The Culture of Success

This is going to be an article riddled with violations of 'political correctness'.  As a result, we have an opportunity to think about a subject in an informative and unique context, two characteristics that 'political correctness' preclude. 

First, let us put the United States aside for a moment, and look at the recent Human Development Index map :

The first question we can ask is why Australia and New Zealand are wealthy, while Haiti and Liberia are among the world's poorest.  All four are countries that are inhabited and governed by people who have been there for under 200 years.  Let me also provide the disclaimer that the reason is not because of the skin color of the inhabitants of those countries. 

So why is the outcome of the two populations of African origin so incredibly worse than that of the two populations of Anglo-Saxon Protestant origin?

One word : Culture.

Cultures of specific ethnic groups are formed over the the course of centuries, not just decades.  The early inhabitants of Australia and New Zealand (and Canada) were already conditioned with centuries of Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture, wherein the necessary ingredients of democracy, industry, and rule of law were already internalized.  Hence, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, despite being on separate paths for two centuries, still have produced remarkably similar outcomes.  At the other end of the scale, Haiti gained independence in 1804, yet is still the only country in the Western Hemisphere with African levels of poverty - even Mexico is a paradise by comparison.  Liberia is a country created for freed US slaves to return to in order to create a new home in Africa, with a constitution modeled off of the US constitution, and with ongoing benefits of US financial aid and mentorship.  Nonetheless, Liberia is no more advanced that the traditional African countries that surround it.  This leads to a conclusion that most sub-Saharan African cultures, over the course of centuries, never developed the intellectual or philosophical foundations of science, legal institutions, or productivity.  Being separated from African society for two centuries is not sufficient to undo the millennia of anti-advancement conditioning that generations of people received in Africa, and hence the outcomes are still inevitably similar. 

Ponder that for a moment, and then let us return to the United States.

Today, African-Americans in the United States have lower incomes than whites, even decades after the Civil Rights Movement and 140 years after the last slaves were freed.  In 2006, average annual household income for whites is $49,000 while for African-Americans is just $30,134.  It is true that institutionalized discrimination, segregation, and the forced separation of families are all sad chapters in the history of how African Americans were treated in the US.  At the same time, they have received benefits like affirmative action, special scholarships, and other programs to help undo the damage previously inflicted upon them, and do have dominance in lucrative fields such as sports and music.  The examples of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Haiti, Liberia, and Africa in general make it illogical to view the US as a microcosm, and the logical conclusion becomes that African-Americans still are within the partial clutches of African cultural traits that make economic advancement difficult.  Centuries of life in the US have undone a portion of this, resulting in African Americans being far wealthier than blacks anywhere else in the world.  However, it will still take a long time for them to fully gain economic parity with whites, in the US or in any other country in the world.  The accelerating rate of change may help compress what would have previously taken centuries into mere decades, but the sheer enormity of the process of cultural transformation should not be underestimated. 

Here is an article with more details on what cultural factors result in societal failure, and much of this can be seen in African societies.

Again, this has nothing to do with skin color, and there will be many individual exceptions to the majority.  A black infant adopted by a Jewish or WASP family will achieve the same success as others of those groups, provided his childhood interactions are predominantly with others of his adoptive parents' ethnicity, rather than with poorer blacks.

Thus, the notion of 'racism' in the US is no longer an accurate one, and the concept of 'culturism' provides a better assessment of why income disparities exist between whites and blacks across and within dozens of nations today.  The evidence is overwhelming, but discussion of culturism may also become a societal taboo. 

But this concept is not complete without mention of the third type of culture that exists in the modern world : the Wheelbarrow cultures. 

When using a wheelbarrow, a person can move greater weight than without the wheelbarrow.  But when the person stops pushing it, the wheelbarrow cannot move at all.  If a person were analogous to a wheelbarrow, such a person would be capable of greatness if guided by the right people, but would achieve nothing without such mentorship.  This characteristic can even be seen in entire cultures. 

India and China are countries that as recently as the 1970s, were just as poor as most African nations.  At the same time, Indians and Chinese are the two wealthiest ethnic groups in the US, with an average educational level and household income substantially higher (greater than 1.5X) than that of whites.  This is also true of Indian and Chinese communities in Britain and Australia.  Even after adjusting for educational levels, the natural question arises about why India and China themselves are so poor despite the remarkable consistency with which their emigrants outperform the members of their new host countries. 

It appears that Indians and Chinese often succeed in corelation to the quality of their surroundings.  Speaking from direct experience, Indians tend to be people who are driven to do well when they feel they are guests in another country, and greatly fear the prospect of appearing unimpressive to non-Indians.  The subconscious need to gain the approval of white people is very important to many Indians, and I suspect the same is true for many Chinese.  When Indians are in India, on the other hand, they often default back to unsophisticated and unproductive habits, often with little interest in self-improvement or the betterment of Indian society.  Leading Indian entrepreneur Kanwal Rekhi once said, "Indians are a first-rate people in a third-rate country.  We compete with the best and brightest everywhere, but fail collectively."

Other examples abound.  Countries like Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore speeded ahead of the PRC in economic growth, despite having the same Han Chinese population, due to each having active American/British economic mentorship.  The same can even be observed in North and South Korea, where the economic disparity between the two can be described as one group of wheelbarrows being successfully pushed by the US while the other got no suitable mentorship, and thus remains Communist (a byproduct of wheelbarrows not being pushed by the right people). 

This, therefore, brings us to the final concept of this treatise, which is the "Double Wheelbarrow Effect". 

For a society with untapped wheelbarrow potential to achieve prosperity within the confines of its own culture, it becomes necessary to see examples of members of their culture doing well en masse.  This permits traditional inferiority complexes vis-a-vis whites to vanish and permit previously disenfranchised people to gather the courage to ask "Why not us?".  The prosperity of the first few wheelbarrows can then be multiplied.  This can also be called 'globalization'.

Taiwan and Hong Kong were extremely poor in the 1950s, but rapid wheelbarrow-driven growth leading to prosperity by the 1980s, combined with the Chinese-American community in the US reaching critical mass around the same time, created an army of ethnic Chinese with the knowledge and skills to rapidly expand business ties with the PRC.  So the former wheelbarrows themselves are now enabling mainland Chinese to achieve their full wheelbarrow potential.  Hence, the rapid growth of the PRC became possible when it did, and the double-wheelbarrow growth is going strong even after 20 years. 

India, unlike China, does not have the equivalent of Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore where the wheelbarrow effect could begin 20 years prior due to Chinese seeing other Chinese attaining wealth, so India had to wait for the Indian community in the US (and to a lesser degree in the UK) to achieve critical mass and visible wheelbarrow maturity.  This did not happen until the 2000s, and so the Double Wheelbarrow Effect could not benefit India until recently.  Now, India is finally growing rapidly as US corporations open divisions in India and teach Indian workers about American corporate practices, which long ago had origins in Anglo-Protestant value systems.  This Double Wheelbarrow education results in India being widely discussed in business magazines that just 10 years ago scarcely found any reasons to mention India. 

In other words :

Step 1 : Indian engineer comes to US in late 1960s/1970s, gets job, feels xenophobic, but does well in career.  Bonds with other Indians he would normally not be friends with in India. 

Step 2 : He and his friends rise to senior management or start companies, and by the 2000s, are multimillionaires. 

Step 3 : He helps his company start divisions in India, teaching Indians how productive businesses are run in America, what habits are good to develop and what traditional Indian practices should be jettisoned in the interest of producing something of value.  He meanwhile teaches white American colleagues how many opportunities exist by using what India has to offer and persuades them to invest further.

Thus, the Double Wheelbarrow Effect is what is responsible for the rise of China starting in the 1980s and India starting in the 2000s.  The conventional wisdom credits China's 1979 reforms and India's 1991 reforms, but those merely represent the locks being taken off the wheelbarrows.  The actual pushing could only have happened when it did, not sooner, due to the need of the first diaspora wheelbarrows to achieve critical mass.  But now, the double wheelbarrow tide is so strong that India and China are even devising ambitious space programs. 

I'm going to give this subject a bit more thought and make some tweaks to the article (I, too, am a wheelbarrow).  There is more to be done on this subject.

Comments

[TxBubba]

"Dinocrat" recently posted on a similar topic on how societies with sharia as the guiding law of the culture are doomed to poverty. A few years ago Ralph Peters wrote for the publication of the Army War College on the signs of failed states. Both of these articles would appear to support your assertions from slightly different viewpoints.

[jeffolie]

Culture, politics, and economics are all mixed together. One need look at the failed USSR and other communist failed nations. Capitalism and freedom reign supreme although not free from severe recessions.

[jen]

Australia and Canada are great nations with a lot of wonderful people, full of achievements. On the other hand,your reasoning is fallacious at best. Or naive to say the least. The statistics notwithstanding. And, it is not because I am Haitian. Further I am not offended by, at the very least, your seeming naivete or what you call 'lack of political correctness. You've forgotten to take into account that wealth/knowledge was transferred wholesale from Europe to Australia,Canada---two very enormous lands with enornous natural resources. ON THE OTHER HAND, Haiti was boycotted, embargoed by EUROPE and USA. Haiti stood ALONE---NOT accepted by the world of nations under European hegemony. And, unless you have thousands of people working for you as slaves, Haiti----land of the mountains----is just that-----mountains. i.e. large scale agriculture is just about impossible-----unless you have zillions of slave working for free as France did. Thus, your comparison is not quite fair. After Liberation, Haiti's growth was stunted by the European powers and USA. Australia's / Canada's was facilitated/catalyzed by Europe. Also, it does not help that France, backed by military might, extorted millions from a nascent Haiti, which plunged the country in enormous debt from which it has not recovered. Now even if one can be blinded by ethnocentrism, any numskull will admit that such a start is hardly conducive to national growth. Another, Haiti's feet were tied up at the start-line by Europe/USA. Australia's/Canada were cheered on by the Europe. We have otherwide some national achievements that may even surpass Australia /Canada: we've developped our own language, religion, and we have produced some of the most educated minds in the Americas. Even with a high illiteracy rate in beloved Haiti, the typical average educated Haitian is as or more educated than the average Westerner in Australia/Canada/ the West. Once Haiti finds a way to neutralize neocolonialism, it should be able to raise itself from the poverty you've described, and which is quite true. The promised we represented early of being a beacon is not etinguished-----it is merely dimmed. Don't count us out yet!

[GK]

jen,

Sorry, but I don't agree.

Natural resources are not the only reason for wealth. Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. have no natural resources, while Zaire, Angola, etc. have abundant resources. Look at who is poor and who is rich.

Embargos alone cannot explain why Haiti is so much poorer than *every* nation in the Americas. Cuba has had stricter embargos than Haiti, and is still much richer than Haiti.

Haiti does not even have the capability of getting tourism business that just about every other country in that region gets a lot of.

Sorry, but Haiti's poverty is due to the same reason as Africa's. Your attempt to blame the US and Europe for Haiti's poverty is merely proving my point. Haiti should, at least, be equal to Cuba, Dominica, or Jamaica.

I truly hope Haiti does rise so that the last example of extreme poverty in the Western Hemi is erased, but I don't see evidence of this yet.

[Chuck the Lucky]

Interesting post.

I would also add the "stereotype threat effect" to the analysis of culture. If the treat of re-enforcing a negative stereotype can have a significant effect on an individual's performance on tasks, it would be surprising if perceived negative stereotypes did not have a sort of breaking effect on certain cultures.

I am not arguing against your view of the importance of culture in political and economic conditions but there is also the cultural impact of colonialism and slavery itself. Countries like Canada and Australia consider themselves (due to ancestry,) descendants of colonial powers rather than victims of it. People in the nations of Africa may, to some extent, be under the impression that their post colonial performance reflects on whether or not they, in some way "deserved" to be colonized. Hence stereotype threat becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Cultures, attitudes and beliefs do not spread as fast as fashions or trends, it it true, but they are spreading faster than ever before and it does not take a wholesale change in culture to begin to see improvements. There are many countries that are far from British culture that have seen rapid progress upon the adoption of just some of the principles of free-enterprise and liberty.

[Assistant Village Idiot]

I generally disagree with jen's post, but there are important points in it. Among the interwoven cultural attributes you mention, the economic one is most important. French and Spanish colonies were far more oppressed than English ones, with the Dutch and Portuguese somewhere between. Nothing like a free market operated for most of the inhabitants.

Free markets create uneven wealth, which is what socialists dislike about it. Even in a free market, not all people can or will take advantage of it at first. For development, it is important only that some are able to partake in it by some measure of merit, rather than nepotism or violence.

Black incomes in America did not begin to rise sharply until after WWII. Many of us believe that the welfare state arrived to suck the juice out of black advancement just as the final legal protections were being put into place. History cannot be repeated, of course, so the hypothesis cannot be tested, but there is some indication of a slowing of the rate of growth of black incomes starting around 1965.

Nonetheless, there were opportunities for some, and the income of American blacks are not only higher than incomes of other blacks around the world, they are higher than Sweden's. The freeing of the market increases both conflict and cooperation in people, but cooperation far more.

I will note my subjective observation from traveling abroad. Even in the western European countries, with great advantages of education and stable culture, I do not see the gift for spontaneous organization one sees in Americans. It is not that there are no Germans or Hungarians who can rapidly adjust, but that there are fewer. Perhaps the ability is not expressed because the culture does not reward it as much.

I wish more American blacks knew how far ahead they are of virtually everyone else in this quality. People come from Eastern Europe and work hard and get ahead in all that American Dream sense, but most do not develop this ability to adjust. Their children, who grow up with it, show as much as many Americans whose families have been here longer. African-Americans have much more of this ability than they realize, because their lower starting point economically masks the ability. But American teenagers of any race can organize and divide work better than adults in most other countries. "Okay, we'll pick up the small ones while you guys all do the big ones, and Jacob will go with Livingston to get lunch for all of us, 'cuz they've got cars. When they get back, whoever is ahead will take a break and the lunch guys will help the others." Bang. Gone. Done. European children socialize and finesse their way into the solution, which takes forever.

[Richard Johnson]

Kudos on the cojones my friend, sad to say you’ll probably be made to regret this post.

Unfortunately the left has already been heading you off at the pass.

A while back the Seattle public schools posted this on its web site under “Definitions of racism”.

“Cultural Racism:

Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard, and identifying only Whites as great writers or composers.”

God knows a “future time orientation” has no known use in business.

They then took down the statement when they were made to look like fools in the press and replaced it with a statement that included this lovely little bit of a priori:

“Our intention is not to put up additional barriers or develop an “us against them” mindset,
nor is it to continue to hold onto unsuccessful concepts such as a melting pot or colorblind mentality.”

- Caprice D. Hollins, Psy.D.

Not to discourage you Jen, but ya gotta know what your up against.

[Richard Johnson]

Woops that should be:

Not to discourage you GK

Preview and I need to be better friends.

[Tushar D]

GK, I don't know whether you are familliar with Cricket, but you aggresively played it on the front foot and hit a straight drive over the pavillion. The umpire raises two hands in the air. Six!

[GK]

Tushar,

Thanks. My hope is that the Double Wheelbarrow Effect causes Indian psychology to adapt so that Bollywood films become more intellectually deep and marketable to worldwide audiences and Indian cricket becomes more competitive.

For example, Dennis Lillee has been training Indians in the art of fast bowling in Chennai for 20 years. However, only one or two decent fast bowlers have emerged in that time, and certainly none of Lillee's calibre. The wheelbarrow effect did not materialize as it was a single wheelbarrow effect. However, the *Double* Wheelbarrow Effect of the now wealthy Indian diaspora could cause more money and more aggressive psychology to pervade across India, resulting in (finally) better cricketers after 2010.

Pakistan benefitted from the Double Wheelbarrow Effect in fast bowling (but nothing else) much earlier, where a UK-Oxford educated Imran Khan played county cricket, brought his knowledge to Pakistan, and created Wasim, Waqar, etc. who were from humble backgrounds and would never have been noticed if not for Imran scouting alleys and villages for talent. All these people are from Lahore which is right on the Indian border, and hence there is no genetic difference. It is a psychological one, with Pathan/Punjabi wheelbarrow psychology benefitting from the infusion of UK country cricket that Imran brought to push the wheelbarrows.

The Lillee vs. Imran single vs. double wheelbarrow distinction is critical but often unnoticed.

Just one of many, many examples that exist in the world...

[FabioC.]

I think you're a bit too quick to dismiss the influence of communist dictatorships. Under those, citizens could not start business or organize in any form not approved by the state. Mao tried the "cultural revolution" to erase the previous Chinese culture and replace it with his own form of communism - and I think he suceeded in part.

[Tushar D]

Double wheelbarrow. I am starting to like that term. Good example, GK.

[ooo]

GK, good stuff, as usual. Is your contact info up anywhere on your blog? A yahoo or gmail addy?

[GK]

ooo,

What would you like to discuss?

[Josh]

At least two easily identifiable fallacies in this post:

(1) There is no such thing as "African culture." Africa is a continent, not a country or ethnic group.

(2) Correlation is not causation. It is insufficient to simply point out that countries with large numbers of people with African descent remain poor to prove your thesis. This finding is consistent with a number of explanations, not just the "culture" thesis. You need to identify those aspects of "African culture" that allegedly contribute to this poor performance.

[GK]

Josh,

There is no such thing as "African culture." Africa is a continent, not a country or ethnic group.

It doesn't need to be. There are many languages, peoples, and tribes across sub-Saharan Africa, but almost all exhibit some common traits.

Just like Western Europeans have many differences, but many similarities as well. As do the people of India.

This finding is consistent with a number of explanations, not just the "culture" thesis.

Like what?

[Josh]

It doesn't need to be. There are many languages, peoples, and tribes across sub-Saharan Africa, but almost all exhibit some common traits.

And which traits shared by people of African descent throughout the world have caused them to lag behind peoples of other backgrounds in wealth development?

This finding is consistent with a number of explanations, not just the "culture" thesis.

Like what?

Other theses that could possibly explain these phenomena is that the impact of colonialism was more severe of African descent. And of course a theory of inherent racial inferiority would explain this phenomenon as well. I'm not suggesting either of these theories are correct, I'm simply pointing out that a case for the culture thesis needs to explain why it is better than other explanations at explaining the phenomenon. This post essentially just identifies the phenomenon and then jumps to the conclusion that the cause must be culture, without providing an independent argument in support of the culture thesis. As suggested above, some plausible examples of the "African" cultural traits that allegedly differ from the cultural traits of more successful ethnic groups would make this argument more persuasive.

[Vikram]

I'd like to point out that there were (and are) wealthy Indian industrialists (for. eg Tata and Godrej) even in colonial India. For that matter there have always been many visibly wealthy, successful people in India, but there was no wheelbarrow effect. It was simply because usually the means for attaining success are good health and education, which were denied to most Indians due to colonialism, caste system and other social flaws.

There have actually been successfully Indians in America for a really long time (eg. Amar Bose (b. 1929)) but economic growth there accelerated only after 1991. post the collapse of the Soviet Union (socialist's India's major political and economic partner) and market reforms.

I thus believe your wheelbarrow theory does not have any rational grounds, it is pure speculation.

I'd also like to hear you answer Josh's query on what particular African cultural traits make them unproductive.

[GK]

Vikram,

I'd like to point out that there were (and are) wealthy Indian industrialists (for. eg Tata and Godrej) even in colonial India.

These are anecdotal examples, and indicative of nothing at the macro level. Africa has industrialists too. It is the average that matters, and until the 1980s, India's average household prosperity level was on par with most of Africa.

There have actually been successfully Indians in America for a really long time (eg. Amar Bose (b. 1929))

He too achieved success in the 1970s and later, along the same time as other early Indians in the US. This example proves my point, rather than yours.

Surely you know that as recently as 1980, there were only 250,000 Indians in the US, vs. 2.4 million in 2006 (minors included in both numbers).

Your counterargument is weak if anecdotal points are all you can provide, particularly when you also provide no alternative reason why India was one of the world's poorest countries, despite the success they achieved in favorable foreign systems (usually Anglo-Protestant ones).

I'd also like to hear you answer Josh's query on what particular African cultural traits make them unproductive.

Re-read the article, and the links contained within. The answer is provided.

[Vikram]

These are anecdotal examples, and indicative of nothing at the macro level.

Your thesis was that a 'visible' wealthy class (apparently of ones own race) motivates the lower classes of the same race to work hard and achieve success. Tata and Godrej were very successful Indians, visible to the masses (watch Hindi movies from the 50's onwards) but we achieved no success as a people till recently.

particularly when you also provide no alternative reason why India was one of the world's poorest countries

I did mention colonialism, caste system and other social flaws, read my post carefully.

Re-read the article, and the links contained within. The answer is provided.

I agree with a lot of what your sources say, regarding the restrictions on free flow of info. , subjugation of women etc. but these were flaws present in American and English societies even in the early 20th century (American women earned the right to vote only in the 1920s and Christainlity is still a powerful force in America). All cultures have flaws. To claim that these flaws are inherent in African culture is fallacious, you will have to prove it if you want to claim it.

[GK]

Vikram,

(American women earned the right to vote only in the 1920s and Christainlity is still a powerful force in America).

Protestant Christianity is one of the many reasons America, Australia, and the UK became powerful. Show me one Christian-majority nation that does not allow equal voting rights for women. Plus, 1920 was still earlier than just about any other country, regarding women's voting rights.

Your anti-Christian statement is uninformed and biased.

The flaws within African culture are numerous, and explained already. If you doubt it, you may want to consider investing on one of those 'URGENT and CONFIDENTIAL' email business ventures. A brief review of Kofi Annan's ethical history will reveal a similar pattern of behavior as the email entrepreneurs.

You, in turn, have not offered any alternative explanation for their collective failure.

[Josh]

If you doubt it, you may want to consider investing on one of those 'URGENT and CONFIDENTIAL' email business ventures.

Nigerian scammers? That's your evidence? I suppose we are to conclude that Americans are culturally inferior, since we see a lot of ads for snake-oil "performance" pills from Americans in our inboxes.

As for the "Seven Factors," which is the only attempt at identifying the cultural traits I asked for, they appear generally applicable to many different cultures. Subjugation of women is still common in Asian cultures, for example, and I'm sure you'll agree that China restricts the free flow of information. So none of these are specifically "African", and thus your thesis remains insufficiently supported to be persuasive.

[Jumper]

I would have to agree with the article - Africans posess many unsavory traits.

1. Africans steal money from each other and from trusting foreigners. They know nothing about honest business, only scamming.

2. Africans are bloodthirstly, readily jumping at any excuse to commit an atrocity. Africans who are superficially Muslims revel in the violent aspects of Islam - stoning, beheading, genital mutilation - but never actually, say, read scriptures or pray (these non-violent activities don't appeal to Africans).

3. Africans invariably find increasingly grotesque ways in which to behave in an animalistic manner. Cannibalism was practiced by heads of state like Idi Amin and Mobuto Sese Seko. Liberian political leaders routinely torture and mutilate each other.

4. AIDS is far more prevalent in Africa than anywhere else due to the high incidence of Sodomy in Africa. Far more than anywhere else.

[Anand]

I totally agree with your wheelbarrow effect. But I fail to understand how you can say that Indians' mentality has changed? There is still only a very miniscule section of Indian society that dreams big .The sucess of the BPO's has been hyped beyond anything.India may rule in the IT sector worldwide presently but its just a temporary phase. atleast until the babus remain our politicians.

[GK]

Anand,

Good question. Irrespective of the IT industry, throughout India, the spread of the information age has created a huge generation gap. Go to almost any family outside of the top 1% elites, and the young children (age 10-17) are much sharper than their parents. They are web savvy, have much better English, etc. There is a gigantic intellectual jump. When these kids become adults, India becomes a different country. They don't have to all work in IT. Their intelleutual progress can apply to all spheres.

In America, by contrast, the people aged 45-60 are already quite modern, and so are much less behind their own children in terms of 21st century skills.

[World Citizen]

I agree, Culture is the key, not the race.

In US, nowadays, I feel more irrational racism coming from African-American people, then from "whites". It's like the coin was flipped the other side...

[GK]

Wow, I actually agree with "World Citizen" 100% this time.

[john]

So why is the outcome of the two populations of African origin so incredibly worse than that of the two populations of Anglo-Saxon Protestant origin?

One word : Culture.

The fact that you believe you can condense the solution to such a complex topic, which involves an unimaginably large set of variables into a single word is absurd. The fact that you seem to be so thoroughly assured of the validity of your contentions just makes the matter even worse. I do agree that culture plays an undeniable role in shaping the economic fate of a region; however, claiming to have identified the root of of the issue with so little research is idiotic. What you've posted here is weakly supported conjecture at best.

People devote lifetimes to studying questions like these, and I can only hope that unlike you, those people have the humility to concede that whatever conclusions they reach are not necessarily correct.

The need to gain the approval of white people is very important to many Indians, and I suspect the same is true for many Chinese.

I find the notion that Indian and Chinese immigrants are motivated to succeed in order to "gain the approval of white people" to be misguided and condescending beyond words. While again, the point you raised might play a minuscule role in a much larger equation, there is much, much more going on than you seem to realize. To begin with, I suspect that many immigrant families who succeed in the United States come from successful families with productive habits.

[GK]

however, claiming to have identified the root of of the issue with so little research is idiotic.

Do you also dispute this article from a known expert?

People devote lifetimes to studying questions like these,

As have I.

I find the notion that Indian and Chinese immigrants are motivated to succeed in order to "gain the approval of white people"

Unlike you, I am Indian, and I have seen this first-hand for decades.

I suspect that many

Some do, but I know many that do not. Plus, you said "suspect". How can you possibly claim your research is anywhere near as thorough as mine?

It seems you are the one guilty of conjecture, rather than me.

Plus, to start your very first post with personal attacks is evidence of a belief system based on emotion rather than logic and reason. This is proven by your lack of compelling counterpoints.

[boris]

A possible alternative explanation to "succeed in order to gain approval" is they come from long term cultures and can adapt to take advantage of a better performing one. When they return they can install the performance modifications in their own to achieve similar results.

A culture-tech version converting older vintage autos into hot rods.

[zyndryl]

I know that this is about a year too late. But I'd like to provide some empirical evidence that counters John's "...notion that Indian and Chinese immigrants are motivated to succeed in order to "gain the approval of white people" to be misguided and condescending beyond words"

In India, there is a thriving market for 'whitening' or bleaching products for a woman's skin. There is a great social push for women to be more 'fair' or white. It has gotten so bad that women have been damaging their skin with some of the more extreme 'products', just as our drive for thin women have pushed women into anorexia and bulimia.

This also exists in my wife's home country, The Philippines, where only 3-4% of the population is descended from Europeans (mostly spanish) but that 3-4% dominates 99% of the media jobs (news anchors, talk show and game show hosts and acting).

Also in the Philippines, pedigree forgery is quite a going business as well, for the same reasons.

In both cases, this has been attributed by sociologists as traits of a colonial mentality. I also have quite a few anecdotal stories of myself seeing this close up during my various trips to the Philippines and interactions with my wife even here in the US.

My favorite one was my wife telling me how she and her friends would believe what they read in the National Enquirer because it was an American newspaper and so they didn't want to risk looking stupid by questioning what was in it.
After all -- it was American.

Article on Bleaching in India:
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1308/context/archive

Article on Colonial Mentaility:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_mentality#The_Indian_Subcontinent

Oh, and John - you remind me of the people living in the Bubble City in the film Logan's Run, who didn't have to deal with the reality of how the world really was until the dome collapsed and they had to evacuate. You need to get out more.

[GK]

zyndryl,

It is true. In Korea, Japan, and now China, there it is common for women to get eye-widening surgery.

The cosmetic pressure to look 'white' affects women a lot more than men, though, whether it be Indians trying to lighten their skin, Koreans widening their eyes, etc.