US scholar: Do Indians truly have an edge over Chinese in America?

I recently came across a Chinese-language article that delves into the cultural differences between Indians and Chinese in the West. It attempts to explain why Indians are more integrated into British and American society, producing numerous CEOs, engaging in politics, and seamlessly holding high government positions in the UK and the US. 

The article highlights factors such as Indians’ beliefs, acceptance of internal hierarchies, obsession with “management”, recognition of Western mainstream civilisation, and mutual support within their community. All these explain the seemingly pervasive and often perplexing notion that “Indians have done better than Chinese in America”.

Amid my studies and publishing research on the dissemination of Indian Buddhist Jataka tales in China, I often marvel at the imagination of ancient Indians — especially in anthropomorphising animals — and the depth and richness of early Buddhist theories, which surpass ancient Chinese thoughts in many aspects. 

Even the occasional folk stories involving animals recorded in Xuanzang’s The Great Tang Dynasty Record on the Western Regions (《大唐西域記》) often carry connotations far more profound and complex than similar ancient Chinese legends. Chinese people must also acknowledge that Indian culture, including music, dance and Buddhism, has had a far greater influence on ancient Chinese culture than vice versa. 

For instance, the character of Sun Wukong in Journey to the West was created based on the Indian concept of a monkey capable of infinite transformations. Such monkey figures are ubiquitous in the Indian cultural sections of major British and American museums.

However, merely emphasising the success of Indian politicians and CEOs in the contemporary West risks leading the Chinese to disregard their strengths, foster excessive introspection, or even convince themselves that they must compete with Indians in the political and economic arenas in order to be deemed “successful”. 

I believe that such comparisons ultimately offer no solutions as they overlook the significant differences between Chinese and Indian cultures, the uniqueness of Chinese history, and the true strengths of the Chinese.

First, after recognising the strengths of Indian culture in religion and the arts, we should appreciate the advantages of Chinese culture in historical awareness. 

Indian culture is known for excelling in metaphysical thought but being prudent in historical recording. The Chinese not only have a very long tradition of historical writing but also instinctively use methods of preserving historical memory to uphold its national identity and memory in British and American communities. 

When I visited San Francisco’s Chinatown in early 2024, I noticed a privately built Chinese American history museum — unfortunately, it was temporarily closed for renovations so I could not explore further. 

On my most recent summer trip to Manhattan’s Chinatown in New York City, I noticed a small, clean, elegant and meticulously curated and managed Chinese history museum amid the bustling commercial environment. While the museum’s exhibition text described the discrimination and humiliation endured by Chinese people, it more so emphasised their resilience and adaptability. 

When introducing chop suey, the text stated, “The marginalised and discriminated Chinese people have always struggled to survive... The Chinese thus used chop suey to attract curious tourists to this economically marginalized slum [Chinatown].” 

One section was particularly moving, as it prominently displayed the phrase “The rising spirit” (自强不息) in both Chinese and English. We see here that the relationship between the Chinese and British-American societies has always been tense. 

The earliest Chinese immigrants were those who were already geographically and economically on the periphery in their homeland, yet they were bold and adaptable. They endured hardship and resistance in their struggle to survive on the margins of Western society, and established themselves through the “abiding spirit of self-strengthening” (my interpretation of 自强不息).

The Chinese sensitivity to their history does not stop at their emphasis on establishing museums to preserve memory. Even Chinese American congresswoman Grace Meng was spurred to push for the establishment of a national Asian Pacific American history museum in Washington, D.C. 

This sensitivity is also reflected in the statue of Lin Zexu, a relatively non-controversial historical figure, erected in Manhattan’s Chinatown, where he is cleverly positioned as a “world pioneer in drug prohibition” rather than an anti-British “national hero” of China. This flexibility in cultural definition also explains how the Chinese can create new dishes like “General Tso’s chicken” that became widely popular in America.

It is because of this strong sense of history, dedication to memory, and deep analysis of reality that many Chinese writers, such as Ha Jin and Li Yiyun, who were not born in America and for whom English is not their native language, can still create literature in English and make their mark in the literary world. 

Chinese-born filmmakers such as Ang Lee and Chloé Zhao can accurately capture and artistically present American society in their film also because of this in-depth analysis of American society. The position of Chinese and East Asians as outsiders in the American racial landscape and their efforts to adapt have also led Korean writers to deeply reflect on their experiences in their works.

I am not suggesting that these achievements are necessarily superior to those of Indian Americans, but it is because of the difficult and complex relationship between East Asians and British-American societies and the sense of alienation and introspection among East Asians that profound works are created. These are achievements that Chinese and East Asians should be proud of. 

Director Ang Lee successfully used the universal language of film to shoot movies like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon to reflect universal human dilemmas, with the three female characters in the film symbolising three moral images and life choices. 

Indeed, Chinese mainland directors such as Zhang Yimou and Jia Zhangke; Taiwanese directors such as Hou Hsiao-hsien and Edward Yang; and Hong Kong directors such as Wong Kar-wai and Fruit Chan, can repeatedly generate attention and discussion in Western film circles and academia as a result of being deeply rooted in local experiences and consciousness. I have observed many discussions of their films in American Asian Studies conferences. 

Actors such as Donnie Yen, Michelle Yeoh, Jackie Chan and Tony Leung, who create countless classic characters in a Sino-Western cultural environment, also stand tall in the world of cinema. 

Frankly, these achievements are incomparable to Bollywood. An American colleague, whose research had nothing to do with China, once enthusiastically exclaimed that Gong Li is “China’s Meryl Streep”, someone who can give an amazing performance in any role. She also remarked that the character Jade Fox in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon was like a “witch”, showing the deep impression Chinese-language films have made on her.

Second, if we broaden our perspective beyond politicians and entrepreneurs, we must acknowledge that Chinese culture’s “influence” on America is multi-faceted and broad. 

When my family and I dined at a Michelin-starred Cantonese dim sum restaurant in Manhattan in July, we saw a white American tour guide introducing a small group of American tourists to dim sum, explaining its features and eating methods for an hour while they ate. 

The guide introduced himself as a Cantonese speaker from New Jersey, where the culture is “very diverse”. In Manhattan’s Chinatown, we also saw other tour groups led by white Americans instead of ethnic Chinese. 

Even cultural enclaves like Chinatown have enormous appeal despite being far removed from China and often being seen as dirty and chaotic by many mainland Chinese tourists. 

During this year’s Lunar New Year in Cleveland, Ohio, I watched a lion dance performance and was surprised to find that the lion dance team members were not Chinese but American enthusiasts. 

After living in America for over two decades, I do not feel that Indian cuisine and culture have such widespread appeal. While I am a fan of Indian restaurants, objectively speaking, Indian cuisine does not have the same influence in America as Chinese cuisine. 

Perhaps various forms of expression, whether in cooking or the arts, are something Chinese truly excel at.

Third, East Asians are not merely diligent workers. If we look at politicians and CEOs, we must acknowledge that East Asians, particularly the first generation, face the difficult challenge of verbal expression because English is not their native language.

Additionally, I’ve found that Indian colleagues and second-generation Indian Americans are generally outgoing, talkative and enthusiastic. This contrasts with East Asians, who are usually calm and reserved — an additional challenge in Western society.

Being outgoing and articulate certainly aids in Western-style management and public debate. However, the Chinese American History Museum in Manhattan challenges the simplistic stereotype of Chinese Americans as a gentle and compliant “model minority”.

Furthermore, contrary to the stereotype that Chinese people work silently, I have encountered activists who protest, question and advocate within the framework of American law and government behaviour in various ways. 

I have deeply felt that the “problem” with Chinese people is not in overcoming meekness, but in being critical and seeking change outwardly. Because of the significant differences between Eastern and Western cultures, many Chinese have experienced clashes with the American system, leading some to quit or be forced to leave. Indeed, the Chinese cultural gene contains a pursuit of equality, fairness, justice and independent judgement.

Of course, when the mainstream system is overwhelmingly dominant, silence and compliance are certainly wise, and criticism and advocacy may be dangerous and unwelcome. In this context, we must admit that the “success” of Indians, aside from their natural linguistic and cultural advantages, is also due to their active participation in and alignment with upper-level management in a socio-political sense.

Many Chinese people’s frustrations in America stem from their position as critics of the system from the “outside”. In this context, even politicians like Andrew Yang can be seen as alternative thinkers.

During the September 11 attacks, the first person to alert the ground was the brave and calm Chinese American flight attendant Betty Ann Ong (邓月薇). Similarly, the legendary Chinese labourer Dean Lung (丁龙), who worked in the US as a servant, made a generous donation that helped set up Columbia University’s Chinese studies programme in 1902. The donation fund and the chair were named after him, a legacy that continues to this day. 

From a class-based perspective, it is because Chinese culture endows every individual with equal moral power and a sense of obligation that led to the emergence of figures like Dean Lung, a labourer who reshaped American higher education.

Fourth, if to some extent the experiences and mental journeys of overseas immigrants reflect the position and cultural situation of their motherland in the world, this indeed also explains why India is not perceived as a threat by the West. I believe that it neither possesses the strength nor the will to be considered a “threat”. 

Influenced by a traditional culture that accepts fate at lower levels and a colonial culture of Westernisation at higher levels, contemporary India struggles to question the modern world order and create something uniquely its own. 

Consequently, they remain in the shadow of the Western English-speaking world, achieving a “half-trusted” status as a “semi-insider”. They secure a prominent position by participating in the game set by the dominant culture and skillfully navigating between major powers under a non-aligned foreign policy. This approach is certainly comfortable and safe.

Winning such “trust” is a good thing. However, due to the differences between East Asian cultural traditions and the West, along with the active, enterprising historical tradition of the Chinese people — who do not accept fate, pursue equality and maintain individual self-awareness while adapting, self-examining and critiquing — it remains challenging for both those in China and Chinese communities in the UK and the US to achieve full recognition under the influence of a dominant yet distinct “other”.

However, to borrow from a scholar in Indian subaltern studies, has India, despite its Americanised CEOs and position in the lower-middle tiers of the global political economy, truly “spoken for itself” on the world stage?

This year, I met a businesswoman in Taipei who returned to Taiwan after a 20-year stint in the UK. Throughout our conversation, I sensed that she was not at all “Westernised” and still very much a “Chinese person”, filled with scrutiny and criticism of the West. 

Similarly, I have a long-time Hong Kong friend who studied, worked, married and struggled in the UK for over 20 years, yet still takes pride and joy in being able to return to Hong Kong after achieving professional success in the UK. 

Thus, even if we do not judge who is better, we must acknowledge the difference. If the differences between the East and West are so great, and the experiences of Chinese and Indian immigrants are so distinct, with their motherlands’ fates also being so starkly different, then the Chinese cannot emulate the Indians; although they can consider the Indians’ strengths. 

The Chinese can only recognise these differences, discover and enhance their strengths, and develop themselves as individuals. Overthinking, excessive self-examination and comparison, especially in terms of the number of politicians and CEOs, will only lead to the old Chinese trap of “blaming oneself too much.”

Related: Price of the American dream: Do immigrants have to forget their past? | Have Chinese Americans fallen behind Indian Americans in the business and political fields?