It turns out that race is a much more complex subject than most of us have previously imagined. For many years, Americans looked at race through the prism of white/black or white/people of color. It turns out, however, that these models and ways of looking at race were much too simplistic and were frankly a distortion of the reality which actually exists. And, make no mistake, this has profound cultural, social, religious, political and economic implications for all of us.
DNA testing has dramatically changed the way that many Americans look at their racial identity. Testing of autosomal, y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA has revealed that most Americans are complex mixtures of several ethnicities and races. To their consternation, some white Southern Americans have discovered an African paternal ancestor. Likewise, black Americans have been receiving test results that demonstrate African, European and Native American ancestry (see https://splinternews.com/if-you-re-black-dna-ancestry-results-can-reveal-an-awk-1793862284)
We have an interesting case in point in former President Barack Obama. This controversial man not only defies traditional labels and categories, his ancestry defies much of our former thinking about race among black and white Americans.
In 2007, Ta-Nehisi Paul Coates asked "Is Obama Black Enough?" You can read the full article in Time here: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1584736,00.html The question arose because many blacks and whites pointed to Obama's biracial identity (and the fact that his father was from Kenya) as evidence that he simply did not share the same experiences and outlook as the folks descended from West African slaves. Coates, however, went on to point out that "Obama understands what all blacks, including myself, know all too well — that Amadou Diallo's foreign ancestry could not prevent his wallet from morphing into a gun in the eyes of the police." He went on to conclude that "Back in the real world, Obama is married to a black woman. He goes to a black church. He's worked with poor people on the South Side of Chicago, and still lives there. That someone given the escape valve of biraciality would choose to be black, would see some beauty in his darker self and still care more about health care and public education than reparations and Confederate flags is just too much for many small-minded racists, both black and white, to comprehend."
In 2016, Ben Carson left no doubt that he didn't think Obama was black enough. In an interview with Politico (Glenn Thrush), Carson contended that Obama was "raised white." He pointed out that many of the President's "formative years were spent in Indonesia," and that it was therefore "a bit of a stretch" for him to claim that he shared the experience of most black Americans. You can read the entire piece here: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/ben-carson-obama-was-raised-white-219657 Carson went on to contend that Obama had never experienced the kind of racism that was extant back in the 50's and 60's. For Ben Carson, Obama just didn't measure up in the area of blackness.
In the post-Obama era, we sometimes forget that these kinds of issues were ever raised, but they were. We recall Trump raising the issue of Obama's birth certificate and claiming that it was highly likely that he had been born in Kenya, not Hawaii. For many, Obama was never "one of us." He was one of the other guys - not part of our group.
The reality, however, is not so simple. Most folks like contrast. They like for things to be either/or, and Obama's racial identity (like racial identity in America more generally speaking) could not be neatly and tidily discerned. For instance, Obama's only slave ancestor of West African descent came through his white mother's line. Through her, he was also descended from white slave-owners. Moreover, his maternal ancestry made him much more "American" in the classical sense than Donald Trump! (Trump's paternal grandparents were born in Germany, and his mother was born in Scotland).
My own ancestry is another case in point. I have Native American ancestry, and I'm also descended from white men who fought "Indians." Two ancestors were killed by Native Americans and a Great Grand Uncle massacred a band of Sioux on Blue Water Creek in Nebraska. To further complicate matters, my Native American ancestor owned black slaves. Confused yet? I also have an African ancestor who was enslaved in Virginia. I have three white great grand uncles who were abolitionists and two who were active in the underground railroad. I have many ancestors who fought for the Confederacy and some who fought for the Union during the American Civil War.
Do you begin to see the implications for all of this? African Americans with both slave and slave-owning ancestry. Who gets reparations? Are you one of the oppressed or part of the oppressors? Native Americans who owned slaves and intermarried with black folks. Were your ancestors the good guys, the bad guys or both?
And we've only scratched the surface in talking about experience. Do current members of the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma reflect the Native American experience? Have you ever been to one of our nation's many reservations? I've been to Wind River, Pine Ridge and Rosebud. How many Native Americans do you think are still living in traditional housing? What are the conditions which confront Native Americans living on reservations? What are the conditions which confront Native Americans living in urban areas? How many folks with significant Native ancestry are living as white or black Americans?
Horror of horrors, is it possible that Americans can share their experiences with each other? Is it possible that we have more in common than we previously imagined? Is it possible that your history is also my history? Is it possible for me to like and enjoy "your" music? Are these questions unsettling? Maybe it's time to reevaluate our notions about race and what that means for each of us? Maybe it is possible to walk in each others shoes and imagine ourselves as the mixed-up and dysfunctional family that we really are?
DNA testing has dramatically changed the way that many Americans look at their racial identity. Testing of autosomal, y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA has revealed that most Americans are complex mixtures of several ethnicities and races. To their consternation, some white Southern Americans have discovered an African paternal ancestor. Likewise, black Americans have been receiving test results that demonstrate African, European and Native American ancestry (see https://splinternews.com/if-you-re-black-dna-ancestry-results-can-reveal-an-awk-1793862284)
We have an interesting case in point in former President Barack Obama. This controversial man not only defies traditional labels and categories, his ancestry defies much of our former thinking about race among black and white Americans.
In 2007, Ta-Nehisi Paul Coates asked "Is Obama Black Enough?" You can read the full article in Time here: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1584736,00.html The question arose because many blacks and whites pointed to Obama's biracial identity (and the fact that his father was from Kenya) as evidence that he simply did not share the same experiences and outlook as the folks descended from West African slaves. Coates, however, went on to point out that "Obama understands what all blacks, including myself, know all too well — that Amadou Diallo's foreign ancestry could not prevent his wallet from morphing into a gun in the eyes of the police." He went on to conclude that "Back in the real world, Obama is married to a black woman. He goes to a black church. He's worked with poor people on the South Side of Chicago, and still lives there. That someone given the escape valve of biraciality would choose to be black, would see some beauty in his darker self and still care more about health care and public education than reparations and Confederate flags is just too much for many small-minded racists, both black and white, to comprehend."
In 2016, Ben Carson left no doubt that he didn't think Obama was black enough. In an interview with Politico (Glenn Thrush), Carson contended that Obama was "raised white." He pointed out that many of the President's "formative years were spent in Indonesia," and that it was therefore "a bit of a stretch" for him to claim that he shared the experience of most black Americans. You can read the entire piece here: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/ben-carson-obama-was-raised-white-219657 Carson went on to contend that Obama had never experienced the kind of racism that was extant back in the 50's and 60's. For Ben Carson, Obama just didn't measure up in the area of blackness.
In the post-Obama era, we sometimes forget that these kinds of issues were ever raised, but they were. We recall Trump raising the issue of Obama's birth certificate and claiming that it was highly likely that he had been born in Kenya, not Hawaii. For many, Obama was never "one of us." He was one of the other guys - not part of our group.
The reality, however, is not so simple. Most folks like contrast. They like for things to be either/or, and Obama's racial identity (like racial identity in America more generally speaking) could not be neatly and tidily discerned. For instance, Obama's only slave ancestor of West African descent came through his white mother's line. Through her, he was also descended from white slave-owners. Moreover, his maternal ancestry made him much more "American" in the classical sense than Donald Trump! (Trump's paternal grandparents were born in Germany, and his mother was born in Scotland).
My own ancestry is another case in point. I have Native American ancestry, and I'm also descended from white men who fought "Indians." Two ancestors were killed by Native Americans and a Great Grand Uncle massacred a band of Sioux on Blue Water Creek in Nebraska. To further complicate matters, my Native American ancestor owned black slaves. Confused yet? I also have an African ancestor who was enslaved in Virginia. I have three white great grand uncles who were abolitionists and two who were active in the underground railroad. I have many ancestors who fought for the Confederacy and some who fought for the Union during the American Civil War.
Do you begin to see the implications for all of this? African Americans with both slave and slave-owning ancestry. Who gets reparations? Are you one of the oppressed or part of the oppressors? Native Americans who owned slaves and intermarried with black folks. Were your ancestors the good guys, the bad guys or both?
And we've only scratched the surface in talking about experience. Do current members of the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma reflect the Native American experience? Have you ever been to one of our nation's many reservations? I've been to Wind River, Pine Ridge and Rosebud. How many Native Americans do you think are still living in traditional housing? What are the conditions which confront Native Americans living on reservations? What are the conditions which confront Native Americans living in urban areas? How many folks with significant Native ancestry are living as white or black Americans?
Horror of horrors, is it possible that Americans can share their experiences with each other? Is it possible that we have more in common than we previously imagined? Is it possible that your history is also my history? Is it possible for me to like and enjoy "your" music? Are these questions unsettling? Maybe it's time to reevaluate our notions about race and what that means for each of us? Maybe it is possible to walk in each others shoes and imagine ourselves as the mixed-up and dysfunctional family that we really are?
From a biological perspective (science!), humans belong to only ONE race. Other animals, such as wolves, do actually divide into races. But for us, it's a social construct and nothing more. And yet that's plenty, isn't it? So much damage has been done by those who came up with this construct, because white men wanted to make it clear that they are superior to all other people.
ReplyDelete"And hath made of one blood all ethnos of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth" Acts 17:26
DeleteWhen I was 13 I discovered through my science magazines that on the molecular level the next door neigbor could be far different from me than a person in Africa or Asia. So in that sense I get what Cathy is saying.
ReplyDeleteI also get the social construct thing. I believe until the 16th century people with different skin were regarded as interesting humans. Not until the slave trade set in a social construct was needed to make the trade right. So the construct was set up to dehumanize those traded. In all white countries import of slaves was forbidden since christians don't do unchristian things. In literature, science and art we see subservient people of color since the 16th century only. The Romans had all types of slaves and black gladiators. Different perspective.
The nazi's needed the same social construct since what they their atrocities are very hard for civilized people to process. So those working in the camps called the dead bodies of their victims "puppen", puppets. Not as a derogatory term but to be able to process their deeds psychologically. Man is a social animal after all.
However I am not such an extreme liberal or blind crazy person to deny that differences exist between people that can be categorized and generalized.
For instance many people have fair hair. It seems there complete phyical make up makes it possible for them to survive in colder climates. Unfortunately their ability to store fat works against them when the need to chase reindeer faded and mcdonalds is 500 yards away.
Darker people seem to have a better rate of surviving sunny climates.
I do wonder sometimes if "the different races" are natures, evolution, god through evolution's, trick for better survival rates in all climates and circumstance for "the human race." The interbreeding with neanderthal did provide for some quality genes to survive the cold. (although red heads suffer the consequences in class or kindergarten)
Despite the "climate change" discussion the reality is that climate has changed many times over millions of years. Current man has survived all through their variation.
I am not sure therefore if I should favor "racial separation" in light of natural diversification. Or should favor Count Coudenhove - Callergi's position as one of the founding philosophers of the European Union that the European race should be replaced by brownish mix in order for war to be eradicated.
So far I favor the Star Trek option. Where all different races work together for a common goal and go where no one has gone before. But hey, I'm rather fond of my little cousin whose ancestors roamed the plains of Europe, Central Asia, the American continent, crossed the Bering Straits, sailed from Hamburg to Ellis island, can call the south pacific her rightful heritage, for the time being has three nationalities and loves to be human.
nck
I believe the greeks used the word Xeno for different people. Barbarians, half man half horse, roaming the plains, unable to build a sustainable shack or temple. (Our brave Celtic, Scythian forebears)
ReplyDeleteThe Vikings traded russian girls at the Dublin staple market and perhaps Yorvik too.
I find all cultures to be vehicles for surviving a certain set of circumstance. A burqa would work quite well in the Arabian sand, but is not necessary and unhandy in Frankfurt. Sadly many practical customs have tranlated into religion or the bodies of literature that are religions are based on.
Other examples. Many nations like India,or nations in Africa are currently reevaluating their anti gay laws. Today we look at those "uncivilised discriminatory cultures of colored peoples as backward for their feelings regarding gays."
The reality is that most all of the anti gay legislation was implemented by the British East India company and its successor the British Empire. The legislation is actually a colonial residu and not some function of the colored race.
nck
Perceptions have changed throughout my lifetime, and they will continue to change. I remember Harry Truman's comments when JFK was elected president. His remarks were somewhat disparaging, as he commented that now he expected that the US would eventually have a Negro as president.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a child, if you called a repairman for something around the house, a white person would show up. The milkman was white, your insurance man was white, the painter or roofer was white, the guy who delivered your coal was white. If you took your car to the garage for repairs, the mechanic was white. Everyone working at the supermarket was white. Your teachers at school were white. I don't know where most of the black people worked. Possibly in their own neighborhoods (that's the way it was back then), or hidden away in menial jobs as janitors or porters, or behind the scenes in big city restaurants or hotels. I mean, at that time, even the garbage men who worked our neighborhoods were white.
As a young man in college and shortly thereafter, there was an emerging movement. We began to see the first ads in publications, and commercials on TV featuring people of color. The black pride or black power movements were coming into play. There was much debate and public discourse. People like James Brown and Muhammad Ali were very prominent. Ali once quipped that he was black, while such then popular TV personalities like Leslie Uggams was "colored". Mexican people faced problems with others perceptions, as well. When I was working on one construction team, a father and his son were foremen. The dad asked his son if Ramon were "savy enough" to perform a certain task. The son had to explain to his dad that Ramon was not stupid; he just didn't speak English. He could do anything that anyone else on the crew could do if a bilingual person could explain the task in Spanish.
I've watched conditions improve for non-whites throughout my lifetime. everyone lives everywhere now. People of all colors are on television, attending schools and colleges, holding key positions in the work place. If you see a beat up car, there is not the automatic assumption that it is owned by a minority person. There appears to be widespread respect for the intelligence and capabilities of the entire rainbow of humanity. So long as they are achievers, people of color are loved and respected in the families they marry into just as Italians, Irish, and Jewish people used to be back when they were considered to be "provisional" whites.
I for one like the way things are today. It has enrichened us all culturally, and broadened our horizons. There are still those who say that multiculturalism, a condition in which people who have been mainstreamed are permitted to preserve and maintain their own cultures, cannot work. However, I've found that multiculturalism will work, if given a chance. The only people for whom it does not work are the people who resent it, and want it not to work. The wilfully ignorant amongst us will always present themselves as obstacles.
BB
By the way, won't it be nice in the millennium when the word "race" only refers to what happens at NASCAR, or NHRA drag racing?
ReplyDeleteBB
Yes, yes it will!
DeleteBased on what we've seen over the past several months, it is beginning to appear that we will have one set of laws during Democratic presidencies, and another set during Republican presidencies. Flip-flop! That could be muted or mitigated, based on the partisanship of the supreme court at any given time, but it appears that the cultural war will continue to create massive turbulence until certain issues are definitively resolved.
ReplyDeleteWhat brought this back to my attention this weekend was the news that the Trump administration is studying into ways to redefine and reverse the Obama era working concepts affecting transgender people, their protections and civil liberties. I used to lie, and to smilingly kid the ladies, telling them I was a lesbian trapped in a man's body years ago as a kind of pick up line, but gender misplacement is a serious condition for millions of people around the world, 1.4 million transgender people that we know of reside in the USA alone. Any elected official who believes that the condition will go away in response to new laws is sadly mistaken. It's not a laughing matter.
This controversy illustrates in microcosm the problems which are caused by the extreme elements of each party, and their unwillingness to compromise.
BB
Interesting BB.
ReplyDeleteI think young people and all the others should be trained or grow accustomed to a new era in which politicians espousing a certain agenda are really going to implement that agenda. The time of compromise seeking "it is all the same, I don't care" is over.
In Britain the younger generation was caught off guard by the older generation wallowing in past victories and Brexit was a fact (still negotiating the impossible).
I have no clue as to what the pace of societal change should be. The focus on Obama's color or perceived race totally overshadowed the rapid pace of change that was implemented during his presedency, both through his policies but also because of external factors like other huge economies and peoples surging and most of all technological change.
It seems things are going a bit too fast for some. People are hearking back to "the good old times". I like the visionaries talking about breakthroughs and travel to mars.
Pressing issues on the local and micro level should be thoroughly researched and adressed.
If a society is not ready to change than change should be implemented through discussion, debate and compromise.
I mean if a society is not ready to have gay marriages. Why not give couples 100 percent equal rights but not call it a marriage.
Where do all the transgender and adhd kids suddenly come from? Were they surpressed in my class room when I was little? I am slowly adapting to the fact that that might have been the case and I am quite liberal regarding individual preferences. I don't know when should people proceed with caution and when should they be in your face, like the first heroic black students. (although the real first black kid to walk into the school in arkansas was just late and unaware that the walk in was postponed) Oh well, how funny history can be in all its tragedy.
nck
In response to your last paragraph, nck, every day education takes place. There is more accumulated knowledge about the human psyche and experience today. Asking where were the kids of decades past with ADHD is somewhat akin to asking where people hid their cell phones during the '60s. Some of the ADHD kids, although they didn't realize that they had a "condition", knew that they had more difficulty absorbing the educational curriculum than did some of their peers. There are some today who have even come to view their ADHD as a benefit, a special and unique talent that has also provided advantages for them, leading to their exceptional success in life. It appears that extreme conservatives object to ADHD and disbelieve simply because money and programs are requested in order to deal with it. They also view it as some sort of "excuse" manufactured to merit special consideration.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of visibility of transgender issues, I suspect that there was perhaps great apprehension about the possibility of secrets becoming known. Something as inconsequential as an accidental fart during leg lifts in gym class could ruin your social life for years back in those days. As you know, I'm a rock n roller. Back when I was at Summer Educational Program in Orr Minnesota, I found a way to do something the officials had told us was impossible. I could pull in the Minneapolis and St. Paul rock station on my transistor radio late at night. That's when the power of the radio stations' transformers was turned to max. That summer, a Minneapolis band called the High Spirits had a regional hit in their cover of Bobby Blue Bland's "Turn on Your Love Light". Recently, I googled the High Spirits, discovered that the band had orchestrated a reunion, and that the lead singer was now transgender! Who would have even suspected? The vast majority of teenagers in the '60s would not have known anything about gender confusion.
I don't pretend to have the answers. I've always believed that every human should have an opportunity and an environment in which to thrive. People are often all too ready to not only oppose people who are different from themselves, but to consider them as nonpersons. Unfortunately, those of us of past cultic backgrounds learned to write off most others. I believe there is a better and more compassionate way.
Lonnie has expanded this discussion into a new post, so we can continue there, but I did want to address that last paragraph of yours here, because I believe that many people have the same questions you expressed.
BB
Yes. There is this olympic swimmer once regarded as the epitomization of manhood who clearly changed his feathers.
ReplyDeletere: "I've always believed that every human should have an opportunity and an environment in which to thrive."
I second that. Someone "diagnozed" with adhd or other has strengths that flourish in an adjusted environment. Perhaps different from the standardized environment we call "school."
I have related before that I completely changed my stance toward gay people during my twenties.Originally oming from a religious background, I realized that I had enjoyed the company of different orientations and their performances all my life without realizing they had different orientation from the majority. Later of course other evidence deepenend my understanding of the issue. But the first cracks in my original position came through the realization that a change to environments in which people thrive can change entire perspectives.
In my case the shift in thinking came in several years. So it took time, patience and perseverance from "the other party" to give me space to grow in knowledge. My point is that some issues are worth rallying the streets and fighting for. But in a democracy the broad majority will only be swayed by time, increase in knowledge and unrelenting civil debate. Some pockets of resistance might always resist change and they have their function but the vast circle of wagons will not remain in siege formation since they are all heading somewhere new.
nck