Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

(Article): "Who is White?"

Expand Messages
  • multiracialbookclub
    WHO IS WHITE ? (Article) SYNOMYMS In the United Kingdom, white and black are not often used as nouns (e.g. whites ), as they seem slightly impolite;
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 18, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      WHO IS 'WHITE'? (Article)


      In the United Kingdom, "white" and "black"
      are not often used as nouns (e.g. "whites"),
      as they seem slightly impolite; instead
      the phrases "white person / people" and
      "black person / people" are used.

      In North America, and to a lesser extent other
      countries, the term Caucasian is used for "white"
      people (even though Caucasian properly
      refers to people from the Caucasus region).

      Anglo-Saxon is a less commonly used
      synonym, which generally includes all white
      Northern-European ancestries, not just
      English, as the term would seem to suggest.


      The term white has historically been used in
      contrast to other racial colour terms, such as
      black, brown, yellow (Far East Asian),
      and red (Amerindian), etc, all of which
      tend to be defined with reference to "white".

      In other words, a "black" or "brown" person
      is simply defined by having darker skin than
      a "white" person, and any given "color"
      may often apply to unrelated peoples.

      In the U.S.A, "black" denotes [any known amount
      of] African ancestry and "brown" is usually
      attributed to non-white Hispanics and South
      Asians (people of the Indian subcontinent);
      in Australia, for example, "Black" denotes
      Aborigines and "Brown" denotes South Asians
      and Middle Easterners/North Africans.

      These terms were in more common usage in the
      beginning of the 20th century as ethno-historians
      attempted to trace humanity's history through
      linguistics, a process that has been largely
      superseded with the advent of DNA analysis.

      At the turn of the 20th century, some scholars
      thought of white people as being the descendants
      of Indo-Europeans and divided them into
      two categories: Semitic and Aryan.

      It is now known that this early categorization
      was highly flawed, since Semitic people, although
      Caucasoid, are not a sub-group of Indo-Europeans;
      "Aryan" was erroneously applied by European
      anthropologist to themselves; and South
      Asians were altogether excluded,
      despite being a caucasoid people
      and a sub-group of Indo-Europeans.

      Most popular and government definitions still
      do not categorize South Asians as white.

      Paradoxically, the term "Aryan", highly
      associated with White supremacy,
      most correctly applies to South Asians.

      Although it is most prevalent in casual
      conversation, the term white is increasingly
      rare in academic and formal discussions of
      racial demographics, but it is still often
      used in discussions of racial attitudes,
      particularly in the humanities, and in fields
      such as 'African-American' studies ("black" studies),
      critical race theory and whiteness studies.


      The scope of the term `White' has changed
      over time, and varies from place to place.

      In the United States, the term usually applies
      to people of ethnic European descent or anyone
      that looks European with no other discernable
      non-European racial features.

      The strictest definition held by white
      supremacist groups around the world is
      that anyone of total ancient ethnic
      indigenous European ancestry is 'white.'

      (Although few actually insist on a genealogical
      record, and tend instead to make their
      judgment on relative skin color.)

      In Haiti, Cuba, and Brazil,
      lighter skinned mulattos
      (people of mixed African and European descent)
      ... are often considered white,
      while in the United States or Canada, those
      same people would always be considered "black"
      and in Europe they would be classed as "mixed
      race" a blanket term for all people with multiple
      racial heritages --- not just 'mulattos'.

      British Afro-Caribbean slang includes
      the terms 'Red' for those with half-black,
      half-white ancestry, and 'Yellow' for
      those who are 3/4 white, 1/4 black.

      Other contemporary difficulties of the term,
      in the United States for example, is that
      Anatolian Turks, Arabs, Iranians, caucasoid
      Jews (Northern/Eastern European Ashkenazim,
      Iberian Sephardim and Middle Eastern Mizrahim),
      may also be seen as non-White by a majority of
      people, even though some people in these groups
      may look very similar to Southern Europeans; and
      in the case of Ashkenazim, to Northern Europeans.

      In the United States, generally speaking,
      the biggest dilemma of `White' inclusion
      is for caucasoid Americans of Middle
      Eastern and North African descent:
      Berbers, Anatolian Turks, Arabs,
      Iranians, Kurds, Mizrahim, etc.

      For the purposes of statistics, they are
      always categorized as `white' by US
      government agencies and the U.S.census.

      This categorization, however, does not always
      lead to a sense of inclusion for most of them,
      as they are often excluded from the general
      structural concepts of white-American society,
      and may even experience hostile rejection.

      Furthermore, while South Asians are also an
      anthropologically caucasoid people -- and
      recognized as such by the United States
      Supreme Court — not only are they also excluded
      from both the popular definition of "white" and
      the general structural concepts of white-American
      society, but are excluded as "non-whites" by
      US government agencies as well, and are
      instead categorised and tallied up as "Asians",
      as done in the U.S.census race categorisation.

      For an example of legal contradictions in
      United States Supreme Court rulings of
      "white" vs "caucasian" [click following link]

      By contrast in Europe, Canada, and Australia those
      same Middle Easterners, North Africans, and South
      Asians are almost never regarded or categorized
      as `White', neither by society's general
      understanding of the term nor by
      government institutions.

      Instead, they are regarded as "racial minorities".

      This latter understanding of the term in
      Australia has little to do with White separatist
      exclusionism, but rather a traditional, and still
      currently espoused, definition of `white' which
      has never encompassed Middle Easterners or North
      Africans, and which, unlike the definition of
      "White" in the United States, has not
      undergone "continuous alterations" to
      include an ever growing number of people.

      In the American context, where Middle Easterners
      and North Africans are grouped as `white' by
      government agencies, the popular contention
      of excluding these Caucasoid groups of North
      Africa and the Middle East from the white
      label is based largely on the argument
      that there is a significant Black sub-Saharan
      component in much of their populations
      (a long-spanning presence throughout the
      history of that region) and on their
      disparate cultural, religious,
      linguistic heritage and ancestral origins.

      It is undeniable that many Arabs in North Africa
      (Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, etc) and the Arabian
      Peninsula (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, etc.)
      have enough black African ancestry or are
      dark enough --at times being [as or even more]
      dark-complexioned [than] ... [so-called]
      `African Americans' -- to be considered
      black by popular US standards...

      Additionally, the popular definition of white
      in the United States often excludes all
      Hispanics, more so those from the Americas
      (even if of unmixed European descent, or of
      European phenotype with distant non-European
      admixture) and at times also questioning
      the `whiteness'of those from Spain.

      Of the countries of Latin America, those that it
      can be said are composed of an overwhelmingly
      European population are Argentina and Uruguay.

      Chile and Costa Rica are also quite "European",
      and possess mestizo majorities where it is not
      uncommon for the European element to predominate
      heavily over the Amerindian one (Castizo);
      of those, very few would acknowledge the
      admixture and would simply identify as white.

      Countries such as Guatemala, Bolivia, Peru,
      on the other hand, possess Amerindian majorities,
      and although they also harbour large mestizo
      minorities, on average the Amerindian element
      predominates over the European one.

      Furthermore, Guyana and Surinam have
      significant South Asian populations.

      Also, Haiti and the Dominican Republic
      are composed mainly of people of
      African or mixed African descent.

      Despite these vast racial differences, there
      is a marked tendency in the US to label all
      people from South and Central America as
      Hispanic or Latino, not white, no matter
      how white or black they might be in appearance...


      One recent genetic study suggests that
      approximately 30% of self-identified whites
      (non-Hispanic) in the U.S. possess some
      sub-Saharan-African ancestry, due to
      mixing with the population now called
      "black" or African American in the U.S. ...

      Indeed, whites who have ancestors which settled
      in theWestern United States during the 19th
      century may have American Indian
      and/or African-American ancestors.

      The broad usage of "white" is sometimes
      criticized by those who argue that it
      de-ethnicizes various groups, although the
      same charge is not leveled at the question
      of ethnic diversity within [so-called] "blacks".

      During the era of Jim Crow Laws in the
      Southern United States, facilities were
      commonly divided into separate sections
      for white and "colored" people.

      These terms were defined by law, with people of
      northern and western European being labeled
      white and African-Americans labeled as "colored".

      The categorization of people of other
      ethnicities and mixed ancestries varied
      by state, county, and municipality.

      A more contemporary criticism is that many
      "black" people have lived in areas of North
      Africa associated with Arabs and thus,
      should be considered white.

      Mostafa Hefny, an obviously "black"-Egyptian,
      is among those whose original ancestors are from
      North Africa and who is classified as `white',
      despite the obviousness of his black identity
      and his socialization as a "black" man in America.


      Countries with a majority of white ethnic
      Europeans include all the nations of Europe,
      as well as some of the countries colonized
      by them through the 15th century to 19th
      century, such as the United States, Canada,
      Argentina, Uruguay, asiatic Russia,
      and oceanic Australia and New Zealand.

      In these nations, the relatively small indigenous
      populations were overwhelmed by white colonists
      from one or more European "mother countries".

      The distribution of Europeans worldwide may
      be explained by the traditional argument
      that Europeans thrive best in temperate
      climates above about 30° latitude in
      both hemispheres, but do not fare well
      in the tropics, except at high elevations.

      Indeed, Europeans have colonized most of those
      portions of the north and south temperate zones
      which had low indigenous-population densities
      when discovered by European explorers,
      which excluded East Asia but included
      virtually all other temperate regions.

      Whites are also nearly unique in that they
      exhibit a variety of hair and eye colors.

      In parts of the world north of 50° North
      latitude, sunlight is low and weak enough
      hat people (and white coloured polar animals
      for that matter) with blond hair, blue eyes,
      and pale skin have an advantage over
      those with darker colouration.

      Benefits include resistance to
      rickets, possibly frostbite...

      However, the only major part of the
      world where such conditions exist is
      in northern Europe and western Russia.

      Parts of Alaska and western Canada, and, in
      the Southern Hemisphere (south of 50° South
      latitude), a small section of South America
      including Tierra del Fuego and the Falkland
      Islands would fit the requirement as well,
      but they were thinly populated at the time of
      discovery and are now dominated by the
      descendants of European settlers.

      Significant minorities of Whites live in
      the various Latin American and Caribbean
      countries, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia.

      Many of these nations have experienced
      considerable political conflict between the white
      minority (descendants of settlers from the former


      Race in the US Federal Census

      The 7th federal census, in 1850, asked for Color:[1]


      The 10th federal census, in 1880, asked for Color:[2]


      The 22nd federal census, in 2000, had a "short form
      [3] that asked two race/ancestry questions:

      **1.Is the person Spanish/Hispanic/Latino?
      **2.What is the person's race?

      **Black, African American, Negro
      **American Indian or Alaska Native
      **10 choices for Asian and Pacific Islander

      This census acknowledged that "the race
      categories include both racial and national-
      origin groups." See also Race (U.S. Census)

      [[NOTE: The fact that the form insists on placing the
      largely MGM-Mixed raced `Ethnic' group currently
      mis-nomered as `African-American' (AA) in
      the `mono'-racial `Black' racial category
      is as illogical as referring to those of
      "American Indian" lineage within the
      South Asian category along with `East Indians.

      More than 70% of those who are of 100% AA
      ethnicity – have a racial ancestry of +20-30%
      European and more than 25% Amerindian – thus,
      they are `multi'-racially `mixed' and not ,
      and are not `mono'-racially `black'.]]


      Source: http://www.reggaeseen.com/reggae/Whites

      Related Link(s):





      Related Article(s):


      [MGM-Mixed==Multi-Generational Multiracially-Mixed
      Mixed==Multiracial Admixed Lineage/Parentage/Ancestry]]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.