Racial classification
in America has been shaped by population census since 1790. The accountability
of census has been criticized severely by many officials and citizens of United
States. The main criticism is that the census not only counted its population,
but also it racially classified the
nation. With regard to that,
policy treats Americans different according to the race they belong to. Until
1977 government used racial categorization as a tool to bring to country in
terms of civil rights and collecting racial data. With the changing population
in America which leads to huge diversity; the major categorization of race into
two ,as whites and non-whites, has changed tremendously. OMB (Office of Management and Budget) brought change to racial classification: "marking one or more". This change recognized 63 different races and rejected hypo-descent
presumption. The initial classification determined 2 distinctions: free
or slave, taxed or untaxed. In 1820, the census started to change; free colored
persons was added to the census. In 1870 Chinese were first counted and in 1890
Japanese were added. In 1920 Filipinos, Koreans and Hindus appeared on the
census form. In 1960 Hawaiians were added in the census but Aleuts and Eskimos
were not successful in terms of having a place in the census. Subcontinent
Indians were considered as Hindus between 1920-1940, but in the next 3 censuses
they were considered as white. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission identified
4 additional minority groups: Negro, Spanish-American, American-Indian and
Asian in 1964. After 1970, Mexicans were counted as a different category under
the name of Hispanics. In 1977, there were 4 primary racial groups: Asian or
Pacific Islander, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Black and White. Imperialism and immigration transformed the nation both demographically and population based. In middle
of 1990s multiculturalism and multiracial movement started to demonstrate its
effects and racial categorized was being shape by those. After all these
changes, race becomes equal to self identification. The number of ethno-racial groups are determined as 126 and the fixed
racial groups are defined as: American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Black/African American, Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Spanish/Hispanic/Latino and White.
Prewitt argues that 2000 census can and should be improved. Even Census Bureau
knows that Hispanics cannot find themselves in the categories listed in the
census. He emphasized on an important point: race and ethnicity. He supports
the idea that difference between the terms race and ethnicity is
meaningless. He thinks that posing race question creates closer attitude
towards self-identity rather than concentrating on the demographic consequences.
Race has the physiological markers which indicates self worth and intellectual ability. Prewitt strongly believes that discarding the term race altogether has
moral and statistical justifications. The government doesn't have to ask what
racial group they belong to; it could simply ask what population group people
belong to. This change would break the rules of hierarchical assumptions which
comes from historical discrimination. Then he claims the question
should be revised as:
Today, not only USA
but also the whole world, deals with the problem of racial classification. How we identify a
person's race or even should we
identify it are
the major questions in our daily lives. Ancestral bonds and ethnicity are
important characteristics of a nation as they show the diversity and affluence.
However using them to classify people and determine policies creates conflicts
and these are out of intended norms. Prewitt claimed that today we are not
heading to a color-blind society, which actually relates to our previous
discussion. Prewitt provides a political perspective on this issue and shows
that racial categorization in the census shows how America is not a colorblind
society. We agree Prewitt about revising the question into a more open ended
one and discarding the term race altogether. It would acknowledge
multiracialism and focus on beauties of diversity rather than discriminating
and categorizing them.
Here are some questions we would like you
to think and interpret about:
- Why do
America enumerate race in census?
- Which
racial groups are underrepresented in America or in other countries?
- How can we
decide on proper number of races? Is 6 enough?
- Do you
think there should be a distinction between the terms race and ethnicity
in census?
- How will
new groups of immigrants find a place in a fixed demographic
classification system?
Articles:
photos and comments about blackness: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/13/one-drop-rule-black-identity-photos-yaba-blay_n_4775100.html
race card project: http://theracecardproject.com/
national geographic pictures: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/10/changing-faces/schoeller-photography
Videos:
the changing state of USA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOeuMymIezg
Iranian American woman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BaZ0LNlfWg
2010 Census: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvdAwc0htaI
Russell Peters: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Jy9uuLTv4
Bige YILMAZ & Aslı AYGÜNEŞ
Firstly, it was great presentation and there were so many amazing videos.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I agree with "not a colorblind society" idea since it is clear that America's colorblindness is a way of discriminating people.
I was thinking about a solution to this race problem in census yet it is really difficult to fins a solution to it. I think determining one's race is important because of the government policies such as immigrant laws, school and health workers and other things we have discussed in class yet it also makes discrimination possible. Also, there is this point which annoys me (or more like, makes me curious) how Americans can talk about purity of race? I mean I love America and American culture, people within. Yet, it doesn't make sense to me. Being white, I can understand. If you are black, you are most likely not white BUT being an American is a completely different thing. You can be English, Spanish, French. There was no America before 1776 as there was no Turkey before 1920. As we have talked in the class, it is difficult to identify oneself as Turkish today because no one really knows where their great-great-great-grand parents were from. They could be from anywhere. It is same with America, I think. They feel like Americans so they are Americans but there is more discrimination in America so that creates a problem to identify oneself as American. "White people" in America has the power as mentioned in "Privilege" by Paula S. Rothenberg and they use this power to clarify who can be American and who cannot. Maybe that's the reason why there are so many kinds of American; African-American, Asian American, Native American... Why not call them Americans, simple as this.
So what is the solution for census, I still do not have a clear answer. Maybe it is not the census that we need to change (apart from the Negro part(which is not appropriate and more racial category would be much better), but we need to change the ideas of people towards being an American. Being an American shouldn't mean that being a white, we are living in the 21st century! As Russell Peters says, it will be almost impossible not to mix races. So my answer seems like not to eliminate the race part in the census but to change it a little bit(such as adding more options) while changing people's way of thinking about being an American more and it is not an easy task at all. However if we manage to do this, maybe we will also eliminate the problem of discrimination since everyone will realize the most important thing is to feel like American.
And just for my curiosity, do you think changing race part to a population group part will solve the problem in the society and political policies? Is it a permanent solution for census? Would it create a social and political discrimination against minority population groups?
Ezgi ULUSOY
Great questions, Ezgi!
ReplyDeleteDue to my health problems, I was unable to view today's presentation by my friends however, after reading and going through the provided materials, I think I can comment on some of the issues pointed out in this presentation. Firstly, I believe that over-classification or under-classification by the government is merely a tool to generalize people of different race and ethnicity because it paves the way for capitalistic tendencies of corporations benefiting from such divisions. In order to provide people with more opportunities, they have to be able to state their race and ethnicity based on their own information and heritage, not bound to the limited options forced upon by the government. Secondly, it is important to point out that the government does not really care about individuals when it comes to minority groups, the main concern is to limit them to certain areas and social groups, so that they could deal with the economical and cultural ramifications more easily than "letting" them be part of a bigger community. Finally, I think that rather than dividing people into more groups just based on their color, people themselves should be able to determine who they are and where they belong to, so that they could fully live the life they want to lead and reach their full potential. It is vital that these discriminations should end on a governmental level and give the choice of identity back to the citizens themselves.
ReplyDelete-Kaan Can Oyman
I think Kaan makes an excellent point about the role of capitalism in racial classification. This goes back to what I was saying about "who gets a piece of the pie?" Or, in the parlance of our times, "it's all about the cash money." Yes, I think Kaan is correct that governments frequently do not care about individuals as much as they care about tracking the status of groups--because it is the groups who will want resources (or drain resources, according to some) and it is groups that the government wants to make sure don't grow too rapidly or shrink too rapidly....
DeleteThanks for the great presentation, really enjoyed it. I loved the occasional short video, as well as the cycling images on the background. I personally find it too distracting when additional materials take too much time -say a 10 mins video out of the blue followed by a dreadfully long quotation. It was all very well balanced, great stuff. (And I now have one more comedian to watch on YouTube when bored, so thanks for that.)
ReplyDeleteOn the subject, I think this is one of those cases where it is downright impossible to please everyone; yet anyone who happens to be not-so-content is very likely to have legitimate, sensible arguments. There are of course issues with the census, but none of them require a large scale change. Let me elaborate…
I believe the main reason why such questions of race and ethnicity are even asked in the census in the first place is directly political, one’s identity comes into play much later. Election campaigns, methods and degrees of affirmative action regarding a certain area, responses to potential local needs, to name a few examples, are without any sort of doubt cannot function as well without such data.
To clarify, the census has an entirely different aim than to provide people with yet another medium of self-expression or one’s assertion of identity. Yet, it is a crucial part of the American psyche that whenever race and/or ethnicity is involved, one cannot simply describe oneself without invoking entirely different feelings than we do here in Turkey, or the average Andersson can in Sweden. When I say that my mother has a Greek/Crimean background, the sentence brings along absolutely no other connotation than what is implied on the surface. The US, on the other hand, is an entirely different story…
This disparity, I believe, lies in the heart of the race problem, and the issue we have at hand. As long as “the American Mind”, to quote Jefferson, keeps thinking within the same boundaries that it does, there is no easy solution. (This isn’t to imply any sort of inferiority, mind you, “the Turkish mind” will have its own boundaries and even some terrible ones at that.) And things aren’t going to change any time soon. So, where do we go from here?
Since any change in the census that might please anyone will trigger an entirely different reaction from some other guy, I believe the solution should be strictly political, without necessarily trying to please every single person out there and failing utterly. Going into extreme detail in origin will not only make analyzing the data a pain in the back but also fall short of having any sort of benefit. It makes absolutely no difference for the government, which part of Africa an immigrant comes from when formal procedures are considered –unless the US decides to bomb a certain African country, but you never know (jk). Again, this isn’t to say one’s ethnicity or national origin doesn’t matter at all; my point is that the way the census data is used makes the census something else entirely.
To end with an example, I would not mind if the US census bureau put the entire Middle East (including Turkey) under a single category. After all, from a political perspective, the countries in the ME are more similar than they are different.
This ended up longer than I first expected, hope it sounds as plausible as it did in my mind.
-Buğra Murat Altan
Hi Murat--thanks for your input. I agree that from the government's stanpoint, all of this is exactly as you say--purely political. That is, the data are used to inform political choices made by individual politicians and also larger, bureaucratic policy implementation, as well as group-specific lobbying. However, let's not underestimate the profound personal effect on identity that the act of checking a box can have. Like I mentioned in class, regardless of the intent of the process (political, bureaucratic, etc), the process of self-identification becomes imbricated in this larger, more complex dialectical relationship where the act of ticking the box *creates* personal identity as much as it reinforces, validates (or denies) personal identity and self-expression. And that's how structural process become deeply involved in personal processes....
DeleteI must admit that I am completely uncomfortable with the word "race". We prooved some times ago that the very conception of 'race' was/is constructed and so completely meaningless. Consequently I don't really get why we are still using it, espacially in the political area. But when I think about it, there is something that, to me, is pretty obvious, it is the very fact that keeping up mentionning "race" is a way to maintain the conception alive and so, to hold (and keep) the power. As we say "divide and conquer/rule". This is, according to me, what census is about : division (not only but mostly). Something caught my attention, we speak a lot about American "races" and almost forget that, even if these people have 'foreign origins' they actually are American citizens. I think that this is something really important.
ReplyDeleteI am French, my grand-parents were from Algeria, I have both nationalities, French and Algerian, but I don't feel 'less' French than someone who got his roots only there. And I am pretty sure that it goes the same for a lot of ""Foreign-Americans"". So maybe in these forms, we could ask the people how they feel about their own identity, it would be better than asking them where their ancestors are from.
But above all, I think that we should work on the use of 'race' and replace it by 'ethny' or 'origins' because of course, we cannot avoid the fact that these people have 'roots' somewhere else, but we should probably 'redefine' the conception of 'being American and having some family abroad' !
My question is, if a Nigerian guy immigrates in the US, finds a job, obtains the green card, got married, has children and then, if he becomes grand-father, can we call his sons and his grand-sons "African-Americans" if they've never been to Africa, don't talk igbo for instance, and don't even know a thing about Africa ? I think Americans would call them African-Americans, just because they're black [they might even not come from Africa (because not only Africans are black)]. So we really need to define what "being American" means because I doubt it's only "being white" unlike what some people seem to think.
I find the "African-American" question pretty relevant because, as you may know, nowadays in the US, 'black-Americans' have established a kind of hierarchy : The blacks who are descendants from slaves and the one who are not. They do the distinction among the black community, but outside this community, for a white-American, there is absolutely no difference at all, they're just Black and so, African. So I think that the way people feel about their identities is much more important than the place their ancestors were born in.
I might appear redundant, but I really think that education is a solution. We need to teach our children that there is no difference between a Black, a Latino American and a White one, that we must treat them equally and learn from their cultures.
All this census question can also be helpful, as we said in class, when it comes to policies (at school...). That's why I find the topics pretty sensitive.
So yes, I definitely think that we should distinguish 'race' and 'ethnicity' simply because they are two different conceptions that are mixed up. one is real and the other one is completely fictional.
~Inès Allag
I want to respond to Inés's comment on the usefulness or not of "race" as a term. Yes, we have seen that it has no biological basis. But, for me, and for scholars of race in America, the word is still important because it is still being used to create systems and structures of inequality in the United States. That is, race as political, economic, legal, social, and cultural dimensions that are vitally important to understanding how power works in the USA. To get rid of "race" as a term not only throws away a long and important history of race struggle (and some triumph) in America, but denies that race still exists, if not as a biological category, than as a social, economic, legal, political and cultural category that has meaning for many people, including people for whom racial self-identification is a powerful act of self-naming. Professor V-V next week will speak to us about the importance of claiming a Chicano homeland and ancestry that *is* in fact different from other traditions in the USA. There *are* real and important differences between groups of people in the USA, but the question is how to turn divisions from faultlines into sources of shared struggle and solidarity.
DeleteAn informative post with an entertaining presentation. The additional materials like videos and links gave us a clear picture of what is being talked about and made us laugh as well. Gotta love Russell Peters!
ReplyDeleteMy personal view on the census is that there is just no end to this “solution” of adding new categories. Racial mixing is becoming more common, and so is the problem of not being able to identify with a given race category, even if you were allowed mark more than one. They can add more options like Persian, Arab, and other categories like Shereen Meraji suggests, but even that isn't a permanent solution. Even Persian and Arabs aren't a specific race/ethnicity, they have diverse races/ ethnicities within their “Persian” or “Arab” communities, their only commonality being the language they speak. So its like saying all Spanish speaking people are Spanish, whether they're originally from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Colombia or Spain.
Also, they'll have to invent new races to describe people after a few generations of racial mixing because there will be many people who are not only a mix of two ethnicities or “races” but their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents will also be multiracial. It wont only be a case of being full or half African, Hispanic, European, Asian, Arab, Native Indian, Persian, etc. Like Russell Peters jokes about, there will be “beige” people. Even people who are half one group and half another may not want to identify themselves with either. People who are racially and ethnically mixed, in a sense have their own new racial and ethnic identity that isn't an official category. They might be, for instance, half “white” and half “Asian”, but have physical and cultural qualities that belong to neither, or a combination of both, with a new hybrid language and culture of their own. Even if one does choose simply one or two of the categories, it wont be helpful to get their background information, because multiracial people don't necessarily share the same culture or qualities as the ethnicities of which they are a mix of. They are also often treated differently than how their parents or grandparents were treated in regards to their race. Then how will people choose from this limited set of categories on what group they belong to? I'm pretty sure that census will not be willing to trace each individual's family history.
Of course, it does seem like the census is making improvements in comparison to the methods of the previous census, but there are many aspects that they are still not taking into account, which result in misleading information about populations and identity.
I think the race and ethnicity aspect should be removed from the census and people should rather be able to relate to population group. “Race” to me is a very abstract concept and there is no reliable data that we can even define race, let alone associate populations with it. If the idea of race was invented according to skin color, skull sizes, and basically physical features. Then what happens to people who have “black” facial features yet light skin or people who are born with dark skin but have blue eyes and blonde hair, and many other combinations. Doesn't this change the idea of race, if one's physical appearance does not tell you this person's background? Rather than being given a small selection to choose from, people should be able to define themselves in terms of who they are, what group they identify with, even if it is a group outside of the given categories. The census should just find a way to gather these data and it needs to consider changing populations while developing its methods. It should keep updating its ways according to the changes. It wouldn't be right to come up with a single formula or a solution today and expect it to work 10 years later. Yes it is much easier and practical to simply categorize people, and it is much more complex to use other methods, but it serves justice for a nation just as complex.
-Sera
Nicely summarized and outlined, Sera!
DeleteFirst of all, thank you for the great presentation ladies. I really enjoyed today. Especially I liked Russell Peters “Whole World mixing” video :)
ReplyDelete“Race” is still a complex issue throughout the world and most people suffer from “race”. It is really difficult to understand the reason of race discrimination and I think that it is harmful for the society. Actually race becomes a more political term nowadays. To find a permanent solution to a race problem is clearly difficult and racial classifications minimized in census. It is true that there is a multiracial classification. We also saw that “Negro” term is still used and it is really offensive for African-American people.
I’m Turkish but my mother is Albanian. Does it make me an Albanian Turkish? My mother’s grandparents is Albanian immigrant and they really suffered from the immigrance. When they immigrated to Turkey due to Balkan War, they struggled a lot to go on their lives and because of their language they had to learn Turkish but they could protect their culture and even today I can eat “pırasalı börek” which is a really famous Albanian food and it is really delicious. When my mother’s grandparents were on the borderland, they lost their relatives. I think it is really sad that they had to leave their own country and they had to face the difficulties about starting a new life in a different country. It must have been difficult for them and surely gaining acceptance was not easy for them. Moreover, according to my general knowledge, Albanians are the first immigrants who immigrated to Turkey.
I think that it doesn’t matter if a person is a white, black, Lebanese, Albanian etc. Colorblindness is not a solution again and it is significant that racial tolerance should be more widespread.
Finally, it is important that if a person is an immigrant and lives in a different country, he/she can adopt the country’s culture, language, also refines the country’s culture, language and other things.
-Ezgi Doğan
What strikes me about your post, Ezgi, is an interesting process about immigration/migration, which we will get to later. And that's the idea that cultures and people don't just move in one direction: from "there" to "here." When people migrate, they bring with them languages, cultures, values, traditions and these things end up impacting the culture of the place they move to just as much as the migrants must learn to adapt and perhaps assimilate (to varying degrees) to the places they have moved to. Cultures never just move one way--it is a complex, dynamic, circular process. Your own family history proves this fascinating point. Thanks for sharing!
DeleteI want to start saying that it was a great presentation. It was fluent, enjoyable and informative. So, thank you Bige and Asli for that.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, when Bige mentioned about NAACP does not want to multiracial box because they worry about losing their privileges, I couldn’t help but thinking that does it always have same causes to have power over something or somebody. Because it seems same to me what and why white people did everything to black people over years and why NAACP which is the representatives or sound of most powerful minority group in America does not want to make indistinct racial classes. So, again I think this race issue is all about power and as it is seen they go with together always.
About the solution, as Russell Peter points out in a really funny way racial mixing is increasing every other day and adding new boxes won’t solve the problem. So I think either they put open-ended question that asks people to identfy themselves or remove this section of census completely. Since removing this section does not serve the purpose of the government, asking people to identfy themselves sounds more applicable in my opinion.
~Berivan Uğurlu
Thanks for the great presentation today. Although the text was a little complicated and although there were parts hard to understand, after the presentation they became clear for me. Thanks for clarifying these tricky parts.
ReplyDeleteEspecially in cosmopolitan countries, numbers and numeric analysis express current data about the circumstances of that country. The United States is considered as the homeland of many people from many different ethnic backgrounds. Since the USA welcomed many minority groups in accordance with its work force requirement especially in the reconstruction period of the country, these people came to the USA with great hopes of having a better life. However, because the reality did not correspond to these hopes, people who came to the USA to work have suffered for centuries. Consequently, the concept of race and ethnicity is of vital importance. This importance derives from the historical background of juridical and civil cases.
In countries where people have the tendency to embrace nationalism idea more than the idea of multiculturalism, it’s not hard to gather under the same roof. In this aspect, countries’ religious and historical backgrounds should be taken into account. For instance, in some countries religion acts as cement in attaching people to each other. In this case, if people of that country didn’t suffer from racial discrimination for decades, it is easy to ignore one’s racial background in identifying his or her identity. On the other hand, if a country has witnessed discrimination based on race or ethnicity for a long period, it is not fair to ignore people’s racial background. Then, people shouldn’t have the luxury of neglect racial diversity. However, how to define one’s race is still blurred. According to my point of view, in cases where it is difficult to identify one’s race, questions should be based on nationality rather than race. As an example, people who live in Turkey today usually came from very different countries in the past. Yet, because of the Ottoman Empire was suffered from and eventually collapsed because of multiracialism; since 1923, the education system is composed of nationalistic ideas. Even so, we face a similar kind of situation with the USA since 90s, namely the Kurdish problem.
Usually censuses clarify how the structure of citizenship evolves during particular time periods. However, parallel to what we have covered in the presentation, the USA is different in its formation. There is a dilemma in how the census should be constructed as a result of the difficulty in defining one’s race. Neither getting rid of racial classifications nor trying to put people in synthetically constraining groups is suitable in solving the USA’s century-long racial problems.
The presentation of today was also successful in creating argumentation about how to solve the dilemma of racial identity. The group also dealt with the connections between the novel Americanah and Prewitt’s text successfully. The last video was closely relevant to what we discuss about this week’s text. Because comedy is the best way to reveal a detailed framework of a subject, the last video provided a general summary about where the USA is going in the issue of multiracialism. Also other videos have explanatory aspects in relation to how the censuses are deceptive. Thanks again for the excellent presentation.
- Deniz
I enjoyed reading your thoughtful response, Deniz!
DeleteFirst of all, it was a wonderful presentation; I really liked your videos and pictures. Thank you for your efforts. Secondly, I would like to try to answer one of your questions as well as I can.
ReplyDeleteQ: Do you think there should be a distinction between the terms race and ethnicity in census?
As mentioned in The Social Construction of Difference: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality, “race is a social construction takes issue with the once popular belief that people were born into different races with innate, biologically based differences in intellect, temperament, and character. The idea of ethnicity, in contrast to race, focuses on the shared social/cultural experiences and heritages of various groups and divides or categorizes them according to these shared experiences and traits.” So, based on that passage with a little interpretation, what I understand from race is a social construction, which is given to one by others, while ethnicity is shared values and history, which one basically embraces. In the text by Kenneth Prewitt, he points that in 1970 census, modification of classification of American-Spanish/Hispanic from racial category to an ethnic one had placed. So, American- Spanish/Hispanic was counted as a racial category for a long time. After the change, it is the only ethnicity-based category, which shows the scarcity. In a multicultural society like the U.S.A, there should be equal opportunity for every person to clarify himself/herself. To conclude, there should be a distinction between the terms race and ethnicity in census, because the terms are fairly diversity between two terms. Additionally, people must be given equal rights, so if the ethnicity categories must be added depending on demand.
I agree with Ilkim that it doesn't make sense to have one "ethnic" category for "Hispanics" while everyone else has to choose a racial category or a country-of-origin category (like Korean, Japanese, Vietnamese, etc). Some standardization is needed!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all thanks for great presentation that illuminated complex parts of text. I wanted to be creative while answering two questions that are related to each other and capable to solve the problem of NAACP over multiple choice. Please excuse me in advance if it is so crazy.
ReplyDeleteHow can we decide on proper number of races? Is 6 enough?
How will new groups of immigrants find a place in a fixed demographic classification system?
The only part that not discussed in class discussion is the question about new groups of immigrants. I think solving the problem of new groups of immigrants/new comers will solve the problem of being unrepresented and the problem of proper number of races. At that point I suggest a solution with time process that is already used almost in every country when applying for citizenship of a country. The process of becoming a citizenship of country requires some steps that must be gone through. The main step is time. People wait for a long periods of time to become citizen of a country which is used, I think, to be sure that you are permanent in that country. So it is better to start from 9th question of census booklet and use time as a tool to create equality for all races. I suggest that there must be three parts, that shows levels of races according to population, for 9th question. At the top of question there must be list of major races “first level”, below the major races there must races of only minority groups “second level”, and at the bottom of question there must be parts for others and multiple choice “that are at third level”. In order to understand my suggestion lets start from third level of 9th question. Take into consideration 2020 census. Those who are not represented at first or second level of question must fill the part for others or multiple choice. Those who represented themselves at third level and will form the %0.5 of total population of US, will be represented at second level at 2030 census, otherwise they will be represented again at third level. Those who represented at second level and will form the %5 of total population of US will be represented at first level at 2030 census, otherwise they will be represented again at second level or will be represented at third level if they fall below %0.5 of total population. These are the approximate numbers that can be regulated by US government.
By using this method it will be possible to increase number of races equally if they form a certain percentage of total population that will be regulated by US government each year. Also this method can solve the problem of, Who gets a piece of the pie? and How big is the piece?, by dividing pie in to two parts, for example as %75 to %25, and separate the biggest part for those minorities who represented at first level of race category and smallest part to those minorities who represented at second level of race category. It is so unmercifully but the third level of race category will not receive any part of pie until they will form a certain percentage of US population.
It is also a very good idea to create a web-site instead of census booklet as Murat and Serhat mentioned in class.
I hope I was clear and not so crazy.
Best wishes
HASAN BAYRAM
Does this method replicate the idea of hierarchies in any way, Hasan? Maybe I need a visual to understand your solution more clearly....
DeleteFirst of all, I would like to thank Bige and Aslı for their presentation. It was a contemplated presentation.
ReplyDeleteAs we discussed in the class, asking for people’s race on the census is a big problem for people because some people eve cannot put themselves one of the placed boxes. When it comes to why government asks such a question is because of federal needs and for community benefit. They would like to know where the money should be spent on. The government creates quotas on immigration and shapes policies according to its results. However, this creates a race classification. Although this classification, we know that all people belong to the one species, Homo sapiens no matter whatever race they are classified. Although ‘race boxes’ are offensive for some people, it makes the government’s job easier. Therefore I can say that it is between two fires. Thus, how is racism unknowingly created?
We have already talked about how multiracial classification affects African-American. The first group which comes to our mind when it is said minority is African-Americans. After the civil right movement, they gained some rights and so they were on a better position than other minority groups. According to their number, African-Americans got funds from the government. And now with multiracial classification some people which were classified as African-American could move other species and because their number decreased so that their funds. We are now familiar with African-Americans’ perspective but what about whites? The question which weighs on my mind is that how does this race classification affect whites?
Pınar ILGAR
Good question!
DeleteThank you ladies for such a good and entertaining presentation. Every part of your presentation was didactic but I think that the video of Russell Peters' explains a lot about this race situation. Anyone whom watches the video could own an idea about the mixing race.
ReplyDeleteAccording to mixing race, 'the boxing issue' might be a way to avoid the identity loss due to the countings and census. However, it still effects the immigrants( whom are required to do it) since it triggers the classification. When looking back to the text and 'marking one or more' we learned that Eskimos are still not accepted as a part of the new race& color system which is as annoying as the offensive 'negro' writing on the paper of census. It's easy for them to describe African American people as 'negro' to struggle for to get the bigger piece of the pie but no one give a single minute to think how racist the system is. Moreover, it even create new races like 'free colored people'. America is a multiracial country which ironically has no respect to the immigant citizens, while wanting them to 'show' themselves due to categories.
As an answer to the third question;
How can we decide on proper number of races? Is 6 enough?
In my opinion, we can decide the proper number by not classifying the races and accept them as citizens and as human beings who came to live in the land of 'opportunities'. In this position, 6 is more than enough to avoid dividing people.
Kardelen İpek
And Eskimos, like "Negro" is an outdated term to refer to Aleut or Alaska Native peoples. It shouldn't be on government documents.
DeleteI confused about this classification situation. Actually the system they are making is simple however, I was astonished while thinking for an alternative way. First I compared the systems in US and Turkey. At first; I thought that our system is better that we do not indicate our race and ethnicity. But I noticed that even we do not remark, our country is not 'cakes and ale'. People still want some privileges by using their race or ethnicity. Also they are abusing their rights by manipulating 'being minority'. Then I thought about the US system; yes, maybe it is logical but not FAIR. Because they mentioned about NAACP and 'the privileges according to demographics' that's why I said its not fair. In my opinion, remarking race and ethnicity is just a need for census not important for privileges or should not be. Privileges or contributions should be given according to "people's" incomes or number of family members. Races and ethnicities should not be bench marks for people's life standards.
ReplyDeleteDilan ALGAN
Ah, but the catch (for Americans) is that things like household incomes are *directly* correlated to race. For instance, you can look at the statistics in Rothenberg's article to see the difference that remains between middle class African American families and white families. And these differences aren't just between whites and blacks, but between whites and all minority groups. So, you see, race is imbricated in all these social structures. That's why the idea of "getting rid of race" is hard to implement--it's too far embedded into every aspect of American life and is directly responsible for what we call structural inequality (things like persistent differences in household incomes or higher levels of education for white people and people who have more money--of all races). It gets very complicated....
DeleteThank you ladies for the informative and entertaining presentation which really helped me to learn some details of the Census 2010.
ReplyDeleteI would like comment on the changes in Census 2010 because I think adding new options to the Census can be a positive thing as long as officials find out different ethnic and racial groups and make regulations according to their needs. However, seeing that the Census 2010 does not include all ethnic groups makes me think about the aim of the Census. If the aim is to find out the ethnicity of the residences then I can say that this aim cannot be achieved just adding new categories because there are a lot of people who are not able to find the best option that represent themselves. As a Turkish citizen, the first thing that came to my mind is "How would I represent myself in the Census if I was a resident in the US?" I am not a Native American, not a black African or not Hispanic and I cannot also say that I am white just because I have a light skin. I know I am not the only person that cannot represent herself in the Census and this problem should be sold out but I do not know how.
To answer one of the questions on blog: “How will new groups of immigrants find a place in a fixed demographic classification system?” Maybe adding categories based on which country a person was born in, what his/her nationality is, what his/her parents' origin is, which languages that person can speak or even in which countries he/she received an education would help new groups of immigrants find a way of representing themselves in a demographic classification system (if the aim is to make regulations according to different ethnic groups' needs). Of course there should be more questions than that but these things, I think, are better than asking whether you are a black African, a native American or a white person.
Tansu Özakman
First of all, it was a really good presentation and I really enjoyed it as you very well informed me about the topic. Yet it is a really complicated situation to come up with an undoubted solution. The method of the Census Bureau is somehow good because it shows that there is no colorblind future for America. Discrimination continues to affect people’s lives as some immigrants were able to assimilate but the others left behind and new versions of racism occurred. The Census Bureau is not colorblind, statistical ignorance of US citizens would be a failure to ignore the multiracial, hybrid America.
ReplyDeleteHowever, even if it seemed so, I do not find this method of the Census Bureau completely proper. If their questions about race changes, it would not be right for future because there is an unstoppable racial mixing and they would have to create names for new races as Russell Peters mentions. Furthermore, labeling and creating multiracial identities complicates the situation. It pushes multiracial people with a single racial identity to question themselves and homogeneity of their origin because race is an unstable form of identity. At this point, I agree with Prewitt, the census should not ask people’s race but it should ask what population they belong to because it creates hierarchical assumptions such as “black person is more stupid or white person is cleverer”. Moreover, it also includes implications for civil rights since race has been tied with factors such as employment discrimination, education and social class. That is why it seems like a best solution to clear the hierarchical assumptions and prevent the implications for civil rights.
Yes, there should be a public awareness but it is difficult for many people to think about their races because the number for the category of multiracial increases. Yet the importance is that there should also be a strong political leadership; government should not categorize people in races and take the burden away from its people. No one has to find themselves in a tough obligation to classify themselves by their race because everyone is a mix of some kind. Skin color is not a prime factor to find the true heritage of people because every group of people (African American, Asian, etc.) comes in different skin shade. Therefore, asking people about their race is not a vital solution but it only strengthens discrimination and shapes politics as Professor Reimer highlighted: “who gets the biggest piece?!”
Burcu Karatekeli
What I love about Burcu's repsonse here is this phrase that she uses: "...race is an unstable form of identity." Super!
DeleteFirstly, I would like to say thank you for this great presentation to Aslı and Bige. It was really successful and interesting.
ReplyDeleteFrom the Prewitt's text and what we discussed in our class, I saw that there are two main problems in the method of the census system. One of them is the consequences of “self-expression”. In the census, people have to identify their race themselves. However, when we consider that the US is a multicultural country, sometimes it may be hard to chose their race. There can be more than one race in their family. In this situation, they have to chose the race with which they want to express themselves. Thus, it cannot give us the accurate results in this sense. It is about something our identifying ourselves. At this point, that crucial question arises: What determines our race? Can we be the ones who identify our race?
The second problem is that there are only six race given in the census (except from "other"). It means that people have to make a choice. The last census demonstrates us that “other” is the third most selected choice. Thus, it means that there are many other people living in the US except from that six race. This census obviously ignores people from other races. Thus, I believe that this is also another problem.
As we always emphasize that, race is a socially constructed concept. It is about your background, your culture or your perception abou how you see yourself and other people. My suggestion can be this: Instead multiple choice, the question can be asked as open-ended. People write their race or ethnicity. It would be harder in this kind of system to reach the results, but at least it offers gap to people to express their race. This kind of system make people feel more valuable as a member of the society.
Finally, another interesting point that I want to point out that in the article Prewitt emphasizes that he wants a society that is truly color-blind. I liked that “truly” in the expression, because we know from last week that color-blindness is not the real solution that we are looking for. By adding this word, I think Prewitt also states the difference between being color-blind and being “truly” color-blind.
Yasemin ÖZTEMÜR
Can you say more about the difference between color-blind and "truly" color-blind? What is the significance for you?
DeleteFirst of all, thanks for your great presentation. It was very informative and fun. I would like to start with the video of Russell Peters that you showed which was very funny and true about the future. Actually, it is clear that with capitalization and globalization mixed races became an issue. It is also inevitable that this fact will change or lose the meaning of race in the future.
ReplyDeleteRelated to these ideas the racial classification of the census will lose its importance because identifying races will be nearly impossible. When we think about "race" we think about African Americans, Hispanics, Asians and the others but not the white race, because the white race became a norm and actually they are in the safe zone and privileged. White race also has different origins such as British, German, etc. At the end, if they start questioning the origin of white in the census this will be the demonstration of Russell's idea about future.
Lastly, if there is a difference in governments payments or funds to different races there will always be a necessity for the racial identity in terms of benefits. All these facts are a demonstration that there is no colorblindness especially the census. Only if the U.S government becomes colorblind the color or race issue will not be a problem in the U.S. Although, diversity has benefits it also creates problems in society if there is a categorization based on it.
Rabia Betül Kubilay
Ah, so in your opinion, it's a good thing to be colorblind?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I found this article and presentation very useful because as we learned many times, there is a huge problem about race and ethnicity and this article gives detailed information about race and ethnicity through the American history. I mean ,before I read this article i didn't know how many races or ethnical classification in the USA.
ReplyDeleteI think Americans strongly influenced by the methods of collected data on race and ethnicity but even in census America could not reach the correct result because one’s ethnicity or race can’t be measure and can’t be classify by majority and these kind of classification make minorities such a ‘ghost’ in society. Also gives a wrong result. As Kennneth Prewitt says in his article: “not all Americans fit neatly into one little box” (p10) Putting people in a limited classification led other race and ethnicities’ diminish.
America identifies himself as a multiracial country but with the racial classification, people are not equally divided I mean as we mentioned in class, government provides people a money but It changes through one’s race. For example being half Latino or half black is not enough so the main question occurs that who gets the biggest piece of pie in the society? And it makes me confused. As Prewitt says that “maybe we should destroy categories”. Thus, people can freely identify himself/herself and this situation would create more equality in the USA.In addition, I want to mention “intermarriages” in the USA . with the multiculturalism, people start to marry different races so this situation create a chaos and I think it disproof the hypothesis the racial classification and it creates a problem. As the writer says that “mark one or more” approach does not reliable at this point and not provide one right classification for census.
Thanks Bige and Aslı for the presentation about Racial Classification. The text by Prrewitt was good and it points out major stuff to talk about when people asks about structuring the race's in society.
ReplyDeleteMainly focusing on the presentation, the Census 2010 test was important because it is being done for a reason that financial aid for minority groups that identified as races. Important quote that I find on the text is, “Without discarding the three-fifths clause, a new era of racial classifcation began in 1820 when the “free colored” were counted separately from slaves and free whites. This modi½cation allowed citizenship and related civil rights to hinge on color rather than on condition of servitude, a policy that heralded nearly a century and a half of race-based policies focused on making it diffcult, if not impossible, for nonwhites to vote, own property, marry across racial lines, enter various professions, seek advanced education, or do much else.”(page 7, Prrewitt) I presume this is the most important part because it is giving people rights, but what extend. Yet data collected by Census used to aid people but it could also create another problem, does every single race get what they need? Or black population is qiuite high than others are they getting more than others ? Those questions actually answered mostly but still should be discussed in some extend.
Still I believe that most important connection to race is economical, think of it, when there is no water in Africa people collects money for aid but how much of it goes to there? It's also connected to the text's question, what is going to be in future? Are we going to still call people by their race or geographical reagion they born? In addition, I repeat myself, if this Census test was done by computer's or internet based system, it would be more accurate; for instance check the Census site, Native American's give up the test on 2010 but they hoped something will done about them and do it in 2000.
The video of Census 2010, the part about the Iranian women that indicates the importance of the racial categorization actually a good example because she is doing racism in my mind, I mean yes it is perfect fit for presentation topic and it explains lot about the identification part. However the fact that as an individual she choses to explain herself belonging in a certain race or ethnicity is another way of self-shot. I mean that is ok to emphasize that but is it ok if a person creates new words out of race and uses them to herself ? And even, is it have to explain the geographical reigon that she born or that her biological parents born ? I born in Bulgaria then came to Turkey in same month, my dad born in Hungary, my mom and grands born in Bulgaria; did this make me Bulgarian or Turkish ?
Lastly, the indian comedian mentioned a major fact that deals with the whole wold actually, being humped by chinese or indians was quite clever and well put because really if you think of the china and india those countries have enourmous numbers of people and as he mentioned that could be the end of “racial mixing”. By the way what's the identification for mixed raced child of a Finland or Sweden and indian breed? The last part, indian comedian was a good closure, thank you for fun ending.
My question is what if those all are individual curiosity as well as it is socially constructed? I mean it is mainly it is directed to individual demands and it shouldn't explain a whole race, because its individual thoughts ? Isn't it also a generalization ?
Serhat BAŞAK
While I don't quite understand all of your thoughts here, S, I think you might be getting at one of the main ideas of race and identity. Race is both how others classify us (for instance, on official, bureaucratic forms) and also how we identify ourselves. In both cases, there are issues of power at work. To self-identify as "white" also means claiming (intentionally or not, as we will see later in the reading by Lipsiztz) social-economic-and political power. When governments and agencies classify you into groups, it's also about power. How to control and manage groups in the country. But the flipside to all of this is that RACE HAS MEANING and to claim a racial identity can be a powerful act of self-expression that empowers people, legitimizes their identities, recognizes how their peoples have been discriminated against and works as an important tool for building solidarity.
DeleteI think the presentation was great and well-organised. I didn't know that the census is used for the government to enact laws according to minorities. Changed and revised categories in the census is not surprising. United States is a melting pot! there are hundreds of shades of white and black. These categories obviously leads to a categorization process which sounds terrible. When I was in Ohio for my exchange year, I took a test that was given by the state. I saw the race/ethnicity question that includes 6 categories. I was so surprised that I told my host mom "it's racist". anyways today's 6 categories still doesn't cover all the races. And I was surprised to learn that Hispanic is a person who knows and talks spanish. The problem is what if you can't speak Spanish and called Hispanic? race and ethnicity difference is meaningless just as prewitt says. I like the idea of government asking what population group a person belongs to instead of race. I was amazed by the NAACP's reaction to racial classification but they are also right. Civil rights movement privileges may be divided in different groups. If official number is smaller based on data, they might get less fund and money from government. Multiracialism is the future of the United States, yes, therefore I think we should not still ask the question what race. Like Asli and Bige said, difference is what cultivates the society. I love diversity and United States is the center of diversity.
ReplyDeleteAt first, thanks to Bige and Aslı for their clear and informational presentation. I think it was very useful for all of us. Racial Classification is a universal problem for all people from different part of the world. Not only Hispanics, Asians and Africans are discriminated also white people come from many different ethnicities so it is incomprehensible that just others are discriminated in the society.As Russell Peters says in the video that Aslı and Bige made us watch, if the situation is like this for Africans, Asians,Hispanics etc. white people are also experience this discrimination among their ethnicities.
ReplyDeleteIn the second place, this sad situation is not just valid for a part of people it is valid for every people from every ethnicity. Actually it can be named as ignorance because it is related to ignorance very closely. Some people live very far from this issue in their daily lifes but this is not the way it should be. Everybody should tahe this issue serious and they should not be stand idly by this discrimination, this racist manner. There is always something to do for this racial problem and just the awareness should be constituted of the things should be done to solve and overcome those problems and starting to move for this from some any point in respect to this.
Özge BAŞAK
The presentation that Bige and Aslı had given was very clear to all of us I think, the question “What is going to be in future?” is the question that we will be asking today and in the future. Class classification is not finished and it will not be finished in the future. The questions that the government ask in the survey is a clue that the racism is not over yet. The short clip that we had watched is making it clear because the woman in the short clip is telling that she has two nationalities and she cannot pick a side because she thinks that she do not have to, and it is fair enough. Making this kind of a evaluation is forcing people choose a side and this is the fundamental issue of racism.
ReplyDeleteThis article made our minds clear that racism still exists and there is a limited classification in the survey that people cannot fit in one ethnicity . To be forced to make a choise about your ethnicity in in the twentieth century, to be forced to choose an ethnicity that you do not fit in is a very sad thing.
Gözde İPEK
I want to thank Aslı and Bige for your presentation. You enlightened us by explaining the significant aspects of the US national census for race and ethnicity studies and the usage data is one of the steps for approaching the subject.
ReplyDeleteIn the light of Prewit’s text, it is very interesting for me to observe how the purposes of the national census transformed over time and the concept of race and ethnicity have gained different meanings in the demographic, cultural and economic spectrums. Starting with social status of the people, then categorizing them according to their race reflects the tremendous changes in the US society. Analyzing the census itself helps a great deal to see the US’ attempts to situate race as social or biological construction.
There are both flaws and pragmatic objectives in the six race classification system that people either suffers or benefits from. I would first ask why only 6 not 10? What methods were used during the development of the model? Was it based on science or was it the production of the social spectrums? I believe that race cannot be diminished in 6 categories because it cannot represent all people. Some people may find themselves not fitting into any of race categories. So what will happen to them? Should we call them race-less people? Since there is no single definition of race, there can be more options in construction of racial groups.
Omitting race in the census can be disadvantageous, in terms of pragmatic approach. At this point, the affirmative action comes into play. It is important to be recognized for racial groups to use the privileges in various fields. However, such action also leads to define and redefine race at each census and this can create confusion in the perception of race for different generations. I’m not sure about compensating the wrongs of the past corrects the current policies. Privileges through race does not sound a way of equalizing the access of resources at any time. Race cannot be wiped out of the minds of people or in policies. In the case of the US, we can see its profound effects and crucial role in the forming the identity of the nation.
Hacer Bahar