I did not nor would I ever suggest that this is true for ALL immigrants. My issue with that particular phrase, however, is that in my experience, it has almost always been used as a manner of chastising poor black and Native American (and Latino) people in this country. The implied message is “these people have become successful in so short a time; what’s your excuse? It must be because you’re inherently lazy.” But as I (and the other 2 commenters) pointed out, there are different histories at play here which is why such comments irk me – and why I absolutely agree with you that you can’t play the comparison game. But unfortunately SOME people do anyway and it’s these people I have an issue with, not you.

But I absolutely have to disagree with your assertion that the US has been a harmonious place, as you put it, for people from different cultures prior to 30 years ago (If that was truly the case there would be no need for this website). I don’t have to go to high schools in France to understand what open hostility toward those who are different looks like; as a black/Latina female I’ve experienced it first-hand throughout my life at my own schools here in the US. There were schools that up until the 1990s(!) were still punishing Native American children for speaking in their native language. Yes, America is a great place and it’s certainly better than most but that doesn’t mean it’s without its faults.

So tell me again about how our people are lazy and had opportunities that yours did not? To quote Malcolm X, “We didn’t land on Plymouth Rock, the rock landed on us!!”

You seem to not realize we are in agreement with you. We are criticizing those who use their immigrant status to condemn certain groups in this country because their family was able to become successful. We are saying that the immigrant experience and, as noted above, the indigenous and African American experiences should not be compared because they each have different backgrounds and different experiences in this country.

Please check anywhere in the comments where we said immigrating to another country was easy. You will not find it. But yes, having an education, even if all of your degrees are not transferable, gives you an advantage in a new country. You are certainly better off than someone illiterate or with a fifth grade education. It will be easier to pursue an education because you are familiar with the rigors of school or academia. If you were involved in some kind of business in your home country, those skills would be transferable, especially if there is a local ethnic community to depend on. Your knowledge doesn’t fall out of your head because your degrees don’t count.

On your last paragraph, I suppose if one is only counting the past 30 years, you may see the US as a country where all the ethnicities and cultures live in peace and harmony, but beyond this time frame that just isn’t so.

Speaking of which, I’ve never seen a Charlie Chan movie so I’m not an authority on those. But I’m assuming he speaks with some sort of stereotypically exaggerated Asian accent (because that seems to be the general case with that sort of thing). And that’s the thing with the woman in this commercial. She DOESN’T speak with an Asian accent. She speaks with a pretty much perfect American accent. I’m Asian-American, born and raised in California, and she talks the way I talk. How does Charlie Chan figure into it?

I still don’t see how she doesn’t “look” Chinese. I wouldn’t necessarily automatically peg her as being Chinese right off the bat, but I don’t find it hard to believe that she’d be Chinese either. I’ll grant that the setting/backdrop didn’t really evoke China for me, though.

In response to your post, I do need to clarify that most Iranian-Americans did not have the “freedom to choose to come to this country.” A lot of them, namely Jews, were severely persecuted during the revolution and were “ghettoized” in Iran when the Islamic regime took over and outcasted them, denying them privileges to good educations and jobs. Many who were once engineers for the shah’s companies, etc. (people who I know personally) were relegated to low-income positions with all their education and hard work put behind them for the Ayatollah’s extremist and sometimes uneducated and inexperienced followers. Many were actually killed, stoned, and sent to jail for being Jewish, Homosexual, Bahai/Zoroastrian, or for speaking up against the regime. These also make up the majority of the people moving out of Iran and yes, they were denied access to such an education. Actually, most Iranian-Americans I know had to seek education in England or America, where they did not know the language too well and were subject to a lot of prejudice just because they had not assimilated. Further, many who had studied in Iran had earned degrees that were of no value in the US, and they had to start all over again. So they really did come here with nothing. 

And Nicthommi: ”even for some people who were forced to leave money and/or property behind, they are frequently coming with some pretty strong academic or professional credentials.”

- Yes, but most of them had all of their land and money reclaimed by the Ayatollah’s regime and had property stolen by them as well. I don’t think your point is any justification. Coming here with no money, no property, and no knowledge of the culture or native tongue is incredibly difficult, and the academic or professional credentials they have were earned as a survival tool for them to be able to prosper in hard times. I don’t see anything wrong with that, nor do I see it as an unfair advantage, as certain people very close to me started with these credentials with absolutely no money and all student loans to pay off, who paid them off successfully and now live comfortable lives. I also know those who came from Iran with absolutely NO credentials, money, or degrees, who, bit-by-bit, built their own companies and became highly successful. Oh, and they were not able to come and go as they pleased. Most of them sought asylum in the US and could never return to Iran or else they would have been imprisoned for leaving and killed. So no, they didn’t have a choice. That is a very small privileged group of Muslims who you are talking about who had ties to the government and who were not persecuted.

I don’t think it’s right to debase a culture for being successful with justifications in light of other cultures’ disadvantages. It’s like comparing apples to oranges. Yeah, this show is terrible and is going to emphasize the extremities and stereotypes of a certain culture, but it doesn’t mean should feed into that. To each his own. You cannot compare a culture that has immigrated to America in concentration thirty years ago to, say, Native Americans or African Americans, who have been here from the founding days of the country. There is a huge difference. Not to say they are not systematically oppressed, but my point is one cannot compare the two. 

“In many cases, people of means who are highly educated are targeted/purged during certain kinds of revolutions(e.g. Iraq or Iran), or they flee because the scales are being tipped in favor of the have-nots (e.g. Cuba), and the people who would likely come here and remain poor and struggle even in the U.S. with its “streets of gold”  are left behind in the mother country.”

In the Iranian revolution, the Ayatollah did not “tip the scales in favor of the have-nots” it may seem that the Iranian revolution was this kind of a revolution, but you are mistaken. Like Nazi Germany, it started out with a promise of populism, but ended up just screwing everyone over. And they were not “purged” because they were highly educated or had means, they had to flee because if they did not, they would never be able to escape. Actually, many of them had no money to flee since everything was taken from them, and anything they could scrape up, people would use to flee and to illegally have their children snuck out of the country. The people left behind were either the ones who were not persecuted, or the ones who believed that the revolution would make the country change for the better. Unfortunately, this did not happen – hence the constant protests and revolts by the Iranian youth, who are the majority of the Iranian population today (most are under the age of 30). 

I truly feel upset about this show and the image of Iranians it will spread nationally and globally, and the fact that Ryan Seacrest – who I know is personally friends with many Iranians in LA – is exploiting a group of people for more money. And yes, these people – who, mind you, are obviously going to be ostentatious people anyway since they signed up to put themselves on display on reality television – are also responsible, but as a person who controls what the public perceives in many ways, Ryan Seacrest holds more responsibility on this, and he should be chastised for targeting such a specific “un-vague” group of people who thus can so easily be mocked and put down. 

I feel even more upset that I am seeing comments such as these that have undertones of “yeah, they’re successful people, but it’s because they had it easy. They didn’t have it like my ancestors, or like Native Americans or African Americans,” because, no – they did not have it easy at all. Iranian-Americans are statistically the most successful immigrant population in the United States, proportionately and chronologically (achieving success in a span of three decades), and there is no reason to put this down and to compare. Accept it for what it is, be proud that you live in a country that allows people to achieve, and, as cliche as it sounds, celebrate the differences in diversity. There is no other country in the world where so many different cultures and ethnicities have lived in peace and have coexisted as the catalysts for innovation, civil rights, and democracy. 

I don’t think your civil rights example is analogous to this situation. Your example involved people not engaging with a movement, versus someone actively engaging in or participating in a demeaning act. I don’t think the actress choosing to not participate in this ad is equivalent to “sacrificing themselves to the cause”. I don’t think she should be harassed or belittled, but sometimes ethics needs to come into play and people have to question whether their price tag for their dignity is too low. Perhaps I am being self-righteous, but can’t we demand more from people?

When I see some shit like the following video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWD15oRu3YM ) I do not think it is off base to question the participants in the video.