San Jose’s Vietnamese Majority/Minority

The Model Minority Myth is prevalent within many communities, and especially in a city densely populated with ethnic minorities living in San Jose, jobs and education are competitive amongst Asian American communities. Multiple council members are representing the communities that are trying to give lower-income and underrepresented communities a larger chance to gain employment opportunities and higher education. But with a growing representation of Asian Americans gaining positions, many view them to be the “perfect immigrant” thriving in a diverse community. With this heavy cognition, the younger generation is heavily affected by this thought. The model minority myth is surrounded by the stereotypes and assumptions of being smart and the hard-working mindset of gaining high positions. Therefore, they are expected to do well, and statistically, they do not receive enough mental health-related assistance. Even amongst the older generation, this myth does not exist in their eyes, and they fail to acknowledge the pressure of being held to high expectations. Not every community is successful as many assumptions of Asians are to be ethnically Chinese, Indian, or Korean, but the underrepresented communities of Southeast Asians like Vietnamese, Hmong, and Cambodian communities are held to high expectations and are less admitted to higher positions than other Asian communities. Within San Jose, there are more low-income families reported than those that are higher off. Many Vietnamese dense communities are refugees that fled after the Fall of Saigon to attempt to rebuild their lives. As they build up their life, they focused on their kids to do well academically so that they won’t end up in the same position as their parents. As a figure in the Vietnamese American community, focusing on what can be done to help break down the model minority stereotype is crucial. Festivals, nonprofit organizations, and community events are some of the prime examples of how the community addresses these issues. From the experience of being held to so many expectations, physically, mentally, and emotionally, it’s draining to find self-identity while breaking that myth to prove that not every immigrant is successful. To be able to address internalized issues within the lower-income Vietnamese American community in San Jose, I can utilize the understanding of the minority myth through statistics and local organizations to further my research within my community.

When looking at San Jose, San Jose has the largest Vietnamese population in the United States, yet they have a larger poverty rate than the U.S. population. Using Steven Kanga’s article on racism and law, “Myth versus Facts: Asian American and Model Minorities,” it states the census percentages of the Southeast Asian population in America. Comparing the percentage of the population, Asian Americans make up 3.2% of the U.S. population. Many Asians migrated voluntarily as a response to the violence in their motherland. But those who can make it abroad are those of middle to high class. Meaning that they have experience in high-paying jobs in their home country, but in the States, it is a different story when trying to build up their status. The top 5 Asian Americans with the highest poverty rates rank from Laotian, Hmong, Cambodian, Vietnamese, and then Indonesian families ranging from 67.2–15.2% in poverty. The majority of these groups are Southeast Asians who are affected by the bloodbaths of war and communism. Kangas speaks that these myths generally come from the “supporters of the model minority,” who have stated high statistics of education, generalized the overall Asian population, and “do not realize that income inequality is severe within the Asian-American community”. In response, statistics and statements made by the community leaders show that there are disadvantages to Asian Americans compared to other minority groups in the United States.

Although the overall Asian American population has a lower poverty rate than the U.S. population, the majority of the poverty rates amongst Asian Americans are Southeast Asians, including Vietnamese Americans. Using these statistics, it is the first step into taking the words out of the supporters of the model minorities and putting in statistics of the specific population rather than the generalized Asian population. This article can be used to start disproving the model minority myth by showing the data of poverty and start digging into what the model minority myth is and how it historically came into being. To specifically concentrate this issue into San Jose, this source is an introduction to explaining the displacement of the model minority myth and how Southeast Asians are affected even in a Vietnamese-concentrated city like San Jose.

If we wanted to focus on numbers specifically to San Jose’s Vietnamese community, utilizing the U.S. Census Bureau to get the exact numbers of multiple individuals whose outcomes are the exact opposite of what the model minority myth states. According to the 2010 census, 125,774 Vietnamese Americans are residing in the San Jose surrounding areas, making “San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara MSA(Metropolitan Statistical Area) had the largest percentage of Vietnamese residing in the core city of San Jose: 79%.” (Nguyen, 2–4). Within that percentage, there are 25.6% of Vietnamese youth under the age of 17 and 8.8% of seniors over the age of 65 in 2009. This shows the abundance of Vietnamese Americans residing in San Jose, but the rates of poverty are high, along with other Southeast Asian communities as well. High rates of 13.1% overall living in poverty and 12.1% living below the poverty level put many families making under 60,000 on average for a family of 3 or more. San Jose is an expensive metropolitan area to live in, so the rates of poverty are high to accommodate the rising price of housing.

Utilizing the U.S. Census Bureau, I can show the difference between rates of poverty amongst Vietnamese Americans compared to other Asian ethnic minorities. Since this census is from 2010, it currently isn’t up to date. I can take this data to further prove the model minority myth doesn’t apply to everyone, especially other Southeast Asians who have escaped from war with a limited amount of resources taken along. Similar to the source from Kanga, it can be statistically proven that not all Asian Americans make a large income compared to other minorities in the United States. The census also takes notes of what jobs, education, and economic status of other Asian minorities and compare it with Vietnamese Americans, which is crucial to consider the living situation of certain minorities. The higher rates of poverty can determine if the model minority myth is proven to be true to its words.

Since poverty was addressed in the previous decade’s census, the Pew Research Center’s study on income inequality further challenges the model minority myth through its reports on the Asian American communities. Over some time between 2010 and 2016, there has been a 12.5% increase in AAPI poverty. Even though in the Pew reports, the Asian American median household income makes up $80,720 in 2016 without taking into consideration resources and opportunities provided to the AA community. These resources are not readily available for Asian Americans living in poverty and in a bigger populated city like San Jose that requires a median salary of $157,036 to survive. The study indicates that in comparison to other cities, San Jose’s median income is three times higher than a city like Yuba City. Factors such as education, diversity, living conditions, and geography are required “[…] to truly capture the economic conditions of our communities and advocate for their diverse needs.” (National CAPACD). When considering factors, it is important, especially when it comes to categorizing Asians under the model minority.

This research done by Pew can be used to challenge the model minority myth by targeting wealth inequality for Asian Americans. The data have shown that demographically can prove how much the data can be skewed for others to blindly focus on the positives of the model minority. I can use it to back up my argument of how this challenges the myth and break it down with alternatives and educate the members of the San Jose community of these inequalities we don’t see every day. Furthermore, the articles that reference this research proved that although Asian Americans on average make a high income, there needs to be an acknowledgment of the income gap in America to disprove the model minority. This information can be further analyzed and incorporated into my future research to show the darker side of the economic gap despite average numbers.

To understand the model minority myth, we need to know the historic roots of how this myth came to be and how it disproportionately sections Southeast Asians from other Asian communities. The data provided by Futoshi Kobayashi determines how the positive outcomes became the negative outcome currently due to past media praising Asian Americans for being “successful” in America. Kobayashi explained how during the 1960s, Asians were viewed as yellow peril and exotic being so different from the European immigrant culture. The word “Asian American” didn’t come into existence until Asian immigrants utilized that term to combat racism together. The term “model minority” came in much later to silence the minority group by other minorities. At the time, media portrayed Asians as one generalized community despite having new ethnicities emerging in the United States in the 1990s such as “Southeast Asians (8.5 percent Vietnamese, 5.8 percent Cambodian, 2.1 percent Lao, totaling 16.4 percent), Asian Indians (11.2 percent), and Koreans (11 percent).” (Kobayashi). He uses the four main stereotypes to justify his findings of the model minority myth and the counter-data against the supposed model minority myth states.

The data that disproves the model minority myth is crucial in analyzing patterns in the San Jose community to acknowledge the struggles of Vietnamese Americans. With the focus in mind, Kobayashi stated from his sources, “ the mean family income of South Asians ($77,983) is more than 2.7 times larger than that of Southeast Asians ($28,789). […] the majority of Japanese, Koreans, and South Asians fall into the upper half of the socioeconomic scale, whereas many Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders fall into the lower half.” (Kobayashi, 11). This piece of information can be used to section out the differences between these ethnic groups amongst the generalized term, “Asian”. I can utilize the historical facts and look deeper into San Jose’s history to see how the model minority myth is shaped amongst students as they are more aware of the situation than the older generations. The counter-data used can justify the realities of living up to the model minority myth and breaking it down for each other to understand.

In previous works, the discussion of Proposition 16 comes into play in giving those in poverty an advantage to gain higher positions in the San Jose community. Many councilmembers support this proposition to ban affirmative action due to ongoing racism still happening amongst women and people of color. The source, Yes on Prop 16, states the purpose of Proposition 16 and how it can be beneficial for the minority community as well as women in the workforce, education system, and an opportunity to advance. Because California has banned affirmative action, this source gives resources and articles on how this is beneficial for the equality of Californians. They further back up their statements by listing endorsers and organizations for this campaign to allow affirmative action(including the City of San Jose).

Since San Jose has a huge homeless population and high poverty rates amongst minority groups, Proposition 16 can be used to plan future works to give Vietnamese Americans in the San Jose community the opportunity to get access to programs to better their life. The affirmative action can be explained through the local organizations that aim to give Vietnamese Americans voices in the community and increase civic engagement. Furthermore, Proposition 16 can be used to address the model minority myth, giving full advantage to all at different levels. I can also utilize background information from the San Jose community members that aim to address the problem, bringing more awareness and education not only for the youth but also for the older community so that they can play a part.

If there’s a positive mindset to Proposition 16, there can be a negative side to this bill in the community as stated by Vote No on Prop 16. This source argues through myth and facts about Proposition 16. They state that affirmative action and programs benefiting minorities and women are readily available and “Giving racial preferences continues to perpetuate systemic racism.” They further their argument by stating real-time rebuttals regarding Asian Americans by stating “Some Asian American groups in California, such as East Asians, have a higher poverty rate than the California average. Asian American communities have faced discrimination including the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1883, Japanese internment camps during World War II, and anti-Asian discrimination during COVID-19.” (Vote No on Prop 16). The majority of their facts are rebuttal arguments from certain myths and heavily involve education and different background statuses of all minorities.

When taking into consideration what Proposition 16 can do outside of racially diverse communities, using the committee’s argument of also enacting discriminatory policies as well as allowing marginalized communities can come to both ways. I can use this source to see the positive and negative outcomes of this proposition and how that can reverse the myth or even further proves a point for the believers of the model minority myth. Some certain individuals and organizations are against this and by using sources within San Jose who are against this proposition, it can prove the point that the model minority is still a thing in the community’s perspectives. Overall, where the research stands on the myth determines what can be done to address the community’s poverty problems.

As I progressively look into the model minority myth and what sources can help me further my research to combat the myth, I see that it can be used to excavate more information in my San Jose community. From prior experience, addressing the model minority myth is difficult as is and in San Jose being the most concentrated of Vietnamese Americans, the circumstances do not fit the myth as people may perceive it. The sources relating to the census, Proposition 16, and the historical aspect of the model minority myth all contribute to figuring out the situation that is currently a problem in San Jose. As part of the area myself, I have seen disproportions of the model minority myth and that many are not aware of this being a problem. The sources I can use to argue against the model minority myth show the gaps between bigger populations of other Asian Americans in current America compared to a smaller ethnic group. If we were stepping away from the heavily Vietnamese dense population, this would have been a bigger issue for many Southeast Asian descent to address in their smaller communities probably without as much support as in San Jose. These sources are a start to digging deeper into the problem outside of San Jose. The research done through these sources is crucial to understanding the mindset one may have on the Vietnamese community and what the community members can do as of now to break the “positive” cognition of the model minority myth.

Works Cited

Kangas, Steve. “Myth versus Facts: Asian American and Model Minorities.” Race, Racism and the Law, racism.org/articles/race/64-defining-racial-groups/asian-and-pacific-americans/310-model02a.

“Keep Discrimination Illegal!” Vote No on Prop 16, 11 Oct. 2020, stopprop16.org/.

Kobayashi, F. (1999). Model Minority Stereotype Reconsidered [PDF], https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED434167.pdf.

Nguyen, A. (2011). “The Vietnamese Population in the United States: 2010” U.S. Census Bureau [PDF], https://vacoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/The-Vietnamese-Population-2010_July-2.2011.pdf.

“Pew Research Center’s Report on Income Inequality Challenges Model Minority Myth.” National CAPACD, 25 July 2018, www.nationalcapacd.org/newsroom/pew-research-centers-report-on-income-inequality-challenges-model-minority-myth/.

“Vote Yes On Prop 16 — Opportunity for All Californians.” Opportunity for All Coalition — Yes on Prop 16!, 2 Oct. 2020, voteyesonprop16.org/.