加拿大的種族歧視真厲害
- 主题发起人 Tongjiya
- 开始时间
- 注册
- 2010-07-16
- 消息
- 662
- 荣誉分数
- 31
- 声望点数
- 0
哦耶，就这么个小事都这么生气是容易受不了外人的语言哦~~~跟你让别人闭乌鸦嘴比起来＂搞外事的习惯登高望远＂完全是中性的描述事实或者评价了吧。。。你仔细看看这一句让你生气的话有什么讽刺吗。。。再说了你好心好意披露你个人私生活跟大家共享你的经验就应该担当容许别人跟帖发言吧，不然不就是领导做报告了嘛。。。。或者你声明一吓请勿发表不同意见我也尊重你的要求嘛。。。现在得罪你了耶是无心之过吧~~~~
至于你发挥女人的假想敌特长才是好笑了，哪里有什么前面，我专门查了一下跟你贴是我在这里第一个发言贴嘛。。。。
如果你不喜欢身板这个词可以换作身体不影响我帖子要表达的意思。。。就是身板更给力，有强壮的身体的意思，从汉字语意看无任何不积极不和谐的吧，当然不排除个人喜好。。。。就算你不喜好也不是针对你个人，我说的是我们中国人家长嘛也包括我自己身板不如姚明刘翔们嘛。。。。哪里过分了嘛
- 注册
- 2010-07-16
- 消息
- 662
- 荣誉分数
- 31
- 声望点数
- 0
shutupming
新手上路
- 注册
- 2010-11-02
- 消息
- 76
- 荣誉分数
- 2
- 声望点数
- 0
加拿大不给你面子
共产党不给你活路.
SB, 你选哪个.
共产党不给你活路.
SB, 你选哪个.
A comment from the National Post today:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...le-on-asians-familiar-to-anti-semites-of-old/
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...le-on-asians-familiar-to-anti-semites-of-old/
- 注册
- 2003-04-13
- 消息
- 240,489
- 荣誉分数
- 37,749
- 声望点数
- 1,393
Thanks, boss! This article is very well written with strong support to its arguments.
Jeet Heer: Maclean’s article on Asians familiar to anti-Semites of old
November 15, 2010 – 3:15 pm
Throughout the 1920s, A. Lawrence Lowell, then president of Harvard University, was worried that his beloved school was becoming too Jewish. “The presence of Jews in large numbers tends to drive Gentiles elsewhere,” Lowell wrote in a 1925 letter to Harvard professor. “To prevent a dangerous increase in the proportion of Jews, I know at present only one way which is at the same time straightforward and effective, and that is a selection by a personal estimate of character on the part of Admission authorities.”
Lowell focused on the question of “character” because he believed that Jewish students might well be intellectually gifted but they lacked social graces. A Boston Brahmin and scion of a pedigreed WASP family, Lowell thought that too many Jews spoiled the educational experience of Harvard. Jews as a group, Lowell believed, didn’t assimilate easily into the Anglo-Saxon majority, they tended to cluster together, they’re too pushy and ambitious, they didn’t participate in sports and other extracurricular activities, they lacked the easy comportment expected of true Harvard men. Because Jews lacked “character” and threatened to scare off well-heeled Gentile students, Lowell was at the forefront of a movement among Ivy League universities to impose anti-Semitic quotas.
It’s easy now to see what was wrong with Lowell’s thinking: it rested on an implicit assumption of WASP privilege. For Lowell, Harvard was without question an Anglo-Saxon stronghold, and minorities such as Jews could only be admitted in such numbers that didn’t challenge the schools social composition. WASPs were by definition the essence of Harvard and Jews by definition were always aliens to be tolerated but only in small numbers. In another 1925 letter Lowell actually described Jews as “an alien race.” If meritocracy, admitting students based on grades and scholarly ability alone, meant too many Jews, then Lowell felt that meritocracy had to go.
Last week Maclean’s magazine published a disgracefully xenophobic article which updated all of Lowell’s arguments and assumptions, applying them not to the Harvard of the past but the Canada of today. The target of the article wasn’t Jews but Asian-Canadians. Written by Stephanie Findlay and Nicholas Kohler, the article was titled “’Too Asian’?” and opened with this startling sub-headline “A term used in the U.S. to talk about racial imbalance at Ivy League schools is now being whispered on Canadian campuses.” (All quotes are from the original posting of the article, which was later taken down by the magazine and reposted in an edited and slightly less offensive form).
Just as Lowell worried that the WASP elite would avoid a Harvard that was too Jewish, Maclean’s raises the spectre that privileged white kids are staying away from universities that are “too Asian”. The article opens with the story of Alexandra and Rachel, two recent graduates of Havergal College, a hoity-toity all girls private school. When choosing upon their undergraduate education, both decided to avoid the University of Toronto because it had a “reputation of being Asian.”
What does “racial imbalance” and “too Asian” mean? Maclean’s offers this helpful explication: “’Too Asian’ is not about racism, say students like Alexandra: many white students simply believe that competing with Asians – both Asian Canadians and international students – requires a sacrifice of time and freedom they’re not willing to make.”
The fist thing to note is the remarkably broad use of the term “Asian” which encompasses everyone from a Hong Kong exchange student who is here on a temporary visa to kids whose families have been in Canada since the building of the railways in the era of John A. Macdonald. In the eyes of Maclean’s magazine, all “Asians” look the same and are always (to use Lowell’s words) “an alien race” outside the mainstream of Canadian society (which is implicitly defined as white). The idea that white Canadians have a right to a university education without having to compete with “Asians” rests on a strong sense of white privilege and entitlement, a racial haughtiness which Maclean’s largely takes for granted although the article briefly queries it in very mild terms.
Much of the Maclean’s article is taken up with listing the faults of “Asian” students. The language the article uses would be utterly familiar to Lowell and the other Ivy League gatekeepers of the 1920s. Like the Jews at Harvard in the 1920s, “Asians” are portrayed as book smart but lacking in social skills. According to Maclean’s “Asians” are pushy and ambitious (“They tend to be strivers, high achievers and single-minded…”); unlike white students, “Asians” don’t appreciate that education involves “social interaction, athletics and self-actualization.” Because “Asians” have a “narrow” focus on academics, they “risk alienating their more fun-loving [white] peers.” Finally, “Asians” stick together and are balkanizing our culture by their failure to assimilate.
Even in very tiny details, Maclean’s article echoes the anti-Semites of old. Lowell took notice of the curious fact that Jewish students were “much less addicted to intemperance” than Gentile students. The Maclean’s article repeatedly notes that “Asians” drink less than whites. Maclean’s could have saved themselves money on this article if they had simply reprinted one of Lowell’s speeches from the 1920s, replacing the word “Jews” with “Asians”.
Near the end of the article, Maclean’s explicitly raises the historical parallels, noting that “to quell the influx of Jewish students, Ivy League schools abandoned their meritocratic admissions processes in favour of one that focused on the details of an applicant’s personal life.” We’re told that so far, Canadian schools have remained meritocratic and “rely entirely on trans.” Then we get two curious sentences: “Likely that is a good thing. And yet, that meritocratic process results, especially in Canada’s elite university programs, in a concentration of Asian students.” As a student of weaselly rhetoric, I very much admire the use of the word “likely.” The suggestion being made here is that a quota system, like the one that limited Jews in the Ivy League schools, might possibly be a good idea, since the current system leads to a bad result (the “a concentration of Asian students.”)
I’ll end on a personal note. I’ve had the privilege of teaching at Canadian universities and working for the Canadian media. I’ve never experienced a “racial imbalance” at Canadian universities: I’ve met students and colleagues from every conceivable ethnic background. But I have noticed a “racial imbalance” in the Canadian media, which often seems as white as the ideal Harvard Lowell was trying to create in the 1920s. In fact, arguably Lowell was progressive compared to the Canadian media since he was willing to allow that the student body could be 15% non-WASP.
If the masthead of Maclean’s magazine is to be trusted, there is not a single “Asian” working in an editorial capacity for that publication. There do seem to be one or two “South Asians,” like the excellent Sarmishta Subramanian, but not any “Asians” as Maclean’s defines the term. To put it another way, students who don’t like to compete with “Asians” would be perfectly comfortable working for Maclean’s.
November 15, 2010 – 3:15 pm
Throughout the 1920s, A. Lawrence Lowell, then president of Harvard University, was worried that his beloved school was becoming too Jewish. “The presence of Jews in large numbers tends to drive Gentiles elsewhere,” Lowell wrote in a 1925 letter to Harvard professor. “To prevent a dangerous increase in the proportion of Jews, I know at present only one way which is at the same time straightforward and effective, and that is a selection by a personal estimate of character on the part of Admission authorities.”
Lowell focused on the question of “character” because he believed that Jewish students might well be intellectually gifted but they lacked social graces. A Boston Brahmin and scion of a pedigreed WASP family, Lowell thought that too many Jews spoiled the educational experience of Harvard. Jews as a group, Lowell believed, didn’t assimilate easily into the Anglo-Saxon majority, they tended to cluster together, they’re too pushy and ambitious, they didn’t participate in sports and other extracurricular activities, they lacked the easy comportment expected of true Harvard men. Because Jews lacked “character” and threatened to scare off well-heeled Gentile students, Lowell was at the forefront of a movement among Ivy League universities to impose anti-Semitic quotas.
It’s easy now to see what was wrong with Lowell’s thinking: it rested on an implicit assumption of WASP privilege. For Lowell, Harvard was without question an Anglo-Saxon stronghold, and minorities such as Jews could only be admitted in such numbers that didn’t challenge the schools social composition. WASPs were by definition the essence of Harvard and Jews by definition were always aliens to be tolerated but only in small numbers. In another 1925 letter Lowell actually described Jews as “an alien race.” If meritocracy, admitting students based on grades and scholarly ability alone, meant too many Jews, then Lowell felt that meritocracy had to go.
Last week Maclean’s magazine published a disgracefully xenophobic article which updated all of Lowell’s arguments and assumptions, applying them not to the Harvard of the past but the Canada of today. The target of the article wasn’t Jews but Asian-Canadians. Written by Stephanie Findlay and Nicholas Kohler, the article was titled “’Too Asian’?” and opened with this startling sub-headline “A term used in the U.S. to talk about racial imbalance at Ivy League schools is now being whispered on Canadian campuses.” (All quotes are from the original posting of the article, which was later taken down by the magazine and reposted in an edited and slightly less offensive form).
Just as Lowell worried that the WASP elite would avoid a Harvard that was too Jewish, Maclean’s raises the spectre that privileged white kids are staying away from universities that are “too Asian”. The article opens with the story of Alexandra and Rachel, two recent graduates of Havergal College, a hoity-toity all girls private school. When choosing upon their undergraduate education, both decided to avoid the University of Toronto because it had a “reputation of being Asian.”
What does “racial imbalance” and “too Asian” mean? Maclean’s offers this helpful explication: “’Too Asian’ is not about racism, say students like Alexandra: many white students simply believe that competing with Asians – both Asian Canadians and international students – requires a sacrifice of time and freedom they’re not willing to make.”
The fist thing to note is the remarkably broad use of the term “Asian” which encompasses everyone from a Hong Kong exchange student who is here on a temporary visa to kids whose families have been in Canada since the building of the railways in the era of John A. Macdonald. In the eyes of Maclean’s magazine, all “Asians” look the same and are always (to use Lowell’s words) “an alien race” outside the mainstream of Canadian society (which is implicitly defined as white). The idea that white Canadians have a right to a university education without having to compete with “Asians” rests on a strong sense of white privilege and entitlement, a racial haughtiness which Maclean’s largely takes for granted although the article briefly queries it in very mild terms.
Much of the Maclean’s article is taken up with listing the faults of “Asian” students. The language the article uses would be utterly familiar to Lowell and the other Ivy League gatekeepers of the 1920s. Like the Jews at Harvard in the 1920s, “Asians” are portrayed as book smart but lacking in social skills. According to Maclean’s “Asians” are pushy and ambitious (“They tend to be strivers, high achievers and single-minded…”); unlike white students, “Asians” don’t appreciate that education involves “social interaction, athletics and self-actualization.” Because “Asians” have a “narrow” focus on academics, they “risk alienating their more fun-loving [white] peers.” Finally, “Asians” stick together and are balkanizing our culture by their failure to assimilate.
Even in very tiny details, Maclean’s article echoes the anti-Semites of old. Lowell took notice of the curious fact that Jewish students were “much less addicted to intemperance” than Gentile students. The Maclean’s article repeatedly notes that “Asians” drink less than whites. Maclean’s could have saved themselves money on this article if they had simply reprinted one of Lowell’s speeches from the 1920s, replacing the word “Jews” with “Asians”.
Near the end of the article, Maclean’s explicitly raises the historical parallels, noting that “to quell the influx of Jewish students, Ivy League schools abandoned their meritocratic admissions processes in favour of one that focused on the details of an applicant’s personal life.” We’re told that so far, Canadian schools have remained meritocratic and “rely entirely on trans.” Then we get two curious sentences: “Likely that is a good thing. And yet, that meritocratic process results, especially in Canada’s elite university programs, in a concentration of Asian students.” As a student of weaselly rhetoric, I very much admire the use of the word “likely.” The suggestion being made here is that a quota system, like the one that limited Jews in the Ivy League schools, might possibly be a good idea, since the current system leads to a bad result (the “a concentration of Asian students.”)
I’ll end on a personal note. I’ve had the privilege of teaching at Canadian universities and working for the Canadian media. I’ve never experienced a “racial imbalance” at Canadian universities: I’ve met students and colleagues from every conceivable ethnic background. But I have noticed a “racial imbalance” in the Canadian media, which often seems as white as the ideal Harvard Lowell was trying to create in the 1920s. In fact, arguably Lowell was progressive compared to the Canadian media since he was willing to allow that the student body could be 15% non-WASP.
If the masthead of Maclean’s magazine is to be trusted, there is not a single “Asian” working in an editorial capacity for that publication. There do seem to be one or two “South Asians,” like the excellent Sarmishta Subramanian, but not any “Asians” as Maclean’s defines the term. To put it another way, students who don’t like to compete with “Asians” would be perfectly comfortable working for Maclean’s.
shinesmile
新手上路
- 注册
- 2009-11-21
- 消息
- 72
- 荣誉分数
- 0
- 声望点数
- 16
A commnet on the National Post's article:
scott hall
<!-- removed since there are no personas -->
.......
Racism in any form is deplorable; institutionalized racism supported by tax dollars and a quiescent society is simply the tyranny of the majority with its boot on the neck of the minority, from time to time. In one generation, the Irish. Then the Italians, the Jews, the Blacks, and now the Asians.
We had better learn soon that we're all in this together, which is, I believe, one definition of civilization.
- 注册
- 2010-02-15
- 消息
- 1,225
- 荣誉分数
- 144
- 声望点数
- 73
It is so easy to bash a visible minority, whether it is Asian, black, hispanic or native Canadian. All you have to do is collect undesirable habits of that particular group even though those habits are not really general but a very narrow observation. You can do that to any group of human being.
We are all at fault when we try to judge a people/race. Natives are lazy/alcoholic, blacks are violent, uneducated etc etc.
I would like all of you to look at a person by himself on his own merits, without any baggage or prejudice. Not a easy thing to do but please do try.
Our LZ was traumatized by racial remarks directed to him or at him and therefore he thinks Canada is the most racist country in the world. His viewpoint is forever colored. This is most unofortunate.
We are all at fault when we try to judge a people/race. Natives are lazy/alcoholic, blacks are violent, uneducated etc etc.
I would like all of you to look at a person by himself on his own merits, without any baggage or prejudice. Not a easy thing to do but please do try.
Our LZ was traumatized by racial remarks directed to him or at him and therefore he thinks Canada is the most racist country in the world. His viewpoint is forever colored. This is most unofortunate.
- 注册
- 2002-07-28
- 消息
- 14,150
- 荣誉分数
- 533
- 声望点数
- 273
很多老中麻木的很哪. 那咱用通俗的卖热狗打比方, 为什么要反击这种恶意舆论煽动.
老中小孩一窝风地去学实用专业,不就是家里没有后台给介绍轻松能靠soft skill就能拿高薪的工作嘛,说白了就是为了一个相对不需要关系,靠硬本事(智力,学历,技能)吃饭的本领, 从谋生角度,和咱卖热狗绝对有可比性.
咱没啥关系,没人能把咱介绍进平均年薪8-9万的市政府,工会,看见街上有卖热狗的, 咱也去卖热狗,挣点辛苦钱. 别人卖热狗只卖7个月, 咱卖10个月, 人家一天卖5个小时, 咱卖10个小时, 那确实是靠耗时间挣的苦力钱,自然咱的生意就好了,一些老中也纷纷效仿, 开始卖sub, 包子,小肥羊 等等.
时间一长, 本地人突然发现以前他们不屑一做的, 这些老中能吃苦,把一个个小生意都打理的有声有色. 一些人眼红了, 市政府食品高级咨询公司(半官方机构)发文章说:"现在的饮食市场too asian了" , 本地人原来每年卖7个月,每天只卖5小时就能挣出decent的养家的钱,还能经常去酒巴,看冰球, 现在不行了, 老中或asian把我们的市场都挤压了, 于是电台, 其他白人小贩,愤愤不平, 说你们在中国卖不行吗?非要来这里和我们抢饭碗, 有个别好事之徒,开始造谣.说他们老中来了后我们就没好日子过了, 于是满城风语,本地一些普通民众也开始对这些老中小生意者另眼相看.市政府准备给小摊贩license设限制, 说华人小摊贩比例不能超过华人人口比例. 别的行业也准备效仿.
有的老中说: "怪你们不好啊, 我在政府同样拿高薪,没人歧视我啊, 你们还是想想怎么跟我一样靠实力,进政府, 谁敢歧视我, 我让他卷铺盖回家."
另一个老中小摊贩说:"人家说的也对, 你没看见,那xx刚来加拿大,也来竞争卖热狗, 政府是应该采取行动了."
另一个老中智者:"别跟这些人一般见识, 你们该卖啥就卖啥, 加拿大没歧视, 要不怎么一开始就让这么多老中当小贩卖东西呢?"
一位德高望重的华人村官说了:"你们要是嫌歧视,可以会中国啊,看在国内卖小吃能象加拿大那样买房子?"
咱是生意人, 说句生意人的话, 这种时候,不把这种苗头掐灭在初始阶段, 以后生意会不好做了, 如果不采取行动, 不管是抗议还是"公关"一下让市政府或编辑把这种违反宪法的删去或道歉, 以后铺子上,其他生意,其他老中稍微比本地人比例高的场合就会麻烦不断,本地人甚至有可能有更激烈的举动.
你们说我卖热狗的小生意人说得有道理吗?
说实话，中国人做的这些生意还真不算吃苦和主流。。大多数都是服务中国人自己的。。。
中东人那些才是搞很多基石的生意。。论吃苦和社会适应力再有自尊自强，中东人比很多中国人强多了。汽车行，contractor，零售商，肉铺，等等等等都是中东人，小摊小铺本来白人就不属于那个范围和领域，唯一it界被抢掉一点工作倒是真的。。。。
太多中国人喜欢庸人自扰，从自己身上找这样那样的原因，但是，中国人被歧视主要是自己的软弱和自卑。。。。
学校里同学反对太多中国人，第一是嫉妒，第二是中国人好欺负。。。
如果你跟中东人说他们国家种族怎么怎么不好，they gonna bust your head。。。
- 注册
- 2003-04-25
- 消息
- 4,680
- 荣誉分数
- 1,626
- 声望点数
- 323
你说的现象是对的，但和这篇文章的观点是２码事。＂软弱自卑＂有很多原因，和文化有关，和中国苦难的历史有关。其实从现在较年轻的移民说的话中就能让人看到希望，他们比我们背负的包袱要少，开放的祖国也给了他们教多的自信。年轻一些的，来留学的，或随父母来的，不比３０岁才来这的，为了养孩子而为了一份工作忍气吞声。我猜你可能比我们10年多的移民要年轻些，所以自信些，这就是进步。
我想楼上说的卖热狗只是打个比喻。新一代技术移民和早期的修铁路，开餐馆杂货店洗衣店的移民有是完全不同的风景，那时候即使有排华法案都没人敢吭声，那时候主流媒体不屑于攻击你因为你在最底层。现在不管怎样，大家还会为了父母移民去游行，这比起原来的＂软弱自卑＂程度不就减轻了些。现在攻击你是因为你触动了他们在乎的利益和舒适好处，这也是进步。所谓软弱自卑还有很多人说的不抱团，要改变，得有个过程，旧的烙印不是那么容易去掉的。
所以，我们做父母的，希望新的一代有进步，有新气象，所以，父母才要SPEAK OUT，不能让下一带走老路，滞步不前。
看在这发言的一些80，90带人的言论，还有我因为孩子的缘故接触的一些80后父母，我个人感觉他们毕竟经历不同，眼界很开阔，也自信多了，是好事。
- 注册
- 2002-07-28
- 消息
- 14,150
- 荣誉分数
- 533
- 声望点数
- 273
我觉得这个看法太阿Q,人家攻击中国人了歧视中国人了是重视你？扇了你一巴掌你会满意的摸着自己的脸说，恩，我终于有资格被你扇了。。。。这是什么思想？自己把自己放在那么底层的位置？？？其实根本就没有必要。
speak of truth, 中国人被歧视，不是进步，新气象，才能改变这些东西。。。中国人历时以来缺少的是aggressive。问题是，希望进步怎么也好，这种出发点就是错误的。。。。加拿大社会有加拿大社会的规则，小孩子只送去读书，满脑子的数学公式，缺乏social skills, confidence等等必要的生存技能，你总不能选择性失明说成绩好就行吧，成绩根本不代表什么。
大家都有这样的经历吧，初中高中，班级里总是有个被欺负的小孩，这个跟成绩能力无关，就是软弱和自卑。。。。现在中国很多就是被当作那个欺负的小孩。。。。
问题还是，中国人自己的软弱和自卑。导致了今天的局面。。。可怜人必有可恨之处。。。。社会的现状不会说因为什么中国背景也好，几千年的文化也好。。就会改变对你的认知。。。。。
你要想不被欺负，你就得给对方一个message，“你如果欺负我？ i am gonna bust your head。”。。。你试试跟中东人说他们的国家是shit?可能他成绩最烂，可能家里最穷，可是你敢跟他们说说？？？？they gonna bust your head for sure dude。。。。
- 注册
- 2003-04-25
- 消息
- 4,680
- 荣誉分数
- 1,626
- 声望点数
- 323
嗯，有勇气是好事。
将来你孩子慢慢 成长，你就能理解这儿好多父母的想法了。
- 注册
- 2002-07-28
- 消息
- 14,150
- 荣誉分数
- 533
- 声望点数
- 273
理解是一回事，但是加拿大的社会就是如此，不是说会主动理解，慢慢成长，别人就会改变对你的看法，根本就是苹果和橘子的事情。。。
你想要改变别人对你，这个族裔的看法，首先就是你不能够软弱自卑。这个是直接的关联。其他什么都不那么重要。。。
另外中国父母来加拿大我觉得，把太多的希望放在小孩子的身上，这个想法绝对有误差。。。。为什么很多中国小孩缺少自信，很多是因为父母对事物没有自信处处忍让。。。。这个不是好心的问题，缺少自信会影响到很多事情，小孩子的独立，社交技能，自强，创新力，等等等等。。所以说中国小孩子很多只会读书很大一部分责任在于家长对教育的片面。。。您不能否认的是，吃苦，以前的社会环境是个因素，可是又回到苹果和橘子的问题了。小孩子的教育需要的是自信是不能否认的，可能又客观条件的影响，但是那些客观条件其实都被当作家长认知自己问题，和逃避的excuse。。。。。很多人都会说，我以前很苦，为了工作不容易，所以我可以没有自信。。。。
sorry跑远了，不是说中国家长的出入点不好，但是这种事就跟一个好心的医术不好医生能不能救人还是取决与医术。但是中国家长习惯性的说我好心就行了，医术好不好无所谓。。。。这个才是最严重的问题。。。
