RNC Condemns AP U.S. History Exam

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Not true, because without God nothing could exist.

I'm guessing you can't prove that?

It would be logical and self-evident. There's the proof there.

Nothing can pop into existence without an outside force. I don't care what the secular scientists say.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I'm guessing you can't prove that?

It would be logical and self-evident. There's the proof there.

Nothing can pop into existence without an outside force. I don't care what the secular scientists say.

You realize a number of scientists who say that are Christian right bud? That's where all the evidence has led.

[Othelos]

I'm guessing you can't prove that?

It would be logical and self-evident. There's the proof there.

Nothing can pop into existence without an outside force. I don't care what the secular scientists say.

"I don't understand something, so it must not be true."

[The Tiger Kingdom]

It would be logical and self-evident. There's the proof there.

Nothing can pop into existence without an outside force. I don't care what the secular scientists say.

You realize a number of scientists who say that are Christian right bud? That's where all the evidence has led.

There's literally no point in engaging this Ham-wannabe any further. Seriously, you're letting him threadjack.

[Washington Resistance Army]

You realize a number of scientists who say that are Christian right bud? That's where all the evidence has led.

There's literally no point in engaging this Ham-wannabe any further. Seriously, you're letting him threadjack.

Yeah, I'm just gonna let that go.

As for the topic, it's pretty stupid. America isn't shown as the shining beacon of everything evar so it's obviously sub par

[Quintium]

So do the bodies of white kids get left in the street for hours after they've been killed in suspicious circumstances by white police officers?

If that is the correct procedure, then absolutely! It's just that whites don't start photographing it, filming it, publishing it online and burning down their own damned stores over it.

Do white presidents have to constantly deal with an unending barrage of explicitly racist drivel impugning their intelligence, integrity, and background?

Were you too young to be politically involved during the Bush era?
My God, man, I live an ocean away and even I picked up on what they said about Bush.

Do white people constantly chafe under implicitly racist socioeconomic circumstances with regard to banking and housing?

See, here you go again. "Implicit" this, "hidden" that - good God, man! If we're racist, we're racist, and if we're not racist we're just hiding our racism.
If you're white, you can't win, so you might as well turn into an actual racist and try to become what they accuse you of being, because at least it's profitable.

The whites also no longer the wealthiest: the East Asians now hold that title.

I don't have any idea what this means. Wealthy per capita? Wealthy in terms of real proportions? In what country?

You know what he means. In terms if income per capita, in the United States of America, Jews and East Asians are far wealthier than whites. In fact, the television channels that so negatively portray blacks are owned and controlled by people who are at least ethnically Jewish (Comcast, Disney, CBS and Viacom, to name the biggest fish in the pond, have Jewish chairmen and CEOs). So, either this magical formula of 'white privilege' is not perfect, or the real perpetrators of racial injustice are the Jews and the East Asians. But then that's politically inconvenient.

[Frisbeeteria]

God Bless America!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d36NLbUaTTg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d36NLbUaTTg

Given that you lost a prior nation for exactly the same behavior, I'm going to assume that you're deliberately spamming just to be ornery.

*** Forumbanned for 24 hours for spamming ***

[The Tiger Kingdom]

So do the bodies of white kids get left in the street for hours after they've been killed in suspicious circumstances by white police officers?

If that is the correct procedure, then absolutely!

I don't know what the hell that even means, but it's objectively not "the correct procedure".

It's just that whites don't start photographing it, filming it, publishing it online

How dare black people speak up for themselves!

and burning down their own damned stores over it.

It's simply the consequence of white privilege.
With white people, this sort of police brutality doesn't happen - or if it does happen, it gets quickly handled as quietly and inoffensively as possible. When it's a black kid, nobody gives a shit.
And you're surprised when things get violent?
When you take away the means by which problems like these can be resolved fairly, then you reap what you sow.

Were you too young to be politically involved during the Bush era?
My God, man, I live an ocean away and even I picked up on what they said about Bush.

You'll note the key operator was "racist" there. Nobody was attacking Bush because he was white and for no other reason (as people hit Obama), they were attacking him because he is and was objectively a moron.
Compared to the people he surrounded himself with, though, he was small fry.

See, here you go again.

You're not nearly rhetorically skilled/trained enough to pull off the Reagan maneuver.

"Implicit" this, "hidden" that - good God, man! If we're racist, we're racist, and if we're not racist we're just hiding our racism.

There is racism in American society. If you can't see it, you're blinding yourself willingly, and I have little pity for people who lie to themselves for the sake of ideology.

If you're white, you can't win,

Are you fucking kidding me? White people have kind of a stranglehold on literally every element of American life. Every single one. No exceptions. And you're trying to pass yourself off as a victim?
Get over yourself and quit bitching about how hard it is to be on top, because nobody gives a shit.

so you might as well turn into an actual racist and try to become what they accuse you of being, because at least it's profitable.

Yeah, Klan members are hugely successful, or so I hear.
Quit whining about how hard it is to be by far the most advantaged and face what's right in front of you.
This is not a zero-sum game - there is no disadvantage to being antiracist. There is nothing to lose, and a lot to gain.

You know what he means.

How the fuck would I have known what he meant? For the matter, how would you?

In terms if income per capita, in the United States of America, Jews and East Asians are far wealthier than whites. In fact, the television channels that so negatively portray blacks are owned and controlled by people who are at least ethnically Jewish (Comcast, Disney, CBS and Viacom, to name the biggest fish in the pond, have Jewish chairmen and CEOs).

I sense a Protocols of the Elders of Zion link right around the corner!

So, either this magical formula of 'white privilege' is not perfect,

...Or you just don't care to understand what it means.

or the real perpetrators of racial injustice are the Jews and East Asians.

Jews in America, in case you don't know, are generally regarded as white. It's not a Jewish problem, despite the fact that you're desperately pushing it as hard as you can, your bust of Hitler looking on approvingly.
And as for East Asians, they're recent immigrants, were never enslaved, and had a much easier time of assimilation as a result of that. They're also just not that politically active, so that doesn't hold water. Richness =/= political power, necessarily, if you stay out of politics.
It's apples and oranges.

But then that's politically inconvenient.

No, it's just incorrect. Sorry.
Listen, buddy, I get the feeling you might want to take your talents to Stormfront instead of here. You'd probably find a much more racially agreeable audience there.

[The New Sea Territory]

I'm guessing you can't prove that?

It would be logical and self-evident. There's the proof there.

Nothing can pop into existence without an outside force. I don't care what the secular scientists say.

No one says there was no force. However, your Jehovah of the Gaps isn't the logical answer.

[Blakk Metal]

Why do these guys even bother? They make Mussolini look effective.

[SaintB]

We can't look at ourselves objectively! That would be terrible!

[Quintium]

I don't know what the hell that even means, but it's objectively not "the correct procedure".

For the purpose of forensic investigation, it might well be the correct procedure. You see, before they remove the body, qualified investigators have to document the site. To even get them to the scene of a crime with the correct equipment can take hours, and if they don't do their job thoroughly then other investigators might not be able to come to proper conclusions. Note that by "the correct procedure" I mean the procedure that will produce the most forensic evidence about a case, and not the procedure that is best for the feelings of the family of the person who was killed.

Nobody was attacking Bush because he was white and for no other reason (as people hit Obama), they were attacking him because he is and was objectively a moron.

See, like this whole white privilege nonsense that's just your personal opinion presented as fact. George Walker Bush has an estimated IQ of between 120 and 130, and has a B.A. in history from Yale and an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School. Can you say the same, or are you uneducated because there is some dark, evil foreign force at work to keep you from being succesful?

I have little pity for people who lie to themselves for the sake of ideology.

Which, considering the fact that you just called George Walker Bush (IQ 120-130) a moron (IQ 51–70), is fairly laughable.

This is not a zero-sum game - there is no disadvantage to being antiracist. There is nothing to lose, and a lot to gain.

I was refused participation in a special course in law school, because it was only open to 'non-western' students (and yes, they made that very clear in the announcement). I was stuck in university workgroups with people who clearly had no business in a university (baseball caps on and pants too far down in class, speaking in slang and lousy Dutch, harrassing women and getting angry when those women move far away from them) and were just there because the university would lose all government funding if it didn't meet certain diversity criteria.

or the real perpetrators of racial injustice are the Jews and East Asians.

Jews in America, in case you don't know, are generally regarded as white. It's not a Jewish problem, despite the fact that you're desperately pushing it as hard as you can, your bust of Hitler looking on approvingly.

Is your point of view that, in American society, whites have the upper hand over non-whites in corporate and political life and that therefore action should be taken to change that? If so, then why use such a broad brush if a certain subset of the group you describe as whites, namely the Jews, is actually in control? If you want to tackle white control of society, you can also tackle Jewish control of society, because a majority of 'white' people in control of America's largest corporations and banks are also Jewish (despite the fact that, while whites are a large majority of the American population, Jews form less than 2.6% of the American population). If anyone's privileged, it's the Jews. Or is there some illogical mental turn that you will now make to explain that corporate and political dominance of the Jewish 2.6% isn't a problem while the relatively small corporate and political dominance of the white 77% (with a lot of overlap) is?

Listen, buddy, I get the feeling you might want to take your talents to Stormfront instead of here. You'd probably find a much more racially agreeable audience there.

It wasn't about race until mine started being targeted. Also, I don't really like Stormfront.
They're the right-wing equivalent of sites like Jezebel and ThinkProgress - a circle jerk, and I don't like circle jerks. /pol/ is alright, but Stormfront? No.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

I don't know what the hell that even means, but it's objectively not "the correct procedure".

For the purpose of forensic investigation, it might well be the correct procedure.

Yeah, except it isn't.

You see, before they remove the body, qualified investigators have to document the site. To even get them to the scene of a crime with the correct equipment can take hours, and if they don't do their job thoroughly then other investigators might not be able to come to proper conclusions. Note that by "the correct procedure" I mean the procedure that will produce the most forensic evidence about a case, and not the procedure that is best for the feelings of the family of the person who was killed.

The fact is, regardless of whatever speculative or hypothetical forensic procedures you're pretending to be an expert on, they don't do that shit to white kids. They don't. They get the body off the street, ASAP. They do not leave it laying unattended for hours.
And that's without even getting into the actual mechanics and legal underpinnings of his murder.

See, like this whole white privilege nonsense that's just your personal opinion presented as fact.

So was that statement, ironically.

George Walker Bush has an estimated IQ of between 120 and 130,

I have an "estimated IQ" of eleventy billion. I estimated it myself. Isn't that impressive?

and has a B.A. in history from Yale and an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School.

Believe me, I could get a BA in History pretty easily if I had the cash to stay an extra year or so and triple-major.

Can you say the same,

In terms of IQ? No way to know, because you don't actually know Bush's IQ score - and IQ is meaningless anyways. Hell, even if Bush had a miniscule IQ score, I wouldn't hold that against him, because it's so ridiculously narrow and useless a test.
It's been years since I got tested, anyways.
As to college degrees, no, because I wasn't born a millionaire and thus stood little chance of getting into either of those colleges, much less actually paying my way if I did get in.
However, I am currently in training to double-major in pre-law and political science at a fairly prestigious university, and then go into law school at that same university to train to be a lawyer, so I'll say that in terms of actual qualifications, I may actually end up with a degree on ol' Bushy.
And frankly, I know a shitload of MBAs who are idiots, so that hardly proves anything.

or are you uneducated because there is some dark, evil foreign force at work to keep you from being succesful?

It's a work in progress!
But frankly, I'm willing to acknowledge that not everybody was as lucky as me - and I did get lucky when it came to my education, to a certain extent, due to factors beyond my control.

Which, considering the fact that you just called George Walker Bush (IQ 120-130) a moron (IQ 51–70), is fairly laughable.

You just said that was an estimated score. You have no idea what his real IQ score is. Stop lying. Nobody is convinced.
And maybe I'm being uncharitable if you want to use some pedantic and outdated definition of "moron", but it's pretty much beyond dispute that he was a stooge pushed around by Cheney and Rumsfeld to hell and back, and he never demonstrated the kind of towering intellect you want the CinC to have.

I was refused participation in a special course in law school, because it was only open to 'non-western' students (and yes, they made that very clear in the announcement). I was stuck in university workgroups with people who clearly had no business in a university (baseball caps on and pants too far down in class, speaking in slang and lousy Dutch, harrassing women and getting angry when those women move far away from them) and were just there because the university would lose all government funding if it didn't meet certain diversity criteria.

Ah, and now I can begin to see where all this is coming from.
I'm going to do something rather odd, here: I'm going to take you at your word.
I'm sorry that that happened to you - I want you to believe me when I say that I know how frustrating it can be to be held back like that, with people who aren't as serious as you. In my case, back in high school (hey, tying into the original topic of the thread!) it happened to be upper-middle-class white kids (like me, funnily enough) who were the worst - they clearly came from a place that gave them no boundaries, established no discipline, gave them no motivation, and so they wasted everybody's time and made things worse for a lot of us.
I hated those guys. I really did. For years and years, I'd spend whole classes silently fuming while those assholes ruined everything because they weren't content with being fuckheads - they wanted to share it with everybody. There was no getting away from it, no making it better, and it would go on for years. And there's fragments of that resentment and anger still remaining in my psyche. I try to control it. Sometimes it gets the better of me still, but it gets weaker every year I get further away.

Believe me, I know exactly that feeling. But as I've gotten older, I've learned that holding onto that anger in perpetuity doesn't help anything, and it really doesn't help to immediately extrapolate the worst of those feelings, those experiences, and those expected traits, across that entire population of which a small group pissed you off.
You had a singularly unpleasant personal experience with a group of people. That's regrettable, and that shouldn't be discounted.
But here we are, talking about a group of people that number in the billions (people just like you and me in every way that matters), with really complicated and nuanced elements that affect those same billions of people in every way of life imaginable - and all you're seeing are those guys that pissed you off, or those admin officials who made one stupid decision in unfairly closing off a class like that. You're coming at this from a place of anger - you're viewing all these issues, all these billions of people, through the lens of a personal grudge.

I know exactly how tempting that is - to close your mind off like that. It's simpler. It feels right, in that vindictive, angry, vengeful kind of way. But I'm going to ask you to try and put that regrettable experience past you, and at least try to see this sort of issue -that is to say, racial bias in society - without already having made your mind up years ago on it when you had a bad time in college. Those were just a few people, just one college. We're talking about hundreds of millions of people, now, with hundreds of years of accumulated history and baggage, and you can't lump them all together and dismiss them like that accurately. It's not right, and it's not fair.

It's a complicated problem we face (and even you've got to admit there is a race relations problem in America), and it deserves real, honest, open-minded assessment. I'm trying my best to come at it from that place.

Is your point of view that, in American society, whites have the upper hand over non-whites in corporate and political life and that therefore action should be taken to change that? If so, then why use such a broad brush if a certain subset of the group you describe as whites, namely the Jews, is actually in control? If you want to tackle white control of society, you can also tackle Jewish control of society, because a majority of 'white' people in control of America's largest corporations and banks are also Jewish (despite the fact that, while whites are a large majority of the American population, Jews form less than 2.6% of the American population). If anyone's privileged, it's the Jews. Or is there some illogical mental turn that you will now make to explain that corporate and political dominance of the Jewish 2.6% isn't a problem while the relatively small corporate and political dominance of the white 77% (with a lot of overlap) is?

Because it's a problem that permeates through white society. The problem doesn't necessarily aggregate at the top.

It wasn't about race until mine started being targeted.

You absolutely were not targeted. As the quote chain shows, this all began with you posting that video about the teacher and common core and whatever, which specifically invoked white privilege and your feelings on it. Sorry, you were not targeted. That is not true. You brought it up first.

Also, I don't really like Stormfront.
They're the right-wing equivalent of sites like Jezebel and ThinkProgress - a circle jerk, and I don't like circle jerks. /pol/ is alright, but Stormfront? No.

Jesus Christ, there may be hope for you yet.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Admittedly, my immediate thoughts were "Fuck em", "who gives a shit" and "Fuck em while they give a shit".

But this is likely why I'm not an American politician or any type of politician and should not become one.

[Agritum]

Admittedly, my immediate thoughts were "Fuck em", "who gives a shit" and "Fuck em while they give a shit".

But this is likely why I'm not an American politician or any type of politician and should not become one.

That would be kickass.

[Imperializt Russia]

It sure does make racist people whine a lot.

See, there's another magic buzz word. "Racist."

In South Korea, there are television shows detailing how white men are giving Korean women venereal diseases and impregnating them only to break off all contact when they say they're pregnant. In Japan, all foreigners are generally despised. In Malaysia, the government still maintains racial laws in favour of the ethnic Malay and against the ethnic Chinese. In Zimbabwe, whites generally cannot own land, and in South Africa they're murdered for it. In Palestine, selling land to ethnic Jews is punishable by death. In Libya, black migrants are being beaten up and occasionally even set on fire by militias. In Morocco, the police arrest black migrants, detain them without trial or beat them so hard their bones are broken. In Myanmar, the Rohingya are subject of genocide, and in China the Tibetans and the Uyghurs are going the same way. Whenever there's a civil war in Africa or the Middle East, the refugees are raped, trafficked, prostituted, robbed and murdered on a massive scale by the inhabitants of the areas they flee to.

But I'm a "racist" for being against government measures intended to make whites poorer and non-whites richer because some people think that'll bring peace and prosperity.

Have you ever considered why those countries might actually have those measures?
Might have something to do with what that vague term of "whites" have wrought there over the years.

Thank the British Empire for some of it, kindly.

As a white in America, you are less likely to be shot in the street by police. Or assaulted by them. You're less likely to be born into poverty and turn to crime. You're more likely to be employed. You're more likely to earn a good wage. You're more likely to be promoted.
You're more likely to be accepted to university (a culmination of latent racism and reduced educational attainment for a variety of other factors), more likely to be accepted for loans and more likely to command something with your degree.

Saying that you oppose "measures to make whites poorer and non-whites richer" for no reason other than... non-whites will become wealthy is... well, that's racist. Sorry to offend your worldview with that. Care to try and persuade me that it's not?

As whites, we're privileged in society. This is just a thing.

It's actually the other way around. Your history is romanticized, biased, outrageous and inaccurate.

The colonists DID treat women like property, like most pre-1900 societies. They also committed genocides, perpetuated slavery and carried out acts of terrorism during their revolution.

That's simply not true. That's just what the anti-American education system is indoctrinating the public with.
This is not how history has been taught for the last two hundred years. Only now has it changed. I have the AP class and it is extremely biased and in particular quite anti-Christian.

Mostly because Christian settlers were racist, murderous bastards.
Since that's still the dominant ethnic group in the US, people don't like being confronted with the evils of their past. America's swimming in it.

So's the British Empire, for example.

That's simply not true. That's just what the anti-American education system is indoctrinating the public with.
This is not how history has been taught for the last two hundred years. Only now has it changed. I have the AP class and it is extremely biased and in particular quite anti-Christian.

The last two hundred years haven't had this radical bastion of knowledge called the Internet. Have you heard of it?

History has an anti-American bias. It's called reality. America has done some pretty bad things.

I also have the AP Class. At a Catholic school. It's anti-Christian because the reality is Christianity has caused so many wars and conflicts that it deserves the flak.

He has Ken Ham for a flag.
I think he can't fathom using the internet for factual purposes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege
http://www.tolerance.org/article/racism ... -privilege
http://www.buzzfeed.com/michaelblackmon ... ilege-9hu9
http://www.thesociologicalcinema.com/vi ... -privilege
https://www.isr.umich.edu/home/diversit ... vilege.pdf

None of those are factual evidence.

The first is a Wikipedia page with crippling neutrality issues as determined by Wikipedia's users. The second is on a website so biased that if you were a student at my university I'd throw your work at your face and expel you for gross academic fraud. It's descriptive, but so is David Icke's work on the Illuminati. The third is Buzzfeed, and I repeat what I said about the second. The fourth is yet more description of supposedly the same thing but no factual evidence. The fifth is from the exact same person mentioned in the fourth, and contains a personal opinion.

All things considered, I am not impressed.

Members of an internet community, likely mostly white men, believe that an article on the internet on white privilege may have "neutrality issues".
More at 11.

They believe the Czechs are "wrong" for how they classify their military arms, because their classification system doesn't fit in with wikipedia's worldview.

I'd like a citation for this.
Assuming that's true, that's terrible.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=919852452099
But don't worry - the exact same sentiment is felt everywhere outside the comfortable Western European and North American hugbox.

You whining bloody murder about "weakening the white race" doesn't help you, because the only people who talk that way are either Neo-Nazis, Klan members, or Klan wannabes.

Then you've never been to Europe.

"Wikipedia's not a good source"
>facebook photo
Kind of ruins your argument there.

In my personal experience, Quintum, anyone in England who actually holds such views is typically of those inclinations.

So do the bodies of white kids get left in the street for hours after they've been killed in suspicious circumstances by white police officers? Do white presidents have to constantly deal with an unending barrage of explicitly racist drivel impugning their intelligence, integrity, and background? Do white people constantly chafe under implicitly racist socioeconomic circumstances with regard to banking and housing?
Is it considered legal (or at least, inherently justifiable) to for the police to freely murder white kids, as it apparently is for the police to kill non-white kids?
Or is it just that the old stranglehold is still there, just not using so many public ethnic slurs this time around?

Clearly we need such a system, given the inherent bias of the system to leave brown people in the dirt and then blame them for it.

I don't have any idea what this means. Wealthy per capita? Wealthy in terms of real proportions? In what country?

Those are just generalizations, quit being racist toward white people. It exists, you know. Racism against whites. It's all part of the modern day secularist anti-American worldview. White people are people too.

Racism is the belief that another race is inferior.
It's factually incorrect to suppose that anywhere in the west, this occurs or happens.

You can verbally or physically attack a white person for being white. That does happen.
Nowhere near as frequently as it happens to non-whites.

It's like you've inherited Ken Ham's aversion to facts.

Everyone's entitled to worldview - but again, imposing it on other people is not fair, and if you read the Bible, not very Christian, either.

I have read the Bible three times, and I need a source for why it is wrong to have a pro-American opinion? That isn't imposition of a worldview on anyone.

Here's an imposition of worldview for you: forcing the teaching of evolution and environmentalism on students in science classes.

Begone, Mr Ham, you're not welcome here.

Apart from four or five similarly-deluded individuals.

I'm guessing you can't prove that?

It would be logical and self-evident. There's the proof there.

Nothing can pop into existence without an outside force. I don't care what the secular scientists say.

Secular scientist here.
Most creationists forget fairly basic "outside forces" when they "disprove" science. Things like gravity, or the speed of light.
What're you taking offence to in reality today, Mr Ham?

[Mushet]

Everytime I come on these NSG threads I see the same thing: Liberals belitting conservatives/republicans and propping up those of liberal view.

I see absoloutely nothing wrong with what the RNC did. They wrote a strongly worded letter and sent something to a college because they disagreed with something, this is America, they can do that no matter how stupid it is. I can write a strongly worded letter to my Representative or the President(not that he would read it since he's so busy,)and it could be stupid as hell, but why is it your concern?

I also do not expect foreigners(which encompass a very large majority of NSG) to have a positive view of America, espescially when polled on this website, most foreigners on here HATE America.

As my ROTC teacher said, we are the best country on the face of the earth. If they had done this in Afghanistan they would've been shot and killed.

Thank God the RNC has the right to do this, and may God BLESS this country.

Wait, a large majority of NSG are foreigners? To the USA? It looks like that's what you mean. Every single poll I can remember on the subject show that a large majority of our users are US residents, and I doubt a majority of those users were born elsewhere and immigrated. I can also see that in the topics on NSG that more often than not center on issues going on in America. What makes you think that a large majority of NSG are foreigners? And what makes you think that they all hate America? That's not what I've been seeing in my years here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege
http://www.tolerance.org/article/racism ... -privilege
http://www.buzzfeed.com/michaelblackmon ... ilege-9hu9
http://www.thesociologicalcinema.com/vi ... -privilege
https://www.isr.umich.edu/home/diversit ... vilege.pdf

White Privilege, although something that was existent in the Jim Crow south is now nonexistent. Affirmative Action actually gives priority to the black and latinos students, while blacks and latinos have employment quotas, something that doesn't exist amongst white people. The whites also no longer the wealthiest: the East Asians now hold that title.

Oh nonexistant today huh? That must be why my K-12 school history lessons have focused on the history of white people and why America is geared towards the interests of white people primarily and why white ex-cons get more callbacks than black people with no such prison records.

Affirmative action in Universities takes far more than students being black or "latino" in account.

What employment quotas?

Indian Americans hold the highest household income actually, they are South Asians. Furthermore just counting income doesn't show the full picture of actual wealth, you should account for the fact that Asian Americans are clustered much more in urban areas with higher costs of living .