Ethnic is a Eurocentric way of saying non-Western. In America since the 1920s it has meant something not part of White American culture: ethnic foods, ethnic beauty, ethnic neighbourhoods, etc.
“Ethnic” comes from the word for Gentile in the Bible. The Jews divided the world into Jews and Gentiles, into the Chosen People and Everyone Else. The Jews called the Gentiles the goyim, “the nations”. In the New Testament, written in Greek, goyim became ethnoi. That became, by way of Church Latin, the English adjective “ethnic”.
By the 1400s “ethnic” applied to anyone who was not Christian or Jew – the heathens and infidels.
By the 1920s White Americans were the Chosen People – American exceptionalism, Manifest Destiny and all that. Now Italians, Jews, Poles and others who came from Europe who were not part of White American culture were “ethnic”, formerly known as “alien races”.
By the 2010s spaghetti sauce was no longer an “ethnic food”. Now “ethnic” was a nice-sounding way to say non-white: blacks, Latinos and Asians were now “ethnic”. But not Native Americans – they were still “tribal”.
By the 2050s America will no longer be mainly white. What will “ethnic” mean then?
Or what does it mean now if you look at the world as a whole? You know, that place where most people are “Asian”.
The truth is, everyone is ethnic. White Americans, just like everyone else, have their own foods, holidays, heroes, newspapers, neighbourhoods, restaurants and shops. They speak English with an accent just like everyone else.
- Thanksgiving is an ethnic holiday.
- Starbucks is an ethnic coffee shop.
- NPR is an ethnic radio station.
- Indie rock is ethnic music.
- The New York Times is an ethnic newspaper.
- The Upper West Side in New York is an ethnic neighbourhood..
- “Friends” is an ethnic television show.
- McDonald’s is an ethnic restaurant.
- English and history at American high schools are White American (ethnic) studies.
“Ethnic” beauty positions white beauty as “universal”. Women of colour are “exotic”, they can even appear on the cover of American Vogue or Maxim, but their sort of beauty is seen as a little something on the side, something to add a little “flavour”. You would never know that white beauty is itself “ethnic”.
Words like “ethnic”, “urban”, “mainstream” and not calling white things white (the white press, my white professor), allow White Americans to talk about their divided society in a way that does not make them feel too uncomfortable. It allows them to keep up the fiction that their society is colour-blind and has magically risen above race, that there is no such thing as White Entertainment Television and White History Month. Words like “black”, “white” and “people of colour” do not support this fiction.
White Americans talk about themselves as if they are beyond ethnicity and race – when all they are doing is being blind to their ethnicity and race.
That is not something to laugh at – due to their numbers and power it privileges them, it supports white privilege and therefore racism.
See also:
- style guide: Eurocentric words
- style guide: Briticisms – the comment thread has a discussion of the word “ethnic” in relation to Britain.
- white privilege mindset
- dichotomous thinking
- Eleven Nations of North America – the above post is very much a piece of New Netherland thinking
- goyish
- people of colour – means pretty much what “ethnic” means but does it more honestly in terms of race and without making whites the unnamed centre.
- White Default
- being universal
Abagond
Whites love what I call “Word Salads.”
It’s a great way to speak in a codified, racist manner in front of non-whites and get away with it as long as we don’t catch on. They’ve been doing this for centuries. That’s why they’ll never change or be any better or more educated on why racism hurts not only us, but them as well.
Make no mistake that these codified words are also apart of their socio-political paradigm. How clever.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophasia
LikeLike
Yet, whites have no problem, noticing Black, Latino, Asian and Native American people and calling it out in the open.
I can’t stand when they always talk about someone and make it a point to mention their, “ethnic background” .
“I was at this music store the other day and this, “black guy” suggested this new album.”
why do they always have to point out the persons race? when the person is of color and not white?.
When the person is white they are speaking of, then its a “girl” or a “guy”
They are not color-blind by a long shot, they play color-blind around black people and other people of color but soon as they get around other white people, they show their true colors.
LikeLike
I was just talking to my husband about this last night. We were in walmart to pick up some hummus and I said it’s probably in the ethnic food section and he informed me walmart didn’t have an ethnic food section. I know they used to have an ethnic hair care section so, I’m not sure if they still call it that though.
After checking the Asian food aisle, we found it in the chip aisle.
LikeLike
@ sondis
SO true, and the other annoying thing is when they say I don’t see color we’re all human. I’m like wtf I still have to put my race when I fill out forms, so until that stops I will not believe this color blind bs. It also frustrates me when the non black women with biracial kids say they are going to raise their kids not to see race and be colorblind and they won’t deal with racism. I’m like really so basically what they are saying is if my half black child doesn’t see race then they won’t deal with racism. As if to say if black people don’t see race then the racist will leave them alone, they never put the blame on the racist whites always saying the black person is whinning and making things up. smh
The ethnic word is just annoying, if it ain’t white its ethnic, ghetto, weird, disgusting,etc. It crazy that white is the default, when talking about anything non white, its always another word put in front of it.
LikeLike
The truth is, everyone is ethnic. (sorry, don’t know how to do proper quotes on this site)
thank Allah someone else noticed! in the way ‘white’ people use it it’s one of the stupidest terms i’ve known. even exotic & foreign make more sense!
LikeLike
I hear ya Fleecy…
@ mstoogood4yall:
They always make that statement, “i don’t see color, we are all human” because as white people, they don’t have to see race, being they are the dominant race in the world.
Black people and other people of color, don’t have the luxury of, “not seeing race” as its mushed in our face, every day of our lives.
We are constantly bombarded with 1000’s of messages, every single day of our lives, that tells us we are black and we are not white.
Every time a white person says that to me, i let them have it, ( intellectually speaking ) and at the end, they look so stupid for even saying something so racially insensitive.
Then you never hear from them again, because they don’t like black people, who stand up for themselves and are conscious of their white privilege and ignorance.
I’ve made a lot of white women, very uncomfortable…..
LikeLike
It makes sense that in a country/culture with a strong white majority that they would think of white as default and the same for any other culture out there of a different majority race.
It would be an admirably and extremely objective/rational culture that didn’t identify with itself as default but that seems unlikely or at least something that will take away to create.
LikeLike
Peanut
Whites who insist on “on seeing colour” are lying to you. Of course they see it. It the FIRST thing they notice as soon as they look at you. I especially get amusement from those whites who do not classify themselves as “white”.
LOL!
Nice try.
Whiteness is the default for now. Soon it will be the bitter enemy of the whole hueman race.
LikeLike
Kiwi:
Very true statement…. I would agree that Asians have been trying to be white but like you’ve said, they have failed in that regard but has succeeded in becoming , “Honorary Whites” by adopting white culture and rejecting their own culture and only having, white friends and associates.
Every other ethic background has the ability to do this, ( Become Honorary whites ) except Black people and that’s because we, typically don’t have euro-centric features and hair.
Asians have long hair, Latinos have long hair, Native Americans have long hair, that mimic white hair, so that is a commonality that whites can accept with these ethnicities but not African-Americans.
LikeLike
@ Sondis
Lots of Asians and Latinos don’t fit the stereotypical description that includes light skin and long straight hair. There is definitely a hierarchy of “acceptableness” and one can be Asian and be pretty far down compared to someone else in the same general group. If by Latino you meant Mestizo then maybe, if their looks lean more towards the Euro rather than the Amerindian side.
I think part of it also is, as black people we’re known for “rocking the boat” and not letting white people feel good about the messed up stuff that gets done for their benefit, past and present.
LikeLike
There are whites who would like special white history classes, whites only clubs, and all kinds of other stupid, special white organizations, events or holidays. I don’t think most of us would really want much to do with them, though.
LikeLike
I don’t like the term ”ethnic”. It is another way for White AmeriKKKlan to say that they don’t see non Whites as full humans and farther indict that they see minorities and people of color as different.
@Sondis
I disagree. Many Latinos and Asians have dark skin and curly hair too as well as having light skin and long straight hair so many of them couldn’t pass for ”honorary Whites”, In this AmeriKKKlan, anyone who is NOT White is NOT considered ”right” in White AmeriKKKlan’s eyes. In other words, anything ”ethnic” aka non White is considered foreign and weird.
I don’t think White AmeriKKKlan will ever see non Whites especially Blacks like me as equal unless something happens that changes their minds.
LikeLike
@ Gen:
Yes, i was referring to those Latinos that can pass for white with blue eyes and light skin.
@ Adeen:
I think you misunderstood, what i was trying to get across, Sista.
“Many Latinos and Asians have dark skin and curly hair too as well as having light skin and long straight hair so many of them couldn’t pass for ”honorary Whites”
Let me elaborate…..
Honorary white is not something you can, “Pass for”, its a status that’s given to you by a white community or person to a person of color.
Quote from abagond’s article:
“Honorary membership is sometimes extended to those who do not look white if they are rich or willing to carry out all of the duties (see below). However not all privileges will necessarily be granted. Honorary membership is more likely to be extended to Asians than to blacks.”
Its explained in greater detail in abagond’s post on the white club:
I also want to point something else you had mentioned.
“In this AmeriKKKlan, anyone who is NOT White is NOT considered ”right” in White AmeriKKKlan’s eyes. In other words, anything ”ethnic” aka non White is considered foreign and weird.”
This isn’t 100% true, being there is something called, “The exceptional Negro”.
Where black celebrities,athletes and media moguls like Oprah are not seen as, “those other blacks” by racist white people. They are actually, “Honorary whites” as they are accepted by white society.
abagond wrote a post about this here:
LikeLike
Yep, another excellent post. Ethnic is another way of categorizing non-white things. This article speaks on white as the Default. http://www.salon.com/2013/04/25/how_can_white_americans_be_free/
LikeLike
^^This. To not see color of the person..is to not acknowledge the melanin so…thoughtful idea but offensive.
Anyhow, I always wondered about the term ethnic and why it was applied only to certain ppl when it applies to everyone. Overall the term always sounded dumb to me.
LikeLike
[…] Ethnic is a Eurocentric way of saying non-Western. In America since the 1920s it has meant something not part of White American culture: ethnic foods, ethnic beauty, ethnic neighbourhoods, etc. "Et… […]
LikeLike
[…] See on abagond.wordpress.com […]
LikeLike
@Sondis
Now I see where you are coming from. Honestly I didn’t read the article about exceptional Negroes yet but that is another topic that needs to be discussed later on.
LikeLike
No problem, Adeen. just wanted to let a sista know, what I’m talking about. ^_^
LikeLike
NPR is definitely ethnically White. They have completely ignored their mandate to give a voice to those without voices in the media. It’s is such a travesty that NPR receives tax money to promote Whiteness.
LikeLike
I think “Ethnic” has become someone who is of European descent who doesn’t fit into what the establishment wants to put into a box. It also could be a recent immigrant.
Watch out for checkpoints within the country when that immigration bill passes. It’s not for them.. it’s for us. More DUIs.. More soft drug charges. More Americans getting hassled.
LikeLike
Ethnic white people should reject assimilating into the machine and join with other working class americans.. no matter what color.
LikeLike
That was always the endpoint of assimilation in the USA — to lose your ethnic affiliation and become “non-ethnic”. But then, that endpoint was always simply another ethnic affiliation.
They do refer to the white ethnic group sometimes in the USA using various labels. In the Western and Southwestern states, they often use the word “Anglo”. There are times when white Americans will admit to being that. In the East, they sometimes use the term “WASP”. In the West, it is mainly to distinguish from Latinos or Chicanos. In the East, it is mainly to distinguish from Jews. In the south, they simply use “white” or “American”, which is usually to distinguish from Black. I have never been to Oklahoma, but I suspect they use it to distinguish from both Native American and Black. In Hawaii, they use the term “Haole”.
I think that most white people inherently know that they identify with a cultural norm, but since the goal was to be “non-ethnic”, they just cannot come out and admit their ethnic identity.
@Bulanik
I think that that by the time a person uses “extraction” instead of “ethnicity”, they no longer identify with the ancestral ethnic group, but have assimilated into the white ethnic group (or some other ethnic group), but they still want to reference to the ancestry of the person (as opposed to their ethnicity).
So, a white American of Dutch and French extraction would be a white person who has assimilated into the white American ethnic group, but wishes to point out at least where some of their ancestry derives from . One could say a black American of mixed multi-ethnic African, Choctaw and Scotch-Irish extraction and it would make perfect sense. If you referred to an American of Chinese extraction, it would imply that the person no longer identifies with having Chinese ethnicity, but acknowledges that they are of Chinese descent. If they were American, but identified with being ethnically Chinese, then they would be an American which is ethnic Chinese, not of Chinese extraction.
It would make a lot of sense for multi-racial / multi-ethnic people who do not identify with their ancestral ethnicity. For example, if a person had a father that was of Korean / Irish descent and a mother that was Indian / Vietnamese descent, the person might identify as Asian-American, but not specifically with any of their ancestral ethnicities. At that point, I would use “extraction”.
I am happy to hear others’ take on this.
LikeLike
“Don’t make me get ethnic in here”. That’s strange you should do a post on this word. The quote was made by two white gay male co-workers mocking a black patient’s family member. I remember thinking how they were being catty and in my estimation laughing at this black person. The word ethinic since that time has always given me pause. For example while shopping at one of the supermarkets in a white subdivision in the city, I will see ethinic hair products or ethnic foods. So to me ethnic means not white. Ethnic is one of those socially constructed words. It’s like exotic. It may be kind of silly but these words peeve me just a tiny bit. It is certainly letting you know it means not white. It’s like the word urban. I used the word urban once in conversation at the doctor’s office when the nurse complimented me on my outfit. She asked me where I got my denim skirt I was wearing. I said it was at a shop in an urban part of the city. She looked at me with a puzzled look on her face. She remarked “What’s urban”. I was puzzeled since I thought she should know the meaning of the word urban.
LikeLike
@ V-4
No, it would not. Black Americans do not see themselves as the default. The Jews and Greeks in ancient times hardly saw themselves as the “default”, even when they had their own countries. They saw themselves as better than their neighbours, yes, but not the default.
Just because White Americans see themselves as the default does not mean that is the default behaviour for everyone.
LikeLike
@ lifelearner
Great link! Thank you.
LikeLike
@ Bulanik
In America, as far as I can tell, “ethnic” was still mainly applied to whites as late as the 1970s. By the 1990s most white “ethnics” were assimilated White Americans. Even the Jews. By then most immigrants were no longer European but black, Latino and Asian.
LikeLike
@ jefe
Good point. I think part of why whites in America think they are “beyond ethnicity” is because so many of them in the 1900s did not want to nakedly admit to themselves what assimilation meant. Particularly Jews, who not only assimilated at greater cost but provided many of the the cultural workers who would wind up making sense of it for all White Americans.
Kartina Richardson in the article Lifelearner linked to provides another reason: putting themselves beyond ethnicity places them beyond history – and therefore beyond white guilt.
LikeLike
LikeLike
@Abagond
Of course they do; in any nation, any culture in any time, people outside of their group or culture is not something they identify with as much as their own.
Their own by default is the default.
Or to put it another way; who do black americans identify with first, white americans or black americans?
Who do black americans identify with first, americans in general or europeans in general?
That being said; I can see how being a minority in a country or being a small country surrounded by multiple other cultures and countries could produce a different outlook.
Though even then that would require a level of interaction and exposure to outside groups.
LikeLike
Or to put it another way; not to see your people and culture as default would require a level of interaction with other cultures and peoples that ultimately would mean a constant change, adaption and involvement of other cultures into your own.
To not see your culture as default is to not value your culture.
LikeLike
LikeLike
@Bulanik
Re: Abagond’s point
I concur completely.
When I was a child, “ethnic” generally did not mean people of colour. It referred to non-Anglo or non-WASP Euro-American culture and people. The peak of European immigration was between 1875 and 1924, Immigration was almost curtailed after that, relaxed only slightly after WWII, and liberalized after 1965.
A very large percentage of persons born Pre-WW II were children of immigrants (if not immigrants themselves) and Baby Boomers were often children or at least grandchildren of immigrants – they knew their immigrant ancestors. Over the 1950s-1970s period ethnic salience and the melting pot were discussion topics, but it referred to European ethnicities. But in 1965, the immigration law was revamped, which changed the balance of the immigration more towards Asia, latin America and even Africa and more away from Europe. By the 1990s, the majority of immigrants and their children did not hail from Europe, but elsewhere.
In the 1950s – 1970s, due to white flight and blockbusting, many white “ethnics” fled urban areas to resettle in non-ethnic white neighborhoods in the suburbs. Their kids grew up without daily interaction with the “ethnic” community.
By 2013, the European ancestors of most “white” people in the USA have long been gone. they have lost touch with their European immigrant ancestors.
This is one reason why we do things like divide people into generational groupings. It is not necessarily trying to pigeonhole people into generations, but to compare their experience. To millennials, “ethnic” has always referred to non-whites. But Baby Boomers (and especially their parents) may still think of the term in terms of European ethnic affiliation, which was still a strong concept until about 1980.
These are the people who have been melting into being “white”. By understanding this, you can understand why people ask questions like “Will Hispanics (or Asians) become white?”, as this is what happened to prior generations of “ethnics”.
LikeLike
@Abagond,
Yes, they had to pay a huge price to be white.
Maybe this should also be one of the topics to be covered in White History month – “Becoming white”, and examine the Irish, Italians, Jews, , Poles, Russians and even Arabs whose descendants in the USA did become white. Recognize the price to pay and acknowledge some of that pain.
LikeLike
@ lifelearner:
That link you posted was very profound. I had to research this Black and Malaysian sista just to find out more about her writing.
LikeLike
@ sondis
Same here! That is why I wrote a post on her.
LikeLike
@ abagond:
Just read your post on Kartina Richardson, commented.
LikeLike
@Jefe
I agree with you. You are right but why did ethnic Whites like Irish, Polish, Jews, Italians etc become White to assimilate into he White Anglo Saxon AmeriKKKlan culture?
LikeLike
Reblogged this on The Racist and Unoriginal Anglo-American Entertainment Industry.
LikeLike
@Adeen,
I think that ethnic European whites became white for the same reason that everyone else does, or at least tries to to some extent or another, and this applies even to non-whites. The link to the blog post that several referenced above explains some of it – it both helps and hurts people.
If you still cannot understand why some ethnic Euro-descended whites became white, maybe it is easier for you to understand why many “black” people and other multiracial people became white. Abagond did posts on many of them, including Anatole Broyard.
The European ethnic wants to escape his “ghetto” as well, and live a nice life like the “white” people, at least with more access to opportunities and status. but to do that he has to discard much of his ethnic self, his “true” self.
There is a severe price to pay to become white, but for most people, they think it is worth it.
I believe that the Great African-American migrations from the South to the North actually hastened this process of becoming white. At that point, white ethnics came face to face with African-American migrants. Without the codified segregation that operated in the South, they competed for jobs, but also for housing and education. It was often the white ethnic neighborhoods which were the first to be blockbusted by “non-ethnic” whites. They fled to non-ethnic “white” neighborhoods in the suburbs, and largely abandoned their ethnicity.
When ethnic Europeans became white, they became “Americanized”. But when non-whites become “white”, they often get labelled as “sell-outs”. But seriously, most white people in general have sold out to become white, I don’t see why the others should be treated any differently. Everyone makes choices about how to run their lives.
LikeLike
@Adeen,
After I wrote the comment, I found this video on wikipedia made in 1970. Maybe it might shed some like on how society was like back then. It also touches a lot of ideas found all over this blog.
[video src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/Immigrant_to_America.ogv" /]
LikeLike
“The truth is, everyone is ethnic. White Americans, just like everyone else, have their own foods, holidays, heroes, newspapers, neighbourhoods, restaurants and shops. They speak English with an accent just like everyone else.”
That’s true, as just because I might eat a mayonnaise sandwich or bloody meat or drink Heineken or worship Ronald Reagan / George W. Bush / whiteness etc., none of these things can ever change my ethnicity from what it is to that of a white American. My own ancestry, heritage & history (i.e., my ethnicity) will remain the same wherever I go in the world, and I would not have it any other way.
LikeLike
V-4:
Yes. This point is almost trivially obvious.
Sometimes I wonder if Abagond may not be secretly teasing his readers with a post of the form: “Here is something which humans in general tend to do, but I will only describe white Americans doing this to see who leaps at the bait.”
LikeLike
I need clarity on this white by default meme. I am guessing it means many immigrants who immigrated to America, Italians, Irish, and Jewish immigrants were being persecuted for their cultural heritage from their homeland and assimilated into white culture to be acceptable. I hope someone can help me with this. The white culture in my estimation is the so called default.
LikeLike
“mary burrell
I need clarity on this white by default meme. I am guessing it means many immigrants who immigrated to America, Italians, Irish, and Jewish immigrants were being persecuted for their cultural heritage from their homeland and assimilated into white culture to be acceptable. I hope someone can help me with this. The white culture in my estimation is the so called default”
Linda says,
The one thing I can tell you about Europeans on the Continent, is that they did not look at themselves as one big, white group … they broke themselves down into groups based on ethnicity (some of them even perceived each other as different races — such as the slavs and the Jews)
Sometimes when I speak to my friends from Central or East Europe, they speak about British or western Europeans as if they are a separate “race” of people — that’s why Nationality is so important to them.
The way I see it, the mostly British /western European immigrants in north America morphed into “white Americans” because they lived in a slavery-based society and had to make rules that ensured that they gained wealth, held power, and stayed on top — and to them, only whites were “worthy” of ruling and holding power. (“majority rules” — that’s why they are freaked out about Obama and the fact that Hispanics are breeding like rabbits)
The British already viewed the Irish as another race and ranked them at the bottom with the Native Americans and Africans… so it would be only natural that traditional persecuted European minority groups, like the Jews, would be viewed as “other” and dark-skinned Italiens would fall into the “other” category and labeled “Ethnic” …
and as majority group that holds power, whites in America became the default group (the same way that in modern Jamaica, the black majority group in power, is the default group)
and for any “ethnic” group to climb the totem pole of wealth and power, they would need to be “accepted” and assimilate into the default group that holds power.
I guess it’s only natural for the citizens of the “host” country to look down on anyone who is different and foreign — that’s why each immigrant group faces the same BS when they come to America and try to assimilate quickly.
LikeLike
I general I think this whole “ethnic” thing is, once again, american discourse. It seems, and I might be wrong here, that it is a way to circumvent the race, which is by now known to be scientifically dead describtion of any kind. So therefore “ethnicity”, or “ethnic backround”. And also, what does one mean when one says “ethnic” or “ethnicity”? It is very vague term indeed, meaning very different things for different people and occations.
In Europe, despite of all the EU propaganda etc. there is no pan-european identity among the native europeans. There is a very loose and hazy idea of Europe as a geographical region, an area, and everyone in that is european BUT there are nationalities, national groups, national minorities etc. which view each other as “Them”. A good example are the finnish gypsies = the Roma people, or Romani as they call themselves.
They look at other romanis from other countries as foreigners and, sometimes at least, themselves as above those romanis from the Balkans etc. Despite of this, they very often think themselves as being separate from the finns, despite being finnish themselves, as well as the finns look at them as being an national minority, “them” but still finnish.
So despite of being the romani people, they see themselves firmly as finnish and yet in that context as being different from the national majority, who are also finnish. So it can be very much complicated over here. How one defines an ethnicity in a situation like this? Are the romanis an ethnic group even if they identify themselves as finns, just because they have different clothes and their own habits and even a language? Or are they finns, who just behave differently?
But if they are an separate ethnic group, then what about swedish speaking finns? They speak swedish but are finns proper and indetify themselves as finns, not the swedes at all, even though they have their own cultural celebrations etc. And what about carelians, who sometimes have even different religion and their own language too, but who are among the most patriotic finns ever? And what about me, whose mother is a carelian trough and trough, whose fathers mother was a swedish speaking finn from capital region but whose fathers father was from central Finland??
Then we have so-called finnish tribes: the finns proper in south western part, northern finns up north, carelians in the east, the savo in eastern and central Finland, the central finns living in the central areas, the south savo and carelians in the south east, the tavastians in the south central parts, and the finnish speaking people of the capital region who have different accent and life style and culture and are compelety mixed. Are these ethnic groups or what?
What about the Saami, the Lapps proper. Are they “native people” of Europe. Are they finns, swedes, norwegians or russians? Or are they separate people, ethnic group or national minority? And among the Saami there are several groups who have their own culture and language.
@mary burrelle:
The persecution theme is part of an repeating american myth which is tied into the Promised Land mythology ethos which USA is built upon. If we are talking about the millions of the irish and italian immigrants, they went to America simply because of the extreme poverty. Not because ethnic or religious or cultural persecution.
They were not persecuted for these reasons in Sicily or Calabria because there was no reason for that, not ethnically, culturally nor for any religious reason. They were poor and life in the Old Country meant stagnation for their children where as L’America meant possibility of social climb.
BUT it is good to remember that the irish were at first considered being lower sub-humans (actually there are plenty of cartoons depicting them as being half apes) than black slaves and worked for less and lived in worse slums in many places in the eastern seaboard than many of the blacks.
Italians were considered as “black” or “dark skinned” and dirty, crooked criminal people, superstitious and uncivilized, and much worse than any other europeans or american blacks. That is why they were hired in many cities (in Chicagoi and NYC) to work in jobs which were dangerous or down right health hazards, such as asphalt gangs paving the streets. Some judges made open statements how they could not understand why these people did not wash not could speak like normal humanbeings, and how they could not even learn how to read.
The east european jews were persecuted in pogroms for their religion and habits. They had their own language, jiddish, and fashion etc. They seeked better future in USA. But in England they were not seen as foreigners but as jews. Also there was a difference in that were you a jewish person from Poland or France. Now if you were a french jew you could be very much a french by your customs and language and perhaps felt not that much connection with a polish or russian jew. In Italy before and after fascism, one could be a jew and italian wihtout any one noticing it. And there had been jews in Italy since the days of emperor Augustus.
In Spain there are gypsies, famous for their flamenco music and dance. Yes, they are minority music and dancing despite as seen as something very spanish. but are the spanish gypsies of Adalusia first gypsies or spanish? Are they separate ethnic group when they do not have their own language and their distinctive culture has become mainstream culture? What about the catalans? Are the catalans ethnic minority or separate nationality group on their own? Barcelona is seen as spanish city but it is the capital of Catalonia. And what about the basks??
Europe, even though from american perspective it is very handy to see it as a cohesive unit united by certain culture or “whiteness”, is simply not that unified nor it is a quilt or league of nations. It is a hodge podge of cultures and sub cultures and groups and minorities who tend to identify to lowest common nomination, usually the nation, but sometimes a region of a nation.
In a certain way you can be from India or Senegal or China and you will be a foreigner. BUT you can be a french from France, a britt from Great Britain, a german from Germany and an estonian from Estonia and still be a foreigner, just like those others. From my national point of view it makes no difference if you are from India or Portugal. You are both foreigners. You can be the whitest american ever, you are still a foreigner. Period. And if you are a black american, you are an american, a foreigner, first and foremost.
USA or America is a nation of immigrants. Its whole existence is that: a nation of immigrants for the immigrants. I believe that many things in american thinking and in american culture can be traced to this: all americans are immigrants, immigrant groups or their descedants. The only group, THE ONLY GROUP IN AMERICA, which can state that they are natives, are the native americans or the american indians. And they were excluded from american society from the very start all the way up to recent decades, and in many ways and cases still are.
This is why the question of race, ethnicity or ones origin is so important and central theme. It defines you in the american value system and in american cultural system. Italian in USA does not mean nothing like it does in Italy. Being irish in Chicago means completely different than in Ireland etc. In a land of immigrants system of racist or ethnic separation and indetificiation was and still is vital part of the whole system, the power structure and the cultural system.
In Europe it is always your nationality. You are defined by nationality even more than by the color of your skin or any other strait. Famous actors, athletes or pop stars are defined by their nationality, not by their ethnicity unless they whish to do so themselves. A politician is not a black poltician, but a dutch, french, swedish, brittish etc. first. It is the nationality more than anything else.
LikeLike
[…] Ethnic is a Eurocentric way of saying non-Western. In America since the 1920s it has meant something not part of White American culture: ethnic foods, ethnic beauty, ethnic neighbourhoods, etc. "Et… […]
LikeLike
This is nonsense.
Clearly what they mean by “ethnic” is someone who’s not in the majority, as in white. What’s wrong with that when they’re speaking in a country with a white majority?
If I lived in China right now I’d say “ethnic” is anyone who’s not Han Chinese. Is this supposed to be an outrage?
LikeLike
I am a huge fan of the late king of pop Michael Jackson. I think he was a victim of this mindset. In the song black and white, The line that says “I’m not going to spend my life being a color”. That always gave me pause. I would think to my self “Well Mike, who and what do you think you really are? This post makes me think of sad and twisted mentality. I wonder was he ashamed of his ethnicity?
LikeLike
Truthbetold.
Not wanting to be classified racially is:
– something one doesn’t have to do outside of this US of A because there is no official classification system.
– something one does as a political statement. (Because “race” is politics) Refusing “race” is refusing “racism” as a political tool.
Your acceptance of “race” as a classifying device is exactly what they want you to do. They are the ones loling. I’m telling you. They just love it.
LikeLike
Cornelia,
Who are “they?” The ones laughing? Are they the ones that make up the police force, judicial systems, GOVERNMENT, managements and hiring populations, neighbors, doctors, nurses..?
The very people who LOOK AT ME and based on WHAT THEY SEE, proceed to:
beat/shoot/kill me?
deny me a promotion/bank account/loan?
deny me adequate treatment for my physical/mental ills?
buy into EVERY SINGLE negative stereotype about me and then say “get over it” when I dare learn my own history or be PROUD of myself?
Who are “these ppl” that force me and everyone else into a category mostly BASED ON LOOKS ALONE, thereby keeping ‘their’ hands in any and everything I try to accomplish or learn about myself for MY OWN SURVIVAL and mental and physical well being as long as they have eyes?
WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE?? Who set up the hierarchy of RACE and collective ‘color washing’ in the “greatest country on Earth” and then proceed to take this toxic message worldwide….
Whether or not the accumulation of atoms and melanin mean everything or nothing, JUST LIKE ETHNICITY, RACE exists in societal context.
Batman and Superman exist in the Marvel Universe.
The Avengers have superpowers and fight off aliens and “bad guys” and for some reason, we are completely acceptable of these “non-realistic, and physically impossible” facts. People emulate them! Dress up like them! They are not ‘real’!
But just like cognitive dissonance as a means to save your collective psyche when you are always under attack, I AM A BLACK WOMAN FIRST in America.
Consumer, second.
Refusing or ignoring this notion does not benefit me in Amerikkka because I do not make the rules.
It matters.
And I’m not laughing.
LikeLike
The Jews are chosen by God. God placed His name on them.
LikeLike
[…] Ethnic is a Eurocentric way of saying non-Western. In America since the 1920s it has meant something not part of White American culture: ethnic foods, ethnic beauty, ethnic neighbourhoods, etc. "Et… […]
LikeLike
The label ETHNIC is embedded so deeply, it contaminates everything it touches, and it’s so pervasive we aren’t even meant to notice that it is not innocent.
It labels practically everything which is seen as Western and Civilization.
That includes even the measurement of time:
Stone Age, Bronze Age and so on, are all calculated by archaeologists, but all those periods are organized around the beginning of Christianity, thus BC, AD — and this means ETHNIC inserts the dominance of Western, over Eastern Civilization, just as slyly as that. Yet, what that organizes is the sequence of human development — us and them, light and dark, mainstream and ethnic.
It’s the same outlook that makes, say, Acupuncture, Chinese herbal medicine or the Ayurvedic Tradition “alternative” medicine. Are they trustworthy..?
Anlother example, Ethnobotany — the study of people and plants, becomes the way “backward” people work with their environment, it does not refer to the way sophisticated Western SCIENCE approaches the uses and effects of plants. Nothing accidental or tribal or witch-crafty about Western Medicine…I had to chuckle at the page given over to the subject on Wiki! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnobotany
When someone or thing is classified as ethnic, they and it do not inherit the full force of authority which is the entitlement passed down by the Ancient Greeks’ objective methodology.
Because there is no Cartesian model or Newtonian framework to give those “ethnic” research-results credibility and gravity.
I suppose this why we the Polish scientist Copernicus is credited for discovering the sun is placed at the centre of the universe, instead of al-Biruni, the Persian. And if we only one more example, the invention of Calculus, it is a toss up between Leibniz or Newton, instead of the Indian Madhava of Sangama centuries before.
Why? Because only a man educated and schooled in the Western Scientific Tradition could think like a real mathematician/physicist and be correct, by Western standards, in his conclusions.
The ETHNIC label is dichotomous thinking in action. Those that are “ethnic” have too much interconnected-ness and religion and spirituality and have too much “complementarity” in their thinking to be taken seriously.
The ETHNIC label makes anyone, plus their results and solutions, second rate.
***
The other thing about the ETHNIC label is the picking and choosing what is cool and sexy about an “exotic” culture and leaving the dreary stuff of actually BEING ETHNIC to the ethnics. That’s the unwanted part.
LikeLike
I have heard the word ethnic used as a pejorivative. I.E. “Don’t make make me get ETHNIC in here” Underlying meaning, Don’t make me act like a N- word.
LikeLike
When viewed from the white lens the word ethnic is negative.
LikeLike
[…] ethnic […]
LikeLike