Why Is Individuality More Important Than Nationality

Although one’s racial and ethnic identities are predetermined due to genetics, attachment to a particular culture is not a birthright; one has to accept and understand the community in order to fully identify with it. When Robert Chang writes “one is not born Asian American, one becomes one”, he means just that. In Chang’s opinion, having Asian blood and living on American soil is not sufficient to call oneself Asian American, but the connection to the community allows one claim to the title.

Within a single culture there are differences based on religion, politics, nationality, race, and ideology that go largely unassumed by its members. This leads to people defining others in ways that are entirely inaccurate. Members of these imagined communities who live without their identities being recognized by the larger majority are very similar to the subordinate, more “primitive” cultures that exist in the world in the sense that most of the time, they go unacknowledged by larger, more advanced powers. When these subsidiary entities are unable to make themselves known, they simply become easily influenced by higher powers since they tend to become “a quiescent, ignorant, manipulable electorate” (Pratt, 510). It is vital that these marginalized peoples learn to make themselves heard, for there are many principles and ideas that can be learnt from them.

Many new arrivals still struggle to survive and often Chinese Americans still encounter suspicion and hostility. Chinese Americans have achieved great success and now, like so many others, they are stitching together a new American identity. As Michelle Ling, a young Chinese American, tells Bill Moyers in Program 3, “I get to compose my life one piece at a time, however I feel like it. Not to say that it’s not difficult and that there isn’t challenge all the time, but more than material wealth, you get to choose what you are, who you are.” (www.pbs.org)

In this essay, I attempted to lay bare the issues of being an Asian-American and being labeled as an ethnic “other” in modern America. This label of “other” causes them to become marginalized and lose their sense of identity, belonging neither to Western culture nor Eastern culture. In order help stop this loss of identity in Asian-Americans, we must tear down the social construct of the “other” and integrate the different cultures into the melting pot of popular culture. Once we have stopped alienating different cultures, we can then have a moral society that upholds diversity and identity.

“The Danger of a Dominant Identity,” discusses what one columnist believes to be one of the largest problems facing America today. David Brooks, a columnist for the New York Times, argues that reducing people to nothing more than a label with a singular identity is one of the largest problems America faces. Through the appropriate use of rhetorical appeals, David Brooks writes an effective article by informing and firmly convincing the reader of the danger in viewing others as one-sided.

In David Brooks’ “People Like Us” passage on the issue of diversity, Brooks takes a personally emotional perspective of the way in which Americans don’t appreciate how diverse our nation is while “relatively homogeneous” (Brooks 136). His argument is weakened, however, through a bias and hypocrisy that his diction conveys. He claims that grouping ourselves with those who we are most alike is in our nature to, and in doing so, we separate ourselves from those who are different. Using certain statistics as evidence, Brooks points out that the social segmentation created by society will always exist.

Richard Rodriguez's essay “Blaxicans and Other Reinvented Americans” reinforces the idea that race does not identify a person, culture is what defines a person and should be used to identify someone. Richard Rodriguez was in church listening when “[These people] were being welcomed into a new community for a reason of culture” (Rodriguez 90). Culture is being welcomed in church and other people are being nice enough to welcome a person just by their culture and traditions. Rodriguez’s considers himself Chinese because of that fact that he answered a survey with the following “I answered that I am Chinese, and that is because I live in a Chinese city and because I want to be Chinese. ”(Rodriguez 91).

America is a melting pot of different people, culture, and religion. Although there are millions of different people from different parts of the world, it 's citizens would like to appear united and patriotic. To foreigners, every person living in the United States is an American; however, within the country, there are divisions among the society through a concept called race. No citizen calls themselves an American to another American. The individual labels themselves "Hispanics, Asians, [or] Africans," (Rodriguez 119). America may appear uniform, yet it’s citizens seem to want individuality. And here is the paradox: those same citizens also detest the concept of race. When one is deemed by society as different because they are unable to be labeled, the individual hates this sense of distinctiveness. Richard Rodriguez 's memoir, Brown: The Last Discovery of America, discusses this peculiar concept of race by appealing to the reader 's pathos and logos in order for one to obtain a greater understanding of the idea.

Culture Richard Rodriguez’s essay “Blaxicans and Other Reinvented Americans” claims utilizing race as a basis for identifying American is not valid, culture should be what defines a person’s identity. Rodriguez emphasizes how he “declares himself as a Chinese because he lives in a culture of a Chinese city” (Rodriguez 91). This demonstrates how Rodriguez is involved with cultures of many different races, including the Chinese. Because he lives in San Francisco where there is many Chineses around him, he see’s himself as part of Chinese. The essay also mentioned that “[Rodriguez] come to the individuals as having multiple cultures, such as being a Chinese person” (Rodriquez, 92).

Mark Lilla’s argument in The End of Identity Liberalism definitely recognizes the underlying problem in the “success story” (Lilla 1) of the American diversity: a lack of unifying force (Lilla 1). However, it seems to be too arbitrary to deduce from the defects of identity liberalism that the possible solution is only an either-or choice: the necessity of a unifying force should predicate the end of identity liberalism. The end of identity liberalism will come at some time, but today must not be the time. The end of identity liberalism should be based upon universally equal acceptance and representation of different individuals, a point that is ignored by Lilla in his argument.

Turner and Roosevelt’s writings focus on the importance of a national identity, rather than the individual’s ethnic or cultural identity. America is a melting pot, comprised of immigrants from Europe and Asia. These people are urged to let go of their individual identities and become “Americanized”. Both Turner and Roosevelt write that there is no room for anything other than an American national identity. In their writings, Turner and Roosevelt show very little tolerance for the week of mind and spirit. Roosevelt states in American Ideals that “the mighty tide of immigration to our shores has brought in its train much of good and much of evil; and whether the good or the evil shall predominate depends mainly on whether these newcomers

Gene Luen Yang’s novel, the American Born Chinese is the story of a young boy called Jin Wang of Chinese American descent. Wang is struggling with the identity of his ethnicity. The central message that the author wishes to pass across is to encourage young people to embrace their identities and desist from judging people based on their culture, race, and appearance. Throughout the whole story, the main players experience lack of self-acceptance because of the treatments they receive from the society. Ironically, this is the same society that should accept them as part of its own.

SCENARIO - Involving new hire paralegal Carl and the law firm Dewey, Dewey and Howe.

Culture is often a large part of someone’s life and character, which leads to it being a large part of a person’s identity. Amy Tan makes this change explicit through her use of perspective with her characters. One such example is Waverly’s change in identity through culture. As a young child, she starts off ambitious and has a great desire to play and improve at chess. This intense ambition heavily reflects Chinese culture, as ambition and the desire to be the best is stressed in China. Her mother even goes as far as to say “Chinese people do business, do medicine, do painting. Not lazy like American people” (91 Tan). Since Lindo grew up in China, her culture is almost entirely Chinese, and it shows her ambition to be greater than the competition. Waverly grew up with this ambition, because of her Chinese roots and heritage. Her ambition drove her to give up everything for chess, and she only “went to school, then directly home to learn new chess secrets, cleverly sealed advantages, more escape routes” (98 Tan). Waverly constructs her daily life around perfecting her craft, and her devotion to the game of chess. Her extreme ambition mirrors that of typical Chinese culture. Her ambition fades though, as she loses connection to her Chinese culture. They often lose most of their original culture, although “They are allowed to retain certain particularistic traits from the old culture. Such traits are, however, themselves modified in their transplantation to American society” (197 Source 1). The very few, modified traits that they keep pale in comparison to the amount of new cultural influence they face. The result is that of Waverly: a loss of traits that are connected to the original culture. Losing these traits while at the same time gaining new ones change an individual's identity, which is a direct effect of immigration as a

Would you ever vote for a candidate simply because they came from the same ethnic background as you, even without knowing any of their political views? In the article “When ‘Identity Politics’ Is Rational,” written by Stanley Fish, a strong argument is made explaining and defending instances where identity politics is used and why it is important that citizens understand that it exists. Identity politics is when a candidate is only supported because of his or her identity, not their political views or beliefs. Through Fish’s mixed use of logical reasoning, somewhat strong reliability and a minor use of emotional appeal, he is able to construct a solid argument as to when identity politics are appropriate. Fish explains a multitude of examples in a cogent manner that allows the reader to easily follow along. He then continues by using credible evidence, which he provides citations for, that add an immense amount of validity to his article.However he does also make certain assumptions that he does not provide evidence for. Fish also includes a subtle amount of emotion that grasps the reader and pulls them deeper into the article. Fish argues that certain cases exist where identity politics is valid and appropriate, however, depending on the way one understands the definition of identity politics, it can be used in a way that it incorrect and biased.