Jews, Chinese, and the ‘Wrong Kind of Minority’: Unpacking a PayPal Lawsuit

A new lawsuit filed by Asian American venture capitalist Nisha Desai brings into sharp relief a troubling pattern: in the rush to rectify historical injustice, some minority groups are being quietly sidelined. In this case, Desai—founder of Andav Capital and the daughter of Indian immigrants—claims she was excluded from PayPal’s $535 million investment initiative aimed at “Black and minority-owned businesses” on the basis of being the wrong kind of minority.

“To PayPal and its executives,” her complaint reads, “Asian Americans might be minorities, but they’re the wrong kind of minority.”

Desai’s lawsuit, filed in Manhattan federal court, accuses the company of violating civil rights protections that prohibit race-based discrimination in contracting. PayPal has yet to comment publicly on the litigation.

But the case is already raising broader questions—questions that Jewish and Chinese communities, in particular, are well-positioned to ask. Both groups have historically faced exclusion, erasure, and suspicion. And yet today, both are often rendered invisible in the design of race-based programming.

Rethinking the Diversity Template

Following 2020, many corporations created DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives as part of a growing trend to formalize diversity goals in hiring, funding, and branding. However, some of these efforts have calcified into frameworks that define “marginalized” narrowly, often centering specific identity groups while neglecting others with complex, though perhaps less publicly visible, histories of hardship.

Asian Americans, despite facing historic discrimination and ongoing stereotyping, are often excluded from these initiatives. Similarly, Jewish individuals—who have (even quite recently) endured pogroms, quotas, boycotts, and genocide—are regularly left out of discussions around race and equity, assumed to be beneficiaries of unacknowledged privilege.

Desai’s lawsuit may serve as a legal flashpoint, but it also reflects a wider cultural trend: when inclusion policies begin to reinforce new boundaries of exclusion, the very concept of fairness is placed in jeopardy.

Toward a Jewish-Chinese Alliance

Rather than responding with grievance, this moment presents an opportunity for coalition-building. Jewish and Chinese communities, and the wider Asian diaspora, can come together not only in shared concern, but in shared purpose.

A Jewish-Chinese alliance could press for frameworks that value complexity over ideology—ones that account for vulnerability not by surface-level groupings, but by lived experience. Both traditions possess deep philosophical lineages that emphasize ethical discernment, personal responsibility, and social cohesion. Together, they might advocate for a more intelligent and inclusive vision of justice—one that is neither reactionary nor reductive.

This alliance could also call attention to a simple but powerful principle: minorities are not interchangeable. Lumping together distinct communities into broad categories—then rewarding or excluding them based on current social narratives—undermines the spirit of equity itself.

Looking Ahead

As Andav Capital v. PayPal moves through the courts, it may offer more than a legal verdict. It may offer a cultural mirror—reflecting where our current conversations around race and fairness are faltering.

Jewish and Chinese voices, long present but often unrecognized in diversity frameworks, have a crucial role to play in reshaping the conversation. Not in opposition to other groups, but as part of a fuller vision of what inclusion must mean if it is to mean anything at all.