Posted on 08/06/2013 3:31:28 PM PDT by NotYourAverageDhimmi
Discussions of race in the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case have focused on issues of prejudice and stereotypes, but have generally ignored Americans’ confusion about the concept of race itself. While my recent e-book and paperback, The Myth of Race, discusses various aspects of the race concept in depth—including the biology of human variation, cultural differences in conceptions of race, the race-IQ debate, and the treatment of race in the census, I will limit myself here to pointing out some of the paradoxes and confusions about race implicit in the current debate.
George Zimmerman has been described as white, a white Hispanic, mixed race, and perhaps by other racial terms.
Americans assume that race is a biological entity, and use the folk term “blood” (meaning ancestry) to describe it. Since Zimmerman has some African ancestry on his Peruvian mother’s side, he would probably meet Louisiana’s former criterion, that anyone with 1/32 black blood is black. So one possible race for Zimmerman is black.
Most Americans would say that discrimination against Hispanics is racial discrimination, implying that Hispanics or Latinos are a race. However, the 2010 census says that Hispanics can be of any race. Hence, we have the hierarchical paradox that Hispanics are a race that can be any race. In any event, another possible race for Zimmerman is Hispanic.
The census says that people can only be of one race, so the U. S. government treats the mixed race category as a contradiction in terms.
In fact, there has been a generational shift in American culture—people in their 80s would say that someone with any black ancestry is black, and teenagers would say that someone with white and black parents is mixed. Many Americans still believe that a white woman can give birth to a black person (e.g., President Obama), but that a black woman cannot give birth to a white person. Having lived in Brazil, I can assure you that such people would unequivocally be considered white there—but in the United States, if they claimed to be white, many would still say that they are really black, but “passing for white.” So another possible race for Zimmerman is mixed race, though he could be any of several mixtures—white and Hispanic, white and black, black and Hispanic, or white, black, and Hispanic, depending on the cultural categories used by the classifier.
Some people view Zimmerman’s killing of Trayvon Martin as a white on black crime, so for them Zimmerman’s race is white.
Interestingly, Zimmerman has been referred to as a white Hispanic, but not as an Hispanic white. This is because, most Americans assume that Hispanics are a race, and therefore are not white—so a white Hispanic is a kind of Hispanic. However, the census says the opposite—that whites and blacks (but not Hispanics) are a race. So according to the census categories, he is an Hispanic white—which is a kind of white person.
What does this all mean? It means that asking for Zimmerman’s race seems to be asking for biological information about him—but actually it is revealing something about American culture and our own confused ideas about race. Zimmerman’s race is a matter of cultural, not biological information. So different American subcultures classify him differently.
I've thought about that same possibility. Most of the leftist agenda involves blaming one group of people for another group of people's problems. If they can't blame a particular group, what will they do? But like I said, the liberal ability to invent grievances and false narratives is endless. I have faith in their ability to deceive themselves and millions of their fellow Americans.
true
they can always think of something
Zimmerman is mixed, and I agree with the author that Hispanic is a cultural classification rather than a racial one.
Being that Zimmerman has what appears to be full Euro ancestry on his father’s side and mixed Spanish/Amerindian ancestry on his mother’s side, he likely would be considered Mestizo or white Hispanic. In comparsison, Hispanics with Afro roots like Sammy Sosa or Vlad Guerrero would be black Hispanics.
Hispanic is not a race.
So true! Libs never stop. They just keep lying and ruining what is good.
He speaks Spanish fluently, a true Hispanic.
########
No. I have DNA tests that show I’m of Viking descent with 7% Jew and/or American Indian and I speak Spanish...not as fluent as I once was but still.
Barry is a Black Caucasian but he isn’t described that way.
“The census says that people can only be of one race, so the U. S. government treats the mixed race category as a contradiction in terms.”
Nearly half of raw census 2010 data is bizarre cross-mixing of racial data, to what point I couldn’t discern. There were multiple base categories (including IIRC Polynesian, Inuit, etc), then multiple mixes of 2 or 3 recognized multiracial combinations, ... then all those were revisited with the “and Hispanic” variants. I gave up trying to sort out any meaningful interpretation thereof until I get a more powerful computer.
hispanic as you correctly point out is an ethnicity
There are only 5 races according to Carleton S. Coon. The definition of race allows a family to consider themselves a race if they wish, as a group descended from a common ancestor. There is a heavy overlap between the definitions of race and ethnicity, so Hispanics could claim, with justification, to be a race (albeit one formed through admixture). You seem to think that reading the entry for Carletoon Coon on Wikipedia and regurgitating it (with some errors) allows you speak with authority on the subject.
Many modern geneticists and anthropologists consider East Asians to be very closely related to modern Europeans, these groups, in many ways, being more closely related to each other than either are to ‘Dravidians’ and other Indians.
Also, I am surprised that an anthropology expert such as yourself has failed to classify Capoid and ‘Bushmen’ together, the whole point of Coon’s Capoid classification was as a means of differentiation of these people from other Sub-Saharan Africans.
Might be better if you watch your mouth, nube
If you did bother to read, even the wikipedia article you're badly regurgitating, you'd see that CC talks of a different number of races
Many modern geneticists and anthropologists consider East Asians to be very closely related to modern Europeans, these groups, in many ways, being more closely related to each other than either are to ‘Dravidians’ and other Indians.
Which modern geneticists -- if you have links, give them.
East Asians closer to Europeans than to Dravidians? Really?
‘Didn’t read Carleton Coon, didn’t know who he was until you spouted it out’
Your arrogant pedantry made me believe you had at least some knowledge on the subject of race.
‘Might be better if you watch your mouth, nube’
What sort of moron makes threats on internet message boards? No matter, I don’t generally use my mouth when typing.
‘Which modern geneticists — if you have links, give them’
The loser who regurgitates genetic ‘facts’ with no sources whatsoever wants links do they? See below. And your links? Or perhaps the institute at which you gained your expertise?
‘East Asians closer to Europeans than to Dravidians? Really?’
Ya rly
The following book chapter describes an elegant study carried out on groups in India. Why just India? Because India is one of the most genetically diverse countries on the planet, yet there has been astonishingly little mixing between the different groups, with pure mongoloid forms dominating in the far-Eastern areas of the country, and the frequency of blue eyes in the north of the country being similar to some modern European countries. This is why lumping in Dravidians with ‘other Indians’, as you did, is such a stupidly unscientific thing to do, and something that taints most work on this subject. Indians are not a race, India contains many races.
See Figure 3, where Tibeto-Burmans (descriptive of Indian Mongoloids) map genetically closer to Indo Europeans (descriptive of white invaders in India) than Dravidians. Think about this and then come back to me. It is better to be clever than to simply try and feel clever by correcting people on the internet.
If you have a point, raise it, otherwise watch your manners, nube
Any comment on the genetic and anthropological information in my last post?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.