We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
I can not argue with Amy Chua she is 100% correct. Unless you don't have the same opinion about what constitutes "success". Her children are masters of music and their choosen instruments, they are intelligent and perfect students with many talents. But are they proof of "success"? Would you (or any man) marry one of her daughters, I mean could you ever please either of them and would they even consider pleasing you? Their priority would most probably be all about making their husband and children (assuming they even allowed consumation of the marriage) perfect. Could you as her husband lay down on the couch and watch the Superbowl or have a beer while watching TV? Could you come home from your 12 hour workday with romance on your mind with any chance of success? "Success" is defined differently by different people.
I had a Chinese (very intelligent and successful) calculus teacher in college. He would lecture with his back to the class while writing notes and problems on the blackboard with his right hand and erasing the blackborad panel to his left with his left hand while lecturing over his shoulder. He was probably brilliant and no doubt successful but he couldn't teach. Ironically my second year of calculus was taught by by a Mexican American teacher with a glass eye, unruly facial hair, a penchant for telling dirty jokes in class and appeared to be the exact opposite of Amy Chau's view of "successful", but he could teach. You could ask any question and he could answer it and explain it. His class was interactive and actual "learning" took place everyday. How can this be? I believe the only music he could play was by turnng on the car radio and yet in real life he was far more successful at his chosen profession then the stereotypical "successful" Chinese math wizard.
I think that a lot of "successful" people become very qualified in their chosen profession and can demonstrate this without question. But are they an Einstein or a Galileo? Or are they merely open vessels of known information on some field of study? Can you make a genius by forcing a child to spend all their waking hours studying? If they as a result master a disipline are they "successful"? Or is it merely a "trick" like teaching a dog to roll over and bark for "treats"?