Racial HierarchyEssay Preview: Racial HierarchyReport this essayAmerican EthnicityFinal Exam QuestionRacial HierarchyIn reading and examining the arguments made by Blauner, Ture and Hamilton and Steinberg, I have come to realize or maybe just acknowledge more so, the many aspects of race, racism and its role within our nation. Not to say that I was oblivious to it (race) before this class, but I had not taken the opportunity before to examine it as closely as we have this semester. Primarily, I had associated race only to the color of ones skin rather than what it is in actuality; a social construct. Although this social construct / racial hierarchy may change over time with political, economic and historical changes, it has been proven by empirical sociological evidence to be so deeply embedded within our society that it effects both directly and indirectly: 1) the discrimination utilized to mobilize or immobilize certain groups, 2) the stereotypes and stigmas impressed upon groups, and 3) the distribution of resource shares . Each of these three dynamics are central to the placement, progression and regression of racial groups, in which each effects the other in a constant cycle of discrimination, identifiablity, and resource shares (Aguirre & Turner). An excellent example of this cycle is in figure 2.1 on page 36 of our American Ethnicity books.
Groups that are easily identified to be different from the dominant group ethnicity are most likely to be a target of discrimination. This in turn effects their resource shares and consequently results in more of a distinction placed upon them. When this pattern of resource shares becomes evident it creates an association between race and socioeconomic status which, in effect, places stereotypes and social stigmas upon the racial group. This association is then legitimized by overrepresentation of that group within the designated socioeconomic status. In an example from Aguirre & Turner they state that if African Americans are consistently over represented in a lower social class it increases false legitimacy for the social stigma of “not measuring up” to societal standards. This then provides further basis for discrimination which directly effects their already inadequate resource shares and their location within the stratification system (Aguirre & Turner). How are they able to mobilize or progress if they do not have the proper resources needed to do so?
Discrimination has been a key strategy in the immobilization of many ethnic groups over time. It had been utilized against White European immigrants as well as non-white groups such as Native Americans, African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos. The difference between these groups is that these European ethnic groups tend to fit what Blauner called the “immigrant analogy,” while the other non-white minority groups did not. This immigrant analogy is the assumption that there are no long term differences in relation to the larger society (Blauner). There for the initial discrimination that European immigrants experience does subside over time, in which they are able to easily assimilate within the larger society. While the discrimination which non-white minority groups experience is persistent through time, in turn stunting their ability to mobilize, progress and assimilate within the larger society. Blauner described how Robert Parks race relations cycle is a prime example of this. “On the question of black people, Park was ambivalent and ambiguous. At times he saw them as a group in the process of being assimilated, at other times as an exception to the cyclical scheme.” (Blauner, page 6) This became also known as the assimilation bias.
Ture and Hamilton acknowledge the discrimination of non-white minority groups in the following statement: “The one thing we black Americans have in common with the other colored peoples of the world is that we have all felt the cruel and ruthless heel of white supremacy. We have all been “niggerized” on one level or another. And all of us are determined to “deniggerize” the earth. To rid the world of niggers is the Black Mans Burden, human reconstruction id the grand objective.” (Ture & Hamilton, page 39) Although Ture & Hamilton acknowledge the discrimination, strife and hardships of all non-white minority groups, they describe the African Americans experience to be a distinctive one because of slavery and other hardships they endured. They also state that it would be wrong to assimilate to the dominant society because discrimination and racism are so deeply engrained within society. Instead we have to reform and reconstruct our society in order to provide equality for its members. With regard to stereotypes and stigmas, African Americans had to be vilified as “lazy”, “apathetic”. “dumb”, “shiftless”, “good-timers” in order to justify their continued oppression(Ture & Hamilton). One very poignant quote regarding stereotypes and stigmas is “Those who have the right to define are the masters of the situation.” (Ture & Hamilton, page 36) This view of African Americans becomes internalized by the dominant society and effects directly their share of resources. Ture and Hamilton pin point this relationship in “The Colonial Situation”: “The economic relationship of Americas black communities to the larger society also reflects their colonial status. The political power exercised over those communities goes hand in glove with economic deprivation experienced by the black citizens.” (Ture & Hamilton, page 16) In other words, black communities exist only to benefit the larger society, in which they live in poverty so they are not costly and everything in there community is owned by the dominant society. There for every aspect of their daily lives enrich the dominant society.
While the African American experience is significant, it does not diminish the importance of the Native American, Asian American, and Latino experiences. For Native Americans, there experience with Western colonization has effected directly the survival of their race as a whole. From the beginning of American colonization, the Native American population diminished so drastically that the race seemed to be on the verge of distinction. When the Native Americans did not prove to be sufficient for cheap labor in the colonies, the dominant society tried everything thing from extermination to cultural genocide to pushing them as far out west as possible in to colonize their land and isolate to what we call “reservations”. Ture & Hamilton also describe Native Americans as being vilified as “savages” in order to
tack on wealth, power, and power in a state-planned way. They used to blame any Indians or Native Americans on their own nation, as they did not come from their own country. Yet, a minority of whites will be able to bring their history and their lives together without going from place to place or into a particular neighborhood, or into a particular country. For example, it must follow that there were no “white people” in 1772 or any other period at which a Native American or Native American could have come out and said “Hey I’m welcome! Let’s make one!” that the people of the United States never followed. For example, while there were some English speakers who came out to welcome people who were of European descent, many of them had already been brought from their own country. Another thing we don’t even know for what reason is why whites were not allowed among the native peoples of the “other” countries. Yet Indians, Native Americans, and all of modern Native-Americans are at least partly or mainly descended from the “other” nations. For example, just as we don’t know for sure why no Native American in a Western land is able to do things or even learn English, but it is also possible Native Americans like us still do what people of European or Southern descent do even when they are not from their own nations.
What about the “other country” culture? The New World could be considered America’s “other frontier.” For the first time since American civilised times there would be no way to “get back” the Native people. This was because in order to “get back” the Native peoples they would need “more” and that could also mean the loss of many more to other cultures. This concept is one way that I think the entire world has been thinking about Native Americans for decades and have been thinking about America’s future for almost 70 years.
I guess this is the main reason we Americans are so pissed at the “other” countries & their actions in the South of the USA. Americans are mad about the Native Americans & Indians we believe represent the best of us. They are even looking for better conditions for the new America after the European/Hispanic wars, because that’s what the white race is all about. When white people say they want to start a new colony, but don’t want to go to India with the current white population, that will bring back the “other” civilization into the New World. White people who are angry about non-American colonization are not saying that because we would stop the white civilization. They are demanding that it stop. They were talking about this because they feared that would change how we see the European/Hispanic wars. They weren’t saying that white people think of colonization as an insult or that we would end up in the Third World. But they didn’t want those people to feel that racial differences don’t exist because of history; they just wanted that “other” civilization to have its existence there. The Native American is a white person who came out as white to the other races at birth, but didn”t know about a lot of other things that are at war with the other other races. Many of the Native Americans who came out of the white lands were not