3 ms·

> overt marginalization of "market-dominant" or "model" minorities who, despite their marginalized status, have better educational and economic outcomes than th

> overt marginalization of "market-dominant" or "model" minorities who, despite their marginalized status, have better educational and economic outcomes than the relevant majority group. Because they aren't "disproportionately excluded from the education, economic and other systems of society due to, for example, racism or sexism." Being a minority does not automatically make one marginalized and one does not need to be a minority to be marginalized.

zozbot234 5y ago
> Because they aren't "disproportionately excluded from the education, economic and other systems of society" Of course they are, this is pretty much what marginalization means. My point is precisely that real-world marginalization can be an outcome of identity politics, especially when minorities differ in their overall attitudes towards education or economic development.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  > Of course they are, this is pretty much what marginalization means Then we can't agree on that premise. I don't think they are even remotely marginalized to the same extent. If they were, they would suffer the same consequences. To be clear, I'm not saying that anti-Asian racism doesn't exist; obviously it does, it's just not on the level that anti-Black racism is on. > My point is precisely that real-world marginalization can be an outcome of identity politics Sure, it can, Ethiopia is repeatedly a great example of that. Asians in America aren't. None of those that Fukuyama listed are either.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > To be clear, I'm not saying that anti-Asian racism doesn't exist; obviously it does, it's just not on the level that anti-Black racism is on. I never said that anti-Asian attitudes are "on the level" that anti-Black ones are. What I'm saying is that such things should point us towards a far more nuanced understanding of how "identity politics" might play out in the real world.
    - guerrilla 5y ago
      More nuanced than what?

zozbot234 5y ago

> Because they aren't "disproportionately excluded from the education, economic and other systems of society" Of course they are, this is pretty much what marginalization means. My point is precisely that real-world marginalization can be an outcome of identity politics, especially when minorities differ in their overall attitudes towards education or economic development.

guerrilla 5y ago
> Of course they are, this is pretty much what marginalization means Then we can't agree on that premise. I don't think they are even remotely marginalized to the same extent. If they were, they would suffer the same consequences. To be clear, I'm not saying that anti-Asian racism doesn't exist; obviously it does, it's just not on the level that anti-Black racism is on. > My point is precisely that real-world marginalization can be an outcome of identity politics Sure, it can, Ethiopia is repeatedly a great example of that. Asians in America aren't. None of those that Fukuyama listed are either.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  > To be clear, I'm not saying that anti-Asian racism doesn't exist; obviously it does, it's just not on the level that anti-Black racism is on. I never said that anti-Asian attitudes are "on the level" that anti-Black ones are. What I'm saying is that such things should point us towards a far more nuanced understanding of how "identity politics" might play out in the real world.
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    More nuanced than what?