My problems with this are: why does economic status and educational status equate white?
I have no idea why this confusion between race and class exists. As you say, it's harmful and insulting and so often false. To make a guess, I would say that people thoughtlessly fall into this mindset because of many different factors in conjunction, including (but I'm sure not limited to):
1. Demographics. Everyone sees the intersections of race and class, but some people (a lot of people?) extrapolate that data further than they should. We know minority groups are disproportionately represented in lower economic classes and although I haven't got a citation, my assumption is that middle class suburbia is a majority white and that the very top economic bracket is probably almost all white. People then observe these after effects of institutionalized racism and in their minds begin to, well, racially profile. I live in a small Italian Catholic town right next door to a poor urban center that is predominately Puerto Rican and black. I see it a lot. Of course it's wrong, but I think that that unexamined behavior is one reason people associate white = middle class.
2. Cultural capital. I hesitate to bring it into the discussion because it's not as though it makes things LESS confusing, but those are the terms on which I'd like to respond to your question of "Are they implying that somehow Asians as Asians are less likely to succeed economically and educationally and that only by being "white" can someone succeed in that way?"
I first encountered the term cultural capital in Philippe Bourgeois' In Search of Respect, which you may have read. I think it's a standard Anthropology 101 text these days. It just means those qualities that afford people respect from their peer group, things like mode of dress, speech, money, degree of education, or maybe how manicured you keep your front lawn. Obviously what people consider to be cultural capital differs radically according to race, religion, class, nationality, gender, geography... etc.
What does it mean for someone to "be white" in a sense other than the visual? I think that would be to conform to the cultural capital that is associated with white people, as opposed to another group. I say "associated with" because we all know there's no such thing as real cohesion. Things may be valued by people's peer group that they as individuals completely disregard, or vice versa. While I don't claim to know maiteoida or her experience, in her IBARW post (http://maiteoida.livejournal.com/439245.html) she talks about being bullied in high school for not being "black enough." My assumption is that she faced these accusations for not conforming to the same cultural capital as her peers.
I think there is hegemony at work that takes the cultural capital of whites and the cultural capital of people in the middle class and says that the two are one and the same. And I think this can go in two different, sad ways. The first is as you suggest: that some people believe others can't or shouldn't rise in status unless they repudiate any cultural capital specific to minority groups. I think (hope) that this is relatively scarce.
The second is probably Borg racism, I think. That people already in the middle class who value middle class cultural capital face a crisis of identity because of the hegemony at work that says default middle class cultural capital is actually WHITE cultural capital. Because, as we all know, in America, default = white male.
So, to actually try to come to a point through all this rambling, I don't think people are meaning to imply that others can only succeed at being middle class by "being white". I think they're confused. I think they haven't sat down to dissect their privileged thought process to realize that people can conform to one without the other.
In any case, regarding all of your points: I understand what you're saying and I agree 100%. Thank you very much for taking the time to post a meaningful reply.
no subject
I have no idea why this confusion between race and class exists. As you say, it's harmful and insulting and so often false. To make a guess, I would say that people thoughtlessly fall into this mindset because of many different factors in conjunction, including (but I'm sure not limited to):
1. Demographics. Everyone sees the intersections of race and class, but some people (a lot of people?) extrapolate that data further than they should. We know minority groups are disproportionately represented in lower economic classes and although I haven't got a citation, my assumption is that middle class suburbia is a majority white and that the very top economic bracket is probably almost all white. People then observe these after effects of institutionalized racism and in their minds begin to, well, racially profile. I live in a small Italian Catholic town right next door to a poor urban center that is predominately Puerto Rican and black. I see it a lot. Of course it's wrong, but I think that that unexamined behavior is one reason people associate white = middle class.
2. Cultural capital. I hesitate to bring it into the discussion because it's not as though it makes things LESS confusing, but those are the terms on which I'd like to respond to your question of "Are they implying that somehow Asians as Asians are less likely to succeed economically and educationally and that only by being "white" can someone succeed in that way?"
I first encountered the term cultural capital in Philippe Bourgeois' In Search of Respect, which you may have read. I think it's a standard Anthropology 101 text these days. It just means those qualities that afford people respect from their peer group, things like mode of dress, speech, money, degree of education, or maybe how manicured you keep your front lawn. Obviously what people consider to be cultural capital differs radically according to race, religion, class, nationality, gender, geography... etc.
What does it mean for someone to "be white" in a sense other than the visual? I think that would be to conform to the cultural capital that is associated with white people, as opposed to another group. I say "associated with" because we all know there's no such thing as real cohesion. Things may be valued by people's peer group that they as individuals completely disregard, or vice versa. While I don't claim to know
I think there is hegemony at work that takes the cultural capital of whites and the cultural capital of people in the middle class and says that the two are one and the same. And I think this can go in two different, sad ways. The first is as you suggest: that some people believe others can't or shouldn't rise in status unless they repudiate any cultural capital specific to minority groups. I think (hope) that this is relatively scarce.
The second is probably Borg racism, I think. That people already in the middle class who value middle class cultural capital face a crisis of identity because of the hegemony at work that says default middle class cultural capital is actually WHITE cultural capital. Because, as we all know, in America, default = white male.
So, to actually try to come to a point through all this rambling, I don't think people are meaning to imply that others can only succeed at being middle class by "being white". I think they're confused. I think they haven't sat down to dissect their privileged thought process to realize that people can conform to one without the other.
In any case, regarding all of your points: I understand what you're saying and I agree 100%. Thank you very much for taking the time to post a meaningful reply.