Tiger Mom Amy Chua: Three factors why Indians, Jews, Chinese do better than others

The Globe And Mail ^ | Feb 5, 2014 | Craig Offman

[James C. Bennett]

Sounding a little wounded from the wrath that greeted her 2011 parenting memoir Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, Amy Chua has nonetheless jumped back into the pop-ethnography circus with a new book and fresh controversy.

Written with her husband, fellow Yale Law School professor Jed Rubenfeld, The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America posits another theory about collective identity, one that toe-tests – or perhaps leaps over – the line of political correctness: Some U.S. cultural groups, the couple say, are bound to be more successful than others.

...

The book isn’t a collection of flame-tossing whimsy: The research staff acknowledged at the back of the book is the size of a small minority unto itself. Nearly half of its 300 pages consist of footnotes and endnotes to support its contentious arguments: The sense of entitlement that comes from a superiority complex is a leading cause of WASP decline, while Appalachians have the opposite problem – a sense of inferiority makes them feel as though they are not deserving of the same success as other cultures. The authors note their concern about the weakening of impulse control among Jewish-Americans and point out that Mormons are an ideal Triple Package. Uncomfortable yet?

Why did you find it important to write this book now?

Chua: I’ve actually been interested in this topic of disproportionately successful minorities for most of my career. I wrote the book World on Fire in 2002, that was about minorities in the world, and Jed and I, we have these cultural differences. He’s Jewish and I’m Chinese-American, and we’ve noticed big differences and similarities. I used to say, “Chinese people are just two generations behind the Jews.”

The Tiger Mom has nothing on the Jewish mother.

[Nifster]

Commie deems hardly qualify as authorities on the work ethic of americans

[Chgogal]

Huh? The Chinese Work Ethic predates Karl Marx.

[chiefqc]

And let us be frank, if you look at the statistics, the Indians, Asians, Iranians, and Nigerians are making tremendous progress. They make far more money and get far better educated than the average American does.

I suppose that leaves out those American youths who work their butts off, pay their own way through college make as make much money and are as educated as any of the above selected group noted witin her book.

Gee I wonder what is the reaction of those groups not noted in her book like the Italians, Greeks, Germans, American Indians, etc. think about her insite?

Is she assuming that all those races she wrote about in her book are exceptional and therefore none of them are average?

We, all American, hear from our POTUS and certain elected officials that American are not exceptional, that the hard work they do to achieve their goals are not done by themselves someone, the government, helped them.

So yes I am a little annoyed at her limited choice of races she noted within her book without any regards to the other groups who also work hard, and are also exceptional. Perhaps she should could have been more inclusive and less narrow in her thinking then maybe both her books would have had less negative reactions.

[ottbmare]

I'm trying to decide whether there is any purpose at all in replying to this, because it's glaringly apparent that you have read neither Amy Chua's books nor my replies to you.

I suppose that leaves out those American youths who work their butts off, pay their own way through college make as make much money and are as educated as any of the above selected group noted witin her book.

Yes, it does, because Chua is writing about groups, not individuals, and AS A GROUP Americans do not do as well financially as the GROUP of Jews, or Nigerians, or Iranians, or Asians. She is not referring to individuals. Some Chinese fail. Some Iranians are slackers. But AS A GROUP they do well. She is describing some of the reasons why they succeed.

So yes I am a little annoyed at her limited choice of races she noted within her book without any regards to the other groups who also work hard, and are also exceptional.

You see, this is why I suspect you aren't reading either the books you are so upset by, nor my replies to you. As I already wrote, if she wrote about every group of immigrants who have come to this country she would still be writing the biggest book in the world. A writer has to limit her research to a manageable size; as it is, the footnotes about her research are very extensive.

I have no idea why you're so touchy about this, if you and your family are hard-working and successful people. Would you have preferred that no one ever mention the fact that Jews, Nigerians, Asians, and Iranians do especially well? Should we not talk about it?

When we see an athlete who does especially well, articles and how-to books are written about his approach, his training, his mental game, so that readers can learn from his success and improve themselves. Why is it so threatening to have someone write about the ways certain groups of people do well economically? If we can learn from this, why not?

But the majority of those who are upset by these books are liberals who don't like to be confronted by evidence that black people can do well in the US just through hard work. That's a very conservative premise. Why are you siding with liberals on this?

[Nifster]

And the American work ethic does as well. It is silly to say Americans have no work ethic when we produce most of the world’s consumables, food, and other necessities (as well as luxuries). Americans work harder and do more with less than others in the ‘modern’ world. Increased productivity is the hall mark of the American work place.

The Chinese like most of the rest of the world have NEVER been free and never will be. Their understanding of liberty is zero. They are all too happy to live and die in a collectivist society.

Telling me some one works hard in the gulag is not impressive

[chiefqc]

I believe that we can agree to disagree.

Liberals tend to define individuals by groups and we witness how well that is working.

Her daughters have done exceptionally well under her control as evidenced by acceptance of one to Harvard.

Hopefully along with her rigid demand for excellence they were also permitted to make decision for themselves.

I suppose my main concern is the reference to groups, as liberals are so fond doing, and not by individuals.

I wish only the best for her and her children and their continued excellence.

There are chapters yet to be written as the children make decisions on their own apart from the control of their parents. I hope that there will be no tragic outcomes which in some cases only come to light with the new freedoms.