An Open Letter to President Barak Obama on Columbus Day

Students--why is the celebration of Christopher Columbus's "discovery" of America so contentious in the USA, especially for Native peoples?  This national holiday will be celebrated on Monday.
Read on:

An Open Letter to President Obama on Columbus Day

One Powerful Illustration Shows Exactly What's Wrong With How the West Talks About Ebola

Hi everybody,

I just wanted to share with you an article I found yesterday about the way western countries are dealing with the ebola issue.
I found the illustration pretty interesting and powerful, so here come a post dedicated to that article.

A quote from the article : " The Ebola epidemic hit a particular nerve with the artist. "People in the African continent are more regarded as an abstract statistic than a patient in the U.S. or Europe," he said. "How many individual stories do we know about any African patients? None. They are treated as an indistinguishable crowd." "
Here is the article ! http://mic.com/articles/100618/one-powerful-illustration-shows-exactly-what-s-wrong-with-media-coverage-of-ebola
See ya
~Inès Allag

Salon.com: America's sex and race Failure

Check out this article from Salon, which discusses intersectionality, colorblind theory, and issues of race and gender in the US (and more):

America's Sex and Race Failure

The US 2010 Census

As a class, we have spent some time on the US Census Bureau website, investigating the 2010 census.  Here's what we discovered:

• What methods did the Census Bureau use in the 2010 census? 
• where you live is very important: where is your permanent residence?
• separate races in very limited ways
• mail, telephone, door-to-door 
• self-identification (ideology): census methods ask people to self-identify: dialectical process of identity formation (checking the box reinforces and creates your identity)
• the use of the word "Hispanic" to identify Latino/as
• a lot less detailed than 2000 census (in 2000 census they asked subdivisions of counties, but in 2010, just county)
• white includes many different identities 

• How are they similar and different than the methods discussed by Prewitt in "Racial Classification in America: Where do we go from here?"
• a lot less detailed than 2000 census (in 2000 census they asked subdivisions of counties, but in 2010, just county)
• Hispanics as ethic category (not racial)
• you can choose "more than one" as racial category
• racial classifications minimized (less options)
• the same 6 categories 
• bilingual forms were used (Spanish, for example)

• What were the results of the 2010 census?
• Hispanic increased in every single state but PR
• Asian racial group fastest increasing since 2000 census
• CA has the largest amount of minority groups in 2010
• lower number of American Indians/Native peoples since 2000
• white and black still represent the largest multiple race combination 
• American Indians and Native Hawaiians have low population demographics as single-race categories, but their numbers increase when they are combined with other racial categories 
• added "other" racial category: many more people than expected chose this category
• THIRD largest category chosen by USA citizens, other than white or black
• 97% of "other" belong to Hispanic ethnic category
• the majority of the total population reported only one race
• children are more likely to be racial or ethnic minorities than adults (interracial mixing)

Discussion: Should we classify people according to race and, if so, how should a country like the USA do it? What are the pros and cons of racial classification?

Discussion: What is the purpose of racial classification by governments? Think about policy.

• for quotas on immigration (1924: Johnson-Reed Act)
• results shape policies (school systems, example)
• shape politics (elections, where candidates invest their money)
• who gets a piece of the pie!  how big is the piece?

Discussion: the case of Middle Eastern peoples (P9 of Prewitt): How should the USA categorize people of Middle Eastern descent?  As a geographic designation or ethnoracial designation (i.e, Arab American)?

• don't ask either of these--they are both racist 
• based on country
• pick and choose strategy: look at how Afghanistan, Pakistan and India are classified
• what about African American?  We don't ask African Americans to specify their country of origin, so why for Middle Eastern people?  

Discussion: White?  What should be done--if anything--about the classification of "white"?  (P10, Prewitt).  Why is "white" also a problematic racial classification?

Racial Classification: You Can't Judge a Book by Its Cover

     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: 

"What is this person's ancestry, nationality, ethnic origin, tribal affiliation?"

With this change, people would not have a problem with identifying themselves in the limited categorizations the census has. The revised question is open-ended and people will find it easier to relate to. Then, Prewitt has an opinion about how to create a race-sensitive policy. For creating a policy government should be aware of 2 important aspects: First government should be aware of demand for recognition and identity expression of multiple race advocates. For example, if a school has a proportionate number of Vietnamese students, parents expects to have Vietnamese teachers as well. Second, focus of population statistics should turn to smaller groups such as being aware of African Americans as not blacks, but their own identity. Another point is that "mark one or more" census statistics are not reliable because the same individual often gives different answers at different times. Since there is no scientific evidence to determine one's race, it is almost impossible to reach a reliable data. Overall, for Prewitt there is no "one" right classification. Prewitt poses the question to the readers: Where do we go from here? Multiracialism is the inevitable future of the United States.

         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

disney: http://uk.eonline.com/news/541540/an-artist-reimagined-disney-princesses-with-different-races-and-the-results-will-blow-your-mind

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

http://www.google.com.tr/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mPOWMEEKpY0C&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=racial+classification+in+America&ots=dZdHopM7Q-&sig=9R-ocxzcWgO2PhHGYSEJWz4ATSQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=racial%20classification%20in%20America&f=false

This is a link to a article by H. Schuman, it is a big book but only the first part, the section of attitudes and norms is quite helpful to understand the concept of "norm". In addition to that on the historical background part it explains the Civil Rights Movements in detail. I read this parts in my previous courses and thought it might be helpful for who wants to read more about race as an issue of society.

The Problem of the "Problemless" Society: Colorblindness

A Critique of Colorblindness is a text, the main idea of which is to challenge the idea that a race is a fixed category with the use of the Critical Race Theory by focusing on politics as well as law in order to reformulate legal doctrines. It starts with looking through the assaults from both the left and the right. Both of which have their own wrong approaches towards colorblindness. While the Left is using silent racial politics in order to keep its votes from Whites as well as Blacks, the Right’s approach towards race is also not helping the situation at all since they do not really believe in the reality of race as something socially constructed. It is mentioned that as long as the use of race remains invisible, the democratic political space where groups come together to mobilize to engage in social change or to represent their much larger society, vanishes. In order to prevent that and make people see the race as it is, the text introduces us to the three major flaws in the colorblindness approach, which are: (1) the assumption of racial inequality is a problem of individuals, (2) people do not actually look closely to the established racial inequality due to the colorblindness idea of theirs, and (3) the belief on how the colorblindness acts inefficiently on grassroots organizations by preventing civil rights communities from mobilized and being unified. Besides, it is pointed out that civil rights movement lost their moral and analytical power and conservative and neoconservatives persuaded us that solely individual initiative can change something, others cannot do anything about it. Moreover, “The Brazilian Experiment in Race-Blindness” is other crucial point of the text. In this part, it is emphasized that the race is dealt with differently in Brazil and there is color caste system instead of racial caste system to which we are familiar from the US.       

This text touches upon many subject that has been studied during this course. One of which is the idea of how people still believe that race is only about the skin color yet as we studies in our courses, race is a socially constructed term since it changed through time and country according to what is the best for political power and relations as it is also mentioned last week’s reading, Race, Class, and Gender in the United States. Also it is mentioned, there is no help in acting as if there is no race at all when there is racial inequality. Instead of acting as if there is nothing wrong, we need to do something in order to prevent this inequality as we have talked for the previous two weeks. The one of the most important problems mentioned in the text is how race is seen as a personal problem rather than social, economic, historical system (However, is it really possible to take an individual and her/his behavior without any consideration to the society s/he belongs to?). By doing this, putting the whole blame on individuals, the problem is still staying there and not speaking about it will not help anyone. The solution as mentioned in the Matter of Whiteness as the Critiques of Colorblindness, is informing people about different racial groups other than hiding the facts. Besides, in the text it is pointed out that conservatives “blackened” the poverty, it means that they demonstrated all black people as being poor by ignoring many poor white Americans living in the country. They do this generally to demonstrate that it is not a problem, which concerns all the people and these poor black people who can solve the problem, which they created for themselves. In Race, Class and Gender in the United States, it is mentioned, “the social construction of class is analogous but not identical to that of race.” This statement clearly shows us that, we cannot identify class by attributing them to certain races.

We found this text really informative, not only about the conception of race within the society but also about the deep ideology of the race, about the different political approaches and their reasons. It was interesting to learn about the colorblindness and how it is approached wrongly by people. Some of these wrong approaches and their explanations correct our wrong approaches towards race. We realize sometime we also use colorblindness as if it makes everything perfect, yet all it does hiding something which is already there and this thing is racism. Besides, it showed us that how color blindness is the new way of racism instead of being a solution for this issue. We saw its effect on politics and social life by focusing on conservatives' and neoconservatives' approaches to the concept. Moreover, we really found interesting the different approaches adopted by the US and Brazil towards color and race. Finally, we saw how the concept of “color blindness” distorts our perception and creates “new racism” instead of it is supposed to eliminate it.

*If you haven't seen the picture changing, wait a minute and look carefully*

We would like you to watch this amazing TED Talks video of Mellody Hobson, who is an African-American investment expert, on colorblindness and color bravery.

http://video.ted.com/talk/podcast/2014/MazdaRebels_PL/MellodyHobson_2014-480p.mp4 (or you can reach the video from here: http://www.ted.com/talks/mellody_hobson_color_blind_or_color_brave)

"We cannot afford to be a colorblind, we have to be color brave" -Mellody Hobson

Do you agree with her? Why? Why not? 

Some other questions to think about on this subject:

• Is it possible to talk about racial equality while there is still the identification as African-American, Latin-American, Asian-American? Is it bad that we have these identifications? Do they matter? 
• Why do you think there is no commonly used identification as White?
• Why do conservatives try to link “black people” and “poverty”?
• How Brazil and the US deal with race issue differently? 

Ezgi ULUSOY &Yasemin ÖZTEMÜR