.
------------------------

Perhaps, and confirms that white people as a whole today, including the low end slackers and mentally sluggish among them, are not creating enough value. It is Asian leadership that is creating real value.

------------------------------------------------------------

The low self-esteem Chinese will make great low-paid value-creating engineers and the whites with high self esteem will make more money selling the stuff that the Chinese engineers design.
----------------

Actually in the long run it is "low self-esteem" Chinese who are and will be making and reaping the deep rooted earnings and value. White sales people are just that, ephemeral sales entities that will come and go with the wind. The Chinese engineer however will be pulling in hardcore earnings long after the bankrupt white sales booster has faded from the scene.

Having worked in silicon valley in software engineering teams comprised that have been culturally dominated by Chinese engineers, I can tell you that the Western model is vastly superior.

The Chinese cultural engineering model works in the following way. The boss assembles a group of a very few trusted advisors. After the advisors weigh in, the boss assigns the tasks for all of the workers, who essential sit in their cubes and work away at the tasks assigned them. Any problems or fatal errors in the boss' agenda must be dealt with quietly or ignored. Very little interaction is encouraged between the workers. Because of this, the work can be very sloppy as the parts that are done by the worker bees often don't fit together very well, given the lack of coordination and the emphasis on doing one's work by one's self.

In the Western cultural model, the work is done in teams. Ideas are allowed to come from anyone, provided that he can justify these ideas rationally, and hopefully with data. Unworkable concepts are made known and are changed in general without any opprobrium or blame. The boss works more as a coordinator of activities and priorities rather than the taskmaster, with the aim of getting a consensus among the team. The process is more chaotic, but results in more creative results, as everyone can potentially have an input to the form of the final solution.

The parenting advice is horrible, but your criticism of it might be just as bad.

Who gives a shit about what elite colleges want, the corporate world, and value transference?

How about having a good childhood as an end in and of itself?

OneSTDV:

My thought exactly. I want my children to have a purposeful and happy life, not to produce drones like Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang of the Human Hive.
http://en.wikipedia.org

/wiki/Sid_Meier%27s_Alpha_Centauri

And that's assuming the Chinese method works better than America in 1950 or how the Romans trained their elite. I think both those examples are superior to China.

Way to go WSJ for find a Chinese lady to reinforce every stereotype about Chinese people that whites want to believe. Next they should find a fat black lady to write an article about how their family enjoys KFC and watermelon for Thanksgiving.

"Who gives a shit about what elite colleges want, the corporate world, and value transference?"

How about: the people who are RULED by alumni of elite colleges, members of the corporate world, and "value transferrers"?

"High IQ whites in the 130-155 range tend to be the most charismatic (on average) in my experience."

Peter is right. It's more like 115-130, with the "nerd cliff" (which is perhaps more of an incline than a cliff) starting after that.

"How about having a good childhood as an end in and of itself?"

An essential part of a good childhood is preparation for success as an adult. Having a good childhood is not a valid end in and of itself because childhood ends and there is adulthood afterward. If, at the end of childhood, you have done nothing but enjoy yourself and been indulged, then you will fail as an adult. A "good" childhood will not be "no fun ever" but it cannot be "all fun, all the time" or the parents will have failed in their duty to the child.

Asians are allowed to play Cello, too, I've noiced.

Great comment, Ken Tsei. That's my experience working in an Chinese majority teams and in an mostly White American teams. I think the problem is that when the Chinese leader shows bad judgment its really hard to get them to change their minds. Its consider an insult to say something that your boss did was evenly mildly wrong. They also like to punish you if you are disobedient or make mistakes, which makes people afraid of speaking their mind.

I've had some stubborn white bosses, but not anywhere near as bad as my Chinese boss.

Both Asian and Euro-Americans are actually quite successful in competing in technical fields. A lot of arrogant comments in this thread.

"Having a good childhood is not a valid end in and of itself because childhood ends and there is adulthood afterward."

As you may know, adulthood also ends, and there is eternal oblivion afterward.

Childhood is about 1/4 of your entire life for a typical person, and more so if you are one of the many people who dies before retirement. Therefore what you want to do is to strike a balance between enjoying it and accumulating human capital in order to enjoy the other parts of life.

Balance in life is particularly important because of diminishing returns of effort, the importance of genes and the unmalleability of IQ. Non of these are mentioned in the article, which suggest the woman is oblivious about human nature.

The child that spends 20 hours per week playing the piano for a decade of her life will only be marginally more likely to succeed than the readers of this blog who didn't. These are mostly smart people who did their homework AND got to play with their friends and watch an occasional cartoon or two on the weekends.

I find it most absurd that she puts playing a useless instrument for 3 hours per day every day (useless for all but the 0.01% most innately talented individuals) above reading classics or even doing math. This smells of desperate, clueless and obsessive social climbing, willing to sacrifice your child's welfare.

It also tells me the women is ignorant about human nature and the importance of genes.

But let's decide. Is our aim as a society to be the Human Hive or ensure the Pursuit of Happiness?

White superiority is genetic. Just ask a white trash or homeless, you will get answer with little doubt.

Incredible, even a loser feels superior to others.

You know, all this blogospheric babble about how all Asians are smart and successful and all that, it got me thinking ... in my area, and I'm sure in most other places as well, there are plenty of visible Asian-run businesses: crappy take-out restaurants, "Oriental bodywork" spas,* hole-in-the-wall nail salons, dry cleaners that don't seem to do much business, and so on. Most of these businesses come and go with some frequency and are probably no more than very modestly successful at best. My reasoned guess is that the workers put in very long hours for very limited pay.

So what's this about Asian success?

* = it isn't hard to figure out what part of the body they work.

""High IQ whites in the 130-155 range tend to be the most charismatic (on average) in my experience."

Peter is right. It's more like 115-130, with the "nerd cliff" (which is perhaps more of an incline than a cliff) starting after that."

I suspect it may matter where you grow up. Probably part of it is that above a certain level of academic talent, you lose social skills (the same way it's hard to be both a good basketball and football player due to the differences in ideal body type), and part of it is the negative social effects of being 'too smart'. I'm willing to bet you fall off the 'nerd cliff' at, say, 115 in Phoenix, 130 in Columbus, 145 in NYC, and 160 in Cambridge. (All numbers strictly made up.) There are probably lots of healthy, well-adjusted (if very liberal) people with IQs of 145 in college towns with good self-esteem and incomprehension that anyone could enjoy pro wrestling. ;)

I think your advice is more true for males than it is for females. Obviously male athletes develop strong confidence and social dominance skills. But do female athletes become better leaders by being involved in sports?

I don't think that girls get that much social capital from sports. If anything I think that they get a lot of social capital from being attractive.

While her heart is in the right place she has to understand that Far East Asians evolved from different primate than blacks, whites, and Arabs, and that not only are the different parenting styles cultural, but also genetic. I agree with some of her assertions, such as not being allowed to watch television, and to encourage their children to play a respectable instrument (the harpsichord and lute are long overdue for a revival).

However, I find these to be unrealistic: "get any grade less than an A

• not be the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama"

Not everyone can be number one, although these particular list items were probably meant as satire. Nevertheless, being No.1 for almost everyone would be especially unrealistic at a competitive high school, where even a C+ might enable (or "ennoble") one to enter Harvard, especially legacies. If even Mark Zuckerberg couldn't make No.1 at Exeter...

Although with preferences for minorities and legacies only the top 10% of any of these schools are actually admitted, not counting the backdoor and attempted backdoor negotiations made.

"social skills", "people skills", "nerd cliff", etc.

All these terms are close to meaningless in my experience except in the extreme.

Intel's CEO is not an engineer. He has a BS in economics and an MBA from Stanford. That's ridiculous.

You are 100% bang on with this post.

Peter and IHTG,

While I only have anecdotes, in my experience people in the 130-155 IQ range (roughly) are the most charismatic people I know - not the smart fraction people in the 110-130 range.

It's a myth that white Harvard undergrads are nerds. The harvard undergrads I've known almost all had charisma and charm (in a polished, worldly, uppercrust way - not a star football player/movie star way) that was superior not only to schools where most students have IQs in the smart fraction range, but even superior to the Princeton and Yale undergrads I've known.

And for whites with IQ above 160 (e.g. MIT/Caltech types) I'd say that white people of that level of intelligence were more "quirky" than nerds and quite a few were very charismatic, well traveled and cultured.

"in my area, and I'm sure in most other places as well, there are plenty of visible Asian-run businesses: crappy take-out restaurants, "Oriental bodywork" spas,* hole-in-the-wall nail salons, dry cleaners that don't seem to do much business, and so on."

There's a left hand side of the bell curve for Asians, too, chief. There are bums, losers and criminals in Asia just like everywhere else.

Being a straight A student in school locks you in a social circle of straight A students.

Similarly studying classical music means you'll probably never be a fan of hip hop or heavy metal and as a result never socialize with the wrong sort of kids.

"Theater kids are weirdos generally disliked by everyone else in school. I think this is what largely explains why so many Hollywood leading men are short compared to past generations of stars--short boys aren't cool and end up with theater weirdos."

You understand of course that the unpopular boys who end up in theater get the last laugh. As I understand it, even the nerdiest straight guys in theater can get *massive* quantities of poon tang, more than most athletes.

""nerd cliff" (which is perhaps more of an incline than a cliff)"

A better analogy might be a rickety wooden footbridge with many missing floorboards. Some people make it across safely while others fall through to their (metaphorical) doom. As another comment quite aptly notes, there are many people with very high I.Q. scores who nonetheless are socially well adjusted.

I think I'm beating a dead horse to point out that not all Asian parents are like this. I am a doctor, went to an Ivy League college. My parents never told us to study, in fact they were never home to tell us anything. I spent my childhood on endless play dates and sleep overs. Lots of rock climbing in Central Park and mud pies in my friend's backyards. I think I had a C average in all my classes before high school. The only thing I was good at was taking city wide tests because I enjoy standardized tests. I can't play any instruments. I once asked my mom to let me have piano lessons and she told me to play video games instead because they train you to think faster.

I remember my first day in Anatomy class and my professor told me to play something on the piano for us after class because all Asians play the piano. Sadly, I had to decline. Everything I know about the piano I learned from playing the theme of Final Fantasy 6 from watching videos on youtube.

My mom dated a african american man after she divorced my father. He actually was the first person to take an interest in my grades and he convinced me to study biology and go into medicine.

Of course, my parents were always willing to channel money into my hobbies. Ie - get into medical school, get a Mercedes. But eh, my jewish boyfriend's parents gave him a yacht. Damn him. I'll be an Asian parent one day, hopefully, if I ever find time to have them before they get Down's Syndrome.

I am not sure about "American Chinese," whatever that means, but for sure in China this is how it works:

Yes the mothers are very loving and very caring to their children. They seem much more affectionate than Western mothers. Chinese mothers spoil and drive their children to go to school, university, get a good job, etc. But what are the motives? Is it out of love for the child. A small part yes, but for the most part the Chinese are very practical. The children are pampered, loved, and driven for the primary reason of providing for the parents when they reach the age of about fifty. The parents will stop working and for the most part only focus on raising up grandchildren while their parents work.

It is much more about being practical, long term thinking of who will take care of me when I am old than about actual love and the well being of the child.

Sherwood Smith
South China

How about teaching her kids to do their best and always be honest, kind and helpful.

Students from China seem to lie and cheat more than any other students (though by no means all of them cheat). When caught they don't appear to feel ashamed. It is as if they don't understand what honesty is.

Immigrants from China tend to give less to charity than other people, and to donate blood and organs less often. Maybe thus is party because they come from a corrupt, low trust culture where the government can execute you without a fair trial and sell your organs for profit. It could also be that their children are not taught the importance of generosity and volunteerism.

I also think it is a bad mistake not to let children choose their own extracurricular activities. Probably creativity mostly exists when people are doing something they love. A lot of Chinese people are gifted musicians but the classical music and the instruments it is played on came from Europeans.

I generally agree with the post, and this dictates the differences between white and Asian. East Asians are robots with little independent thought. They do what they're told and do it effectively, but value different things than more well-rounded white Americans.

Is Columbus really much smarter than Phoenix? Doubt it.

WOW Jay M your a moron, no anthropologist or geneticist worth his salt supports the multiregional evolution theory that you seem to support. Sure, different races of humans may have mixed with different hominids, but we all evolved from basically the same primate.

But anyhow, I like how Sigma's entry almost seems to excuse the failures of white society by advocating for soft skills like "leadership" and "self-esteem" instead of real skills like logical thinking abilities and conscientiousness. Or maybe you're just pointing out how life works and maybe the Asian program, while theoretically better suited to maintaining civilization, isn't necessarily realistic.

Peter said: "in my area, and I'm sure in most other places as well, there are plenty of visible Asian-run businesses: crappy take-out restaurants, "Oriental bodywork" spas,* hole-in-the-wall nail salons, dry cleaners that don't seem to do much business, and so on. Most of these businesses come and go with some frequency and are probably no more than very modestly successful at best"

I know a family that runs one of those businesses. The first generation were boat people who came here with nothing, worked their asses off, and saved money. The second generation are professionals. Note that the people at the shitty little Chinese restaurants tend be FOBs with bad accents, not American born. They did the best they could reasonably be expected to do.

Meanwhile, our NAMs, who had a little bit more than nothing then, still have a little bit more than nothing, and always will. And you could say the same for more than a few of our whites.

Regarding the Chinese:
A McKinsey report found that American Cisco engineers were twice as productive and five times as costly as their Chinese counterparts at Huawei. http://www.manufacturingnews.com/news/07/0416/art1.html

A friend of mine who works at a startup said that his American programmers are three times more productive than his programmers in China. But they're still cost effective.

Good post - I just take issue with your point that "American society doesn’t value violin or piano playing. When elite colleges select applicants, they value sports-playing far more highly than all other extra-curricular activities."

That is arguably true at second tier "elite" schools like Stanford, Duke or University of Michigan. It's not true at Harvard, Princeton or Yale. You're correct that in general sports is far more useful in America if you want to join the business elite. But if you're an Asian woman interested in marrying well and/or joining the academic/political (or even legal) elite musical instruments are still a smart choice.

Half Sigma thinks that Asian parenting is misguided because of its emphasis on things that college admissions officers are NOT looking for. He seems to be of the opinion that this type of parenting will lead to docile, value-creating, obedient Asians who let value-transferring whites/Jews walk all over them. While I think his analysis has some merit–I don’t think he is completely correct. Elite colleges care about extracurriculars–so long as you are really good at them, whether it be football or violin. Admissions officers don’t give a damn if you aren’t good enough at football to contribute to the team or if you played violin but was only good enough to make 5th chair at region. Sorry, but being average at extracurriculars doesn’t cut it anymore in todays hyper-competitive college admissions environment which is surely much more cutthroat than it was back in HS’s time. Moreover, there are now plenty of Asians heading into “value-transference ” jobs such as investment banking, invalidating his myopic separation of whites and Asians into different spheres of economy.

I think Peter makes a fantastic, and very important point about the inescapable trashiness of a lot of Asian proprietorships.

What is the explanation?

If Asian immigrants were truly as brilliant and useful as they are often claimed, then it seems to me that there would be little resentment of them by mainstream whites. Yet where I live, in a city with an enormous Asian population, I find they are resented in much the same fashion as any Third World group, with many of the same general stereotypes (live in slummy urban centers, operate cliquey, ethnically-exclusive businesses, are generally unclean/pollute, etc)

While it may be readily conceded that Asians are hard workers and good at math and science, there is another visible side to Asian immigration that is far less attractive.

Nice post, Half.

Being the only son of a "Jewish mother" I know what is being pushed to achieve. Now, an old Jew, I say that forcing someone to practice endlessly an instrument is pointless, wrong and evil. Life is much more.

I would like to say his husband (a Jew): Your daughters's life is hell. It is your fault for marrying that heartless schiksa.

Asians are more entrepreneurial than you may think. Read the link below.

http://www.inc.com/30under30/2010/profiles.html#self


Of the 30 top entreprenuerial teams (under age 30) named in this list (there are 48 total people), 6.25% are Asians and 8.33% are Indian. 77% are white. So it seems like everybody is doing pretty well, but Asians keep up just fine and Indians are putting up a tremendous performance. Chinese are overrepresented by 5X their population size and Indians are overrepresented by 9X.

The list below contains the top 100 venture capitalists. 8 are East Asian (mainly Chinese) and 12 are South Asian (11 Indian, 1 Pakistani).

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/99/midas09_The-Midas-List_NameProper_4.html

Actually, Asians are doing pretty well thanks to Chua's advice. They have a mean IQ roughly equivalent to whites and, according to the feeling of many Westerners and Asians, may even have a lower level of creativity..... but still have built first world production-driven economies and are more successful academically. In the U.S., their higher academic performance puts them on career tracks that make them a relatively high earning group. If they weren't such drillers and grinders, that probably wouldn't be true. What's to complain about from an economic perspective?

Sales skills generally aren't enough to boost one into a high paying pay track. You've got to know something, often something technical like engineer, and need some type of credential (ie BA or MBA or MSEE). I think whites, when you compare their educational level to Asians, probably outperform them a little bit because of the leadership/organizational/sales soft skills, but overall are less successful due to less education. Less education doesn't alway imply less ability, but it hurts and makes it harder to jump to good lucrative tracks.

As for value creation, there are a lot of white engineers that create a lot of value in Silicon Valley. There are also a lot of Indian and Chinese engineers that do the same. I don't think any race drives value creation.

The good performance of Indians should discredit all the people (white and Asian) that malign their intellectual facilities. Sure you can argue that Indian migration is select, but a lot of these Indian-American entreprenuer kids are 2nd generation and have regressed to their racial mean, which evidently is high. Checking surnames, none of them appear to be Brahmin or upper caste, so that makes things more impressive. I think India has a lot of high IQ people and a much higher mean than people think.

I see Chua's column as yet another example of dysgenics in action. She is forcing her intelligent kids down a path that will prevent them (dedicated to their successful careers) from having few, if any kids. Compare her to a low IQ mother who will start having kids of low intelligence at an earlier age and will end up having alot more. This is playing itself out on a large scale in the USA and is biologically driving the cultural decadence we see around us.

"I see Chua's column as yet another example of dysgenics in action. She is forcing her intelligent kids down a path that will prevent them (dedicated to their successful careers) from having few, if any kids."

Something like this occurred to me. If you want your kids to be succesful in the genetic sense, better to have them study the Bible for 3 hours a day than to practice violin.

From a genetic standpoint, Ms. Chua's urges are a bit misplaced. It's not like there are regular food shortages and only high status people (like Yale Law professors) get enough to eat.

Sure, Sabril, you are on the right track.

If the Bible is too easy, then Gemara.

Sabril,

Having blue collar or poor children would shame the parents. Better to have rich children and no grandchildren than grandchildren who are no better than blacks or Hispanics.

What's the big deal about being raised like that? Both my parents and especially my mother was almost as demanding as this Chinese chick and I turned out awesome...

Of course, I did boy things like sports, TV, being in plays, having sleepovers, etc... but I was expected to be a straight A student and to play piano, both of which are awesome.

"Better to have rich children and no grandchildren than grandchildren who are no better than blacks or Hispanics. "

Well it's a matter of personal values. Probably it would not surprise you to learn that the American town with the highest poverty rate, the most common language spoken at home is not English. But it may surprise you that it's not Spanish either.

The amount of rationalizing from some white people here as to how white/western parenting is better than the "Chinese mother" way is comical to say the least. Every group seems to get defensive when they are viewed in a less than stellar light. We've now moved now to "Asians might be smarter, BUT we're still..."

White is the new black!

First of all, I should point out how highly politically incorrect it would be for a white woman to write about how white mothers are superior, but we’ll let that slide for now.

yes this is true but a white woman can say why German mothers or French mother are supeior and no one would blink an eyelash. Race is bad but ethnicity is ok.

As a the product of this style of parenting, I have seen both the positive and negative parts of being raised this way. I can vividly remember the first time I got a B on my report card. My mother was so upset that she just yelled for an hour. If you had not known what was going on, you would have thought I had killed the family pet or something. My mother always expected the most from me. I had to get straight As and play the piano. I was never allowed out after dark or allowed to sleep over most of my friends' houses. My parents were very overprotective growing up. Even though she did respect my other interests such as marching band, debate, and drama, I had a hard time deciding if I were doing things for me, or for my mother. After reading some of the responses on this and other blogs, it doesn't surprise me that Asian American women are among the highest demographics when it comes to suicide rates. I was not a happy teenager, but I also had a mouth. My mom slowly learned how to let up and became more lenient as I got older. Would I do what my mother did to me as a child? Probably not, but it was been a part of who I am. Do I think Asian mothers are superior? Nope. It's just a different way of raising your children.

Plenty underclass kids have "high self esteem". Won't do them much good.

If Wall Street is run by Phys. Ed. majors ... does that explain the stupidity there a couple of years ago?

As for the tendency of "elite" colleges to discriminate against upwardly-mobile minorities, they tried it before and only succeeded in opening up room for formerly second-rate universities to grab part of the elite-college oligopoly.

"Probably it would not surprise you to learn that the American town with the highest poverty rate, the most common language spoken at home is not English. But it may surprise you that it's not Spanish either."

Yiddish?

" Checking surnames, none of them appear to be Brahmin or upper caste, so that makes things more impressive."

Yeah? Really? Every single one of them is from one of the likely high-IQ Indian subgroups that Steve Sailer posted about recently.

Is there any question now, why Chinese score higher on standardized tests. Discipline. DISCIPLINE. DISCIPLINE!!!!!
Ambition? That comes from the parents.

This "asians might be smart, but still we .." meme is beyond comical. White people are succeding in america because it is full of white people. The white sales guy will do better than an asian because he is selling to another white...

wait till the world rebalances itself and see how this "soft skills" bullshit will disappear ..
enjoy the last leg of the joy ride mother fuckers ..


"Yeah? Really? Every single one of them is from one of the likely high-IQ Indian subgroups that Steve Sailer posted about recently. "

Yes, none of them is Brahmin by caste. As for "high-IQ Indian subgroups", what's the proof that the castes differ radically in IQ?

The WSJ article is INTENDED to drive negative criticism towards chinese mothers, by talking about all the stereotypes of Asian parents. WSJ must be laughing their asses off at this mother.

I was raised by a German mother. I think she gave Hitler lessons. You did as you were told. I played the piano, flute, and violin. I studied constantly. Never remembered ever going to a slumber party and I never had a date except with a Jewish Cello player at a camp for the musically gifted. But, I married, went to college, went on to a doctoral program and a successful career. Hard work and a German (or is that "Chinese") mother never hurt me. It helped and more parents should model themselves after this autocratic, hard-nosed parenting style.

The comments to this entry are closed.