阿德里安·德莱昂

From “yellow peril” to “model minority” to the “Chinese virus，” Asian Americans have long been considered as a threat to a nation that promoted a whites-only immigration policy. 從所谓“黄祸”到“模范少数族裔”再到“中国病毒”，在推崇“仅限白人”移民政策的美国，亚裔美国人始终被认为是这个国度的威胁。

In a recent Washington Post op-ed， former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang called upon Asian Americans to become part of the solution against COVID-19. In the face of rising anti-Asian racist actions—now at about 100 reported cases per day—Yang implores Asian Americans to “wear red， white， and blue1” in their efforts to combat the virus.

Optimistically， before Donald Trump declared COVID-19 as the “Chinese virus，” Yang believed that “getting the virus under control” would rid this country of its anti-Asian racism. But Asian American history， my field of research， suggests a sobering reality.

A history of anti-Asian racism

Up until the eve of the COVID-19 crisis， the prevailing narrative about Asian Americans was one of the model minority. The model minority concept， developed during and after World War II， posits that Asian Americans were the ideal immigrants of color to the United States due to their economic success.

But in the United States， Asian Americans have long been considered as a threat to a nation that promoted a whites-only immigration policy. They were called a “yellow peril”： unclean and unfit for citizenship in America.

In the late 19th century， white nativists spread xenophobic propaganda about Chinese uncleanliness in San Francisco. This fueled the passage of the infamous Chinese Exclusion Act， the first law in the United States that barred immigration solely based on race. Initially， the act placed a 10-year moratorium on all Chinese migration.

In the early 20th century， American officials in the Philippines， then a formal colony of the U.S.， denigrated Filipinos for their supposedly unclean and uncivilized bodies. Colonial officers and doctors identified two enemies： Filipino insurgents against American rule， and “tropical diseases” festering in native bodies. By pointing to Filipinos political and medical unruliness， these officials justified continued U.S. colonial rule in the islands.

On Feb. 19， 1942， President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 to incarcerate people under suspicion as enemies to inland internment camps. While the order also affected German- and Italian-Americans on the East Coast， the vast majority of those incarcerated in 1942 were of Japanese descent.

Many of them were naturalized citizens， second- and third-generation Americans. Internees who fought in the celebrated 442nd Regiment were coerced by the United States military to prove their loyalty to a country that locked them up simply for being Japanese.

In the 21st century， even the most “multicultural” North American cities， like my hometown of Toronto， Canada， are hotbeds for virulent racism. During the 2003 SARS outbreak， Toronto saw a rise of anti-Asian racism， much like that of today.

In her 2008 study， sociologist Carrianne Leung highlights the everyday racism against Chinese and Filipina health care workers in the years that followed the SARS crisis. While publicly celebrated for their work in hospitals and other health facilities， these women found themselves fearing for their lives on their way home.

No expression of patriotism—not even being front-line workers in a pandemic—makes Asian migrants immune to racism.

Making the model minority

Over the past decade， from Pulitzer Prizes to popular films， Asian Americans have slowly been gaining better representation in Hollywood and other cultural industries. By the 2018 Golden Globes， Sandra Oh declared her now famous adage： “Its an honor just to be Asian.” It was， at least at face value， a moment of cultural inclusion.

However， so-called Asian American inclusion has a dark side. In reality， as cultural historian Robert G. Lee has argued， inclusion can and has been used to undermine the activism of African Americans， indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups in the United States. In the words of writer Frank Chin in 1974， “Whites love us because were not black.”

For example， in 1943， a year after the United States incarcerated Japanese Americans under Executive Order 9066， Congress repealed the Chinese Exclusion Act. White liberals advocated for the repeal not out of altruism toward Chinese migrants， but to advocate for a transpacific alliance against Japan and the Axis powers.

By allowing for the free passage of Chinese migrants to the United States， the nation could show its supposed fitness as an interracial superpower that rivaled Japan and Germany. Meanwhile， incarcerated Japanese Americans in camps and African Americans were still held under Jim Crow segregation laws2.

In her new book， “Opening the Gates to Asia： A Transpacific History of How America Repealed Asian Exclusion，” Occidental College historian Jane Hong reveals how the United States government used Asian immigration inclusion against other minority groups at a time of social upheaval.

For example， in 1965， Lyndon B. Johnsons administration signed the much-celebrated Hart-Celler Act into law. The act primarily targeted Asian and African migrants， shifting immigration from an exclusionary quota system to a merit-based points system. However， it also imposed immigration restrictions on Latin America.

Beyond model minority politics

As history shows， Asian American communities stand to gain more working within communities and across the lines of race， rather than trying to appeal to those in power. Japanese American activists such as the late Yuri Kochiyama worked in solidarity with other communities of color to advance the civil rights movement.

A former internee at the Jerome Relocation Center in Arkansas， Kochiyamas postwar life in Harlem， and her friendship with Malcolm X， inspired her to become active in the anti-Vietnam War and civil rights movements. In the 1980s， she and her husband Bill， himself part of the 442nd Regiment， worked at the forefront of the reparations and apology movement for Japanese internees. As a result of their efforts， Ronald Reagan signed the resulting Civil Liberties Act into law in 1988.

Kochiyama and activists like her have inspired the cross-community work of Asian American communities after them. In Los Angeles， where I live， the Little Tokyo Service Center is among those at the forefront of grassroots organizing for affordable housing and social services in a rapidly gentrifying neighborhood.

While the organizations priority area is Little Tokyo and its community members， the centers work advocates for affordable housing among black and Latinx residents， as well as Japanese American and other Asian American groups. To the northwest in Koreatown， the grassroots organization Ktown for All conducts outreach to unhoused residents of the neighborhood， regardless of ethnic background.

The coronavirus sees no borders. Likewise， I think that everyone must follow the example of these organizations and activists， past and present， to reach across borders and contribute to collective well-being.

Self-isolation， social distancing and healthy practices should not be in the service of proving ones patriotism. Instead， these precautions should be done for the sake of caring for those whom we do and do not know， inside and outside our national communities.

近期在《華盛顿邮报》的一篇专栏文章中，前民主党总统候选人杨安泽呼吁亚裔美国人加入应对新冠肺炎的行动中。如今，针对亚裔的种族主义行为与日俱增，每天约有百起相关事件，杨安泽恳求亚裔“身披红白蓝”，合力抗击疫情。

在唐纳德·特朗普将新冠病毒称作“中国病毒”前，杨安泽乐观地认为，“防控得当”可以消解针对美国亚裔的种族歧視。然而，根据我的研究领域——亚裔美国人史，现实很严峻。

针对亚裔的种族主义史

在新冠肺炎危机发生前，关于亚裔美国人的主流论调是他们是模范少数族裔。模范少数族裔这一概念形成于二战期间及战后，它提出，由于亚裔在经济上的成功，他们是美国理想的有色移民人种。

然而在推崇“仅限白人”移民政策的美国，亚裔美国人始终被认为是这个国度的威胁。他们曾被称作“黄祸”：邋遢，不适于成为美国公民。

19世纪末，本土主义的白人在旧金山传播关于中国人不卫生的排外舆论，致使美国通过第一部仅依据种族阻止移民的法律——臭名昭著的《排华法案》。起初，该法案禁止所有华人在10年内赴美。

20世纪初，菲律宾是美国的殖民地，在菲美国官员诋毁菲律宾人，声称他们躯体不卫生、不文明。殖民官员和医生认为当地存在两个敌人：反美的菲律宾叛乱者和在本土人之间蔓延的“热带病”。这些官员通过指出菲律宾人政治无序、卫生不净，证明在菲律宾群岛上延续殖民统治的正当性。

1942年2月19日，富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福总统签署第9066号行政命令，将可疑人员当作敌人拘禁于内陆拘留营。虽然这项总统令也影响了东海岸的德裔和意裔美国人，但在1942年被监禁关押的大多数是日裔。

他们中许多是入籍公民、二代和三代移民。有些被拘留者曾在著名的美国陆军第442步兵团征战，被美国军方强迫证明他们对这个国家的忠诚，一个仅因他们是日本人而将其关押的国家。

21世纪，即便是最“多元文化”的北美城市，如我的家乡加拿大多伦多，也同样是种族歧视肆虐的温床。2003年非典暴发时期，多伦多反亚裔种族歧视事件增多，与今天的状况很像。

社会学家卡里亚娜·梁在她2008年的研究中强调了非典危机后几年，针对中国和菲律宾医疗工作者经常发生的种族歧视现象。尽管许多女性在医院和其他医疗系统的工作受人敬重，她们却在回家路上战战兢兢，担心遭遇不测。

爱国之情的表达，甚至是身为抗疫一线工作者，都没能让亚裔移民免于种族歧视。

成为模范少数族裔

过去10年，从普利策奖到流行电影，亚裔美国人慢慢在好莱坞和其他文化产业获得更多镜头。在2018年的金球奖颁奖典礼上，亚裔演员吴珊卓发表了她的名言：“生为亚裔，即是荣耀。”那个时刻，至少在表象上，是一个文化包容的时刻。

然而，所谓的亚裔包容也存在见不得阳光的一面。事实上，正如文化历史学家罗伯特·G.李所认为，文化包容能够且已被用来打击非裔美国人、原住民和其他边缘群体的政治积极性。用作家赵健秀在1974年的一句话说，“白人喜欢我们只是因为我们不是黑人”。

比如1943年，美国实施第9066号行政命令关押日裔的第二年，国会废除《排华法案》。自由主义白人主张废除该法案，并不是出于对华裔劳工利益的尊重，而是出于对对抗日本和轴心国势力的跨太平洋联盟的支持。

通过允许华裔劳工自由进出美利坚，美国能够展示它是一个所谓的多种族融合、足以匹敌日本和德国的超级大国。然而同时，日裔仍被关押在拘留营，他们以及非裔美国人仍遭受“吉姆·克劳法”的种族隔离。

西方学院历史学家简·洪在她的新书《向亚洲敞开大门：一部美国废止亚裔隔离的跨太平洋历史》中，揭露了美国政府如何在社会动荡时期，利用亚裔移民的准入，制约其他少数族裔。

比如1965年，林登·B.约翰逊政府签署备受赞誉的《哈特-塞勒法》。该法案主要针对亚裔和非裔移民，将排他性配额制度改为基于行为表现的积分制度。然而，它也对拉美裔移民加以限制。

超越模范少数族裔政治

历史显示，在美亚裔群体会在社群内或在不同种族间合作，而不尝试诉诸当权者。比如已故的日裔政治活动家河内山曾和其他有色人种社区团结合作，推进民权运动。

河内山在阿肯色州杰罗姆再安置中心被关押的经历、战后在哈莱姆区的生活以及与马尔科姆·X的友谊，激励她积极参与反越战和民权运动。20世纪80年代，她与丈夫比尔，一位美国陆军第442步兵团成员，在向日裔被拘留者道歉赔偿运动的最前线工作。他们的努力最终促成了罗纳德·里根在1988年将《公民自由法案》签署成法律。

以河内山为代表的政治活动家鼓舞了之后亚裔社区的跨群体工作。我居住的洛杉矶正快速中产阶级化，小东京服务中心等组织行动在最前线，组织普通民众争取保障性住房和社会服务。

虽然该组织首要服务范围是小东京社区和其成员，但它的工作推动了非裔、拉丁裔及日裔和其他亚裔群体争取保障性住房。在韩国城的西北部，“为所有人服务的韩国城”基层组织，将服务范围扩展到周边居无定所的人，无论他们是何种族。

新冠病毒无国界。同样，我认为每个人均须向过去和现在的各个组织和活动家学习，超越国界，为人类共同福祉作出贡献。

自我隔离、保持社交距离和良好的卫生习惯不应是为了证明个人的爱国之情而做，这些防护措施应是出于对国内外我们相识或不相识的人的关爱而为。

（译者为“《英语世界》杯”翻译大赛获奖者;单位：南京师范大学）

【本译文系2017年度南京师范大学“英才培养计划”项目阶段性研究成果】

1从5月最后一个星期一美国阵亡将士纪念日到9月第一个星期一劳工节，美国有数个爱国主义相关纪念日，鼓励人民身穿带红、白、蓝色星条旗的衣服，其中尤以7月4日美国独立日这一倡议最为热烈。

2 泛指1876年至1965年间美国南部各州及边境各州对有色人种实行种族隔离制度的法律。Jim Crow是对黑人的贬称。