Hence, a distant descendant of nineteenth-century African slaves who works at Goldman Sachs or studies at Harvard is a victim. The first-generation immigrant child of a twenty-first-century Chinese slave who goes to public school is not.
Who do you know who thinks like this? Show your work. Anyone can invent a character, slap a label on them, and blame them for anything under the sun. It also shows a ridiculous lack of critical thinking not to notice that a person can be "successful" in one area while also being "a victim" in another- or more to the point, successful *despite* arrayed disadvantages, not in refutation of their existence. But by your own warped logic, you yourself shouldn't be considered to have any disadvantage from your traumatic upbringing, since you have all the trappings of wealth and success now; yet you continuously try to tug at heart strings in this book as to your poor treatment and various misunderstandings when you were just a poor 'recent immigrant' whose english 'wasn't very good'. So which is it??
