Quanyu Huang’s new book, “The Hybrid Tiger: Secrets of the Extraordinary Success of Asian-American Kids,” may sound like yet another flogging for hapless Western parents, but it’s not.The same issue has another review:
You can’t blame American mothers for still smarting from Amy Chua’s best-selling 2011 book, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother.” In breathtaking and bold calligraphic strokes, she laid out her argument: American parents overindulge their children, allowing them sleepovers, video games and laughable extracurricular activities like playing Villager Number Six in the school play, as they collect trophies for being themselves in a self-esteem-centered culture. By contrast, Chinese parents strictly limit television, video games and socializing, accept no grades but A’s and insist on several hours a day of violin and piano practice, regardless of their children’s complaints. As a result, Chinese-parented kids play Carnegie Hall at 14, get perfect scores in science and math, and gain early admission to Harvard while their floundering American counterparts wonder what on earth hit them. ...
Triumphantly, the Chinese predicted that in 20 years China would lead the world in science and technology, and America would sink like Atlantis, a conclusion horrified American delegates agreed with. But no. Even today, while Chinese students still excel in test-taking, China has yet to produce a single Nobel Prize winner in the sciences or a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates (although, of course, American computer parts are made in China).
Parenthood as we know it — predicated on the unconditional exaltation of our children — is no more than 70 years old, and it has gone through radical readjustments over the past two generations. As children went from helping on the farm to being the focus of relentless cosseting, they shifted “from being our employees to our bosses,” Jennifer Senior observes in her trenchant and engrossing first book, “All Joy and No Fun: The Paradox of Modern Parenthood.” Senior, a contributing editor at New York magazine, examines what it means to be a parent, through interviews with a handful of families who are neither typical nor extraordinary. ...The review says the new Tiger mom book is boring, and you can get the gist of it from reading the freely available synopsis.
Senior quotes the sociologist Viviana A. Zelizer, who describes today’s children as “economically worthless but emotionally priceless.” Senior explains: “Every debate we have had about the role of parents — whether they should be laissez-faire or interventionist ‘Tiger Moms,’ attachment-oriented or partial to the rigors of tough love — can be traced back to the paring down of mothers’ and fathers’ traditional roles.”
I don't think that there is any proof that any of these parenting philosophies are better than any other. I have my preferences, but I believe that parents should be able to use their own judgment.
Other reviews more directly accused racism. The London Daily Mail:
She gained notoriety in 2011 as the uncompromising 'Tiger Mom' - boastful that Chinese mothers make better parents and ultimately have more successful children.From Salon mag:
Now though, Amy Chau [sic, should be Chua], 51, has inspired the fury of the public on Twitter with her new controversial theory that some races and religions are just superior to everyone else.
Dubbed 'simply racist' by one commentor on Twitter, another pulled no punches and called her a 'full blown eugenics pushing racist!'
Yale Law professor Amy Chua, who would live in obscurity among the general public if it weren’t for her persona as the disgustingly smug Tiger Mom, is trolling America with yet anotherFrom Time mag:
theorypersonal rant about her cultural superiority. Two years after releasing “The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” a great step-by-step manual for parents who want to systematically weed out any genuine interest or passion for life that their children might innately have, Chua is releasing a book co-written with fellow Yale professor and husband Jed Rubenfeld called, “The Triple Package.”
In it, Chua and Rubenfeld use what reviewer Maureen Callahan calls “specious stats and anecdotal evidence” to argue that Jewish, Indian, Chinese, Iranian, Lebanese-Americans, Nigerians, Cuban exiles and Mormons are superior to other races or cultures, and “everyone else is contributing to the downfall of America.”
“The Triple Package” is not evidence of a “new racism.” It’s the same old garbage, in a slightly different, Ivy League-endorsed disguise.I agree that it is not new racism. Chinese and Jews have been preoccupied with racial issues for all of recorded issues. For example:
In the 20th century, the social and cultural critic Lu Xun commented that, "throughout the ages, Chinese have had only two ways of looking at foreigners, up to them as superior beings or down on them as wild animals."And Jews play identity politics more than any other group. Just google it for details, if you want.
Update: Here is a current example of a prominent Jewish US Senator (Chuck Schumer) making racist arguments to support Jewish identity politics.