From: ajh@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Hu)
Subject: Re: Political Power--Please start crossposting
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:19:50 GMT

In article <BzAFF5.FBt@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>In article <1gg9qcINN2rk@tamsun.tamu.edu> achin@math.tamu.edu (Andrew Chin) writes:
>>I believe that AAs make up 3.0 percent of the US population, although there
>>is evidence to suggest that AAs were substantially undercounted in the 1990
>>Census.  There are 14 Cabinet and 12 additional top-level Executive Office
>>of the President posts.  We should expect an AA to fill a Cabinet post about
>>once every three presidential administrations, instead of, say, none yet.
>
	[Clinton bashing deleted.]
>
>What it means to be an American is to have a certain set of ideas.  The idea
>that one's ancestry is important is NOT an American idea, but it is one 
>promoted by the left.

OK, let's assume, just for the sake of argument, that race is indeed
unimportant in America, and therefore, that Asian Americans are as
qualified for any particular job as any other hue of American, and there
is no discrimination.

OK, roughly 1 in 30 or 35 Americans is of Asian ancestry.  Since a person's
ancestry is unimportant in Brian Yoder's America, we should, based purely
on statistics, expect to see roughly one cabinet post go to an Asian
American.  And we should see around 12 or 13 Asian-American congresscritters,
and an additional 3 or so Asian-American senators.  Of course, random
variance means we might see a few more or a few less Asian Americans.
On a broader social scale, we'd expect to see Asian Americans earning the
same average income as white people, which is definitely not the case.
(e.g. 1980 mean personal income for white men in California was $23,400;
for Chinese American men in California it was only $15,900.)

Hmm, either Asian Americans just aren't as qualified as the white folks,
in which case we needn't worry about all them Orientals taking over our
top schools and stealing American jobs, and we should be doing our
best to assure that Asian Americans have access to the same opportunities
that are making white people so much more qualified on average, OR,
maybe, just maybe, perhaps, there's the slight, remote chance that a person's
race might have the slightest, teensiest, little itty-bitty effect on
that person's likelihood of success in the US.

>
>>I won't disapprove of Clinton simply because he doesn't appoint an AA to
>>the cabinet.  But I hope you'll excuse me if I take his claim that his
>>cabinet "looks like America" with a hefty grain of salt.
>
	[Good reductio ad absurdum on looking-like-America deleted.]
>
>>Possible nominees:
>
>>Elaine Chao, Deputy Secretary of Transportation (Transportation)
>
>>The president of the United Way is also Asian-American (HUD)
>
>Are they really better qualified than the other potential nominees?  If so then
>why bother pointing out their race?

	Because statistical evidence suggests that many Americans
	will exclude the best qualified, simply because of the
	person's race.

	[Stuff on other potential offices for Asian Americans deleted.]
>
>>                * Fighting racism is not a special interest *
>
>Indeed...too bad you are on the wrong side.
>
>--Brian

Ditto.
					--Alan Hu
----------
I am not Arthur Hu.  I am NOT Arthur Hu.  I AM NOT ARTHUR HU.

I am not a neo-conservative writer for AsianWeek.  I did not go
to MIT.  I do not conduct phone surveys.  I am not married.
I do not believe in Dan Quayle's family values.

Arthur Hu is a fine person.  So am I.  We are not, however, the same person.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american