Census Brief on Multiracial Populations

I am currently reading my way through the recent US Census publication “The Two or More Races Population: 2010.”

There are some numbers in here that really point to the future of America as a place where racial definitions shift, multiply, and become flexible.

Consider for example the fact, “people who reported [being] White as well as Black or African American…grew by over one million people, increasing by 134 percent—and people who reported [being] White as well as Asian…grew by about three-quarters of a million people, increasing by 87 percent.”

That’s a lot of people one could probably not accurately put in a racial box just by looking at them.

America may not be a post-racial nation, but doing racial tallies continues to get more complex.

Here is a telling map and graph showing geographic distribution:

 

PS:  Since the race question on the census does not address Hispanic origin (that is a separate ethnicity question), there is no way of knowing how  Hispanic or Latino identity fits in the mix.  Also, since the census counts Americans of Middle-Eastern or Arab origin as White, that is also an area lacking in differentiation.  In both cases, individuals may note that they are Some Other Race, but that category is not broken down.

National Statuary Hall Part II: Racial Breakdown

According to my count, of the 100 statues in National Statuary Hall the racial breakdown of the individuals portrayed is as follows:

93 White

5 Native American

1 Hispanic

1 Pacific Islander

These numbers make the addition of Frederick Douglass even more essential as he is the first black individual portrayed in this national collection.

I would say that the lack of diversity is a result of the fact the installation of statues was authorized in 1864, but it took a long time for all the states to provide the statues with some still not there in the early 90s  (Wikipedia).  I would have thought that by that time at least one state would have had a black citizen to honor.

Given the politics that would be involved in any state replacing a statue at this point, I think the collection will likely remain with its current mix of individuals.  The only hope might be if the territories get to add statues.  My old home island of Guam could provide some variety.  Consider the individual sculpted below.

Statue of Chief Kipuha (or, Quipuha) at the new Chamorro Village in Hagåtña.

 

By the way, there are 92 men and 8 women in the hall, something else on which to work.

Island Angst or Why I Should not Have Read Jamaica Kincaid

Queen Liloukalani, the last Hawaiian monarch

So I leave tomorrow for vacation, heading eventually for a week on the Hawaiian island of Kauai.  I am looking forward to the time way, the relaxation, the beautiful scenery, the ocean, the sand, and all of the other aspects of vacation.

However, I also suffer from a case of post-colonial island angst.  This peculiar malady is caused by reflecting on what it means to be a tourist, particular the elements of race, class, and imperialism that play a role in my traveling to enjoy the exotic or foreign elements of an island whose past involves colonial occupation.

In my case the onset of this malady can be traced to my reading Jamaica Kincaid’s essay “A Small Place” in which she lambastes the white tourists coming to her home island of Antigua stating:

“An ugly thing, that is what you are when you become a tourist, an ugly empty thing, a stupid thing, a piece of rubbish pausing here and there to gaze at this and taste that, and it will never occur to you that the people who inhabit the place in which you have just paused cannot stand you, that behind their closed doors they laugh at your strangeness” [17].

She goes on to explain how tourists are oblivious to the suffering, oppression and marginalization of the residents of the island.  She ties tourism to the island’s colonial past, particularly its experience as a British colony and sees it it as an extension of that past.

After reading the book, I resolved never to travel as a tourist to any Caribbean island and also threw in the resorts of Mexico to be comprehensive.  I do not want to play any part in the post-colonial ugliness.

When it comes to the Pacific, my view is colored by my experience living on Guam for two years.  There I saw first hand the way the residents both enjoyed economic benefits of being a US territory but also resented the loss of land and autonomy.  There was definitely the sense of the Guam as an American colonial possession, an island with no vote in Congress, limited if any say in many key issues,  and a history of American occupation dating back to the Spanish American war.  As part of Guam’s marginal colonial existence, the education system was inferior to that in the 50 states as was the medial system (except for the military hospitals).  Like those other islands, Guamanians made money off of tourists but did not particularly like them seeing them as rather clueless individuals who could be charged exorbitant non-resident rates for goods and services.

Based on my reading and experiences, I therefore am not a fan of being a tourist on an island, particularly one that has been colonized by a European/American superpower leaving the local population in a marginalized position.

Hawaii, however, presents a different situation.  On the one hand it was a US colonial possession where the US deposed an indigenous monarchy and took power.   There are also many issues around land rights and movements to increase Native Hawaiian rights. On the other hand, Hawaii is a US state with all the benefits and representation that entails.  It cannot really be said to be a colonial possession, although its history involves colonialism.

Still, as a potential tourist, I wonder if in Hawaii I am the ugly being Kincaid describes.  Am I with my white skin and economic resources clearly an outsider who would be better off staying home?  I do not think so, after all I am helping the local economy and all of this angst at least shows I am conscious of the various dynamics.  Still, I wonder about the acquisition of the land on which the resort hotel stands and I will be avoiding any luaus and hula shows. It is one thing to passive acquiesce in the demise of Queen Liliuokalani.  It is another thing to consume deliberately a repackaging of Hawaiian traditions for tourist consumption.

But here is the question, why do I feel all this angst regarding island vacations when I do not feel it when vacationing in the mainland US?  Should  I not feel guilt visiting anywhere the indigenous population has been removed and/or marginalized?  Perhaps it is proximity that bothers me, proximity to the dispossessed, and I would prefer to live my life not thinking of that reality.

Memorial Day Melting Pot

“Indian Country” proudly notes that one individual in this photo is Ira Hayes of the Pima Nation

Looking over various websites and postings on Memorial Day, I see a wonderful diversity for example…

There is the You Offend Me You Offend My Family  posting on Hollywood war films that accurately present Asian soldiers.

There is the Indian Country Today post “A Brief History of American Indian Military Service.”

There is a post on The Root “See 10 Places Honoring Black War Heroes.”

I am sure if I dug deep enough I could also find postings addressing the contributions of other groups  to the United States military. For example consider this piece on Project Q Atlanta on gay vets celebrating memorial day.

How utterly American to celebrate soldiers of all kinds.  What a tribute to the role of an open, meritocratic military in American society.

Myth Debunking: The Founding of America

This Graphic Might Reflect a Little Bias

On Cracked.com there is this piece “6 Ridiculous Lies You Believe About the Founding of America.”  Given the website and the use of the phrase “ridiculous lies” in the title, I do not necessarily believe everything in the piece is accurate.  However, it is a great example of how to present history from a certain perspective–in this case a pro-Native American anti-Columbus perspective.  I tend to agree with much of that perspective, but this version is a bit too glib.  Also, the various links refer to sites that seem reliable such as Discover Magazine and PBS and also sites I am not sure of sacred-texts.com and world-pyramids.com.

I think it would be fun to give this piece to a group of American History students and have them fact check and debunk it.

Johnny Depp as Tonto: Is That a Bird on His Head?

Johnny Depp as Tonto

More creative casting, Johnny Depp is Tonto in the new Lone Ranger movie.  The first photo of his costume/make-up came out today.  The white face paint and bird on his head seem more odd than Native American.  The Native Appropriations blog has a good analysis of the costume pointing out it is just a modification of Captain Jack Sparrow.  As I said recently with Lucy Liu as Watson, I tend to be in favor of creative casting.  In this case though I am of two minds.  On the one hand there are cultural sensitivity issues involving Native Americans and an oppressive, majority culture that are not present with the Sherlock Holmes situation.  On the other hand Tonto is such a stereotypical creation that I cannot imagine a re-imagining being any worse than the original, besides if creative casting works in one direction, it really should work in the other.