“I would not have voted for you… because you’re an Indian,” said Ann Coulter to Vivek Ramaswamy.
Ramaswamy blinked twice, nodding slightly as if to steady himself. Until that moment, their dialogue on his podcast had been amicable Coulter had just finished praising Ramaswamy’s policy propositions and his now-suspended presidential campaign, even including that she agreed with him over most of the Republican candidates during the primaries. However, her refusal to support Ramaswamy’s presidency explicitly because of his Indian heritage threw the Ohio-born political aspirant into a corner. If he condemned the comment as racist, he risked appearing hypersensitive, the very trait he often criticizes on the left. If he said nothing, he would seem spineless. Ultimately, he chose restraint, preserving goodwill with his guest.
The situation brought to mind a deeper, perennial issue in an increasingly diverse America. Here were two outspoken conservative figures with mostly shared beliefs about domestic policy, foreign affairs, and general political philosophy. Both are well-read attorneys, have published several books about American political culture, and have attracted significant media attention for similar comments. Their differences? Quite obvious. Ann Coulter can trace her American ancestry back to the Puritan settlers of Plymouth. Vivek Ramaswamy is a first-generation American born to Indian Hindu immigrant parents. Coulter’s comment reminded Ramaswamy that despite his efforts, she could never treat him as a member of the same club.
Before you notice Ramaswamy’s billion-dollar enterprises or his posturing as the “anti-woke” voice of the GOP’s future, you will notice that he is Indian-American. I sense that as Ramaswamy was staring at Coulter and strategizing a way to proceed with the podcast interview, he was simultaneously recalibrating his sense of where he stood in the conservative movement he hoped to lead.
Americans of full Asian ethnicity like Ramaswamy and myself have a particularly unique relationship with the “perpetual foreigner” stereotype. Notably, our Asian heritage is physically obvious. There is no “white-passing” for Asian Americans, rendering the perpetual foreigner stereotype virtually inescapable to those who see them through that lens. I personally find it difficult to believe that Coulter would refuse to support the son of Anglo-American or Italian-American immigrants. “I would not have voted for you… because your parents were born in Nottingham.” That doesn’t sound quite right.
In some ways, it’s not surprising that the foreigner trope clings most persistently to Asian Americans. For well over a century, American media has depicted Asians through a lens of exoticism, emphasizing unfamiliar customs and casting the East in a shroud of mystique. In 2024, we are, in many respects, still relative newcomers to the American canon. If you were to meet a Gen-Z American of full Asian descent today, the chances that they are immigrants or the children of immigrants are quite high. But does this make Asian Americans less deserving of public confidence in their respect and commitment to the nation? Should that alone disqualify someone like Ramaswamy from serving in America’s highest offices? Does this mean that Asian Americans can never truly embrace their national culture? I disagree with Ramaswamy on many points, but on this occasion, I suspect that our responses would be the same.
