The "ethnicity" of race

For several years I patronized an Asian food restaurant/convenience store twice a week long after my taste buds would have grown weary of it. It was a little pricy for my budget, but I kept going because the wife half of the Japanese proprietary duo there was pleasant to me, and I felt remorseful about not returning the consideration; so I had to make a special effort to insure that I had enough funds each week to cover the cost of this indulgence. Then last week on a day I set aside to make this rendezvous, I purchased a diet Coke at work, which I only took only a few sips of, and decided to save myself a little money when I went to the restaurant. I made my comestible purchase without the usual ice tea I usually added to the bill (because it was cheaper than the bottled water). At some point in the course of eating my supper, the husband half of the  proprietorship approached me and pointed at the Coke bottle and told me in broken English that he hadn’t rung it up at the cash register. I didn’t quite catch his drift at first, but then it dawned on me: After all these years of being a steadfast customer, I was being accused, in a “subtle” way, of being a thief. Dumbfounded by this accusation, I tried to make clear that I didn’t get it from the sto re; because of the translation gap, by the time he understood my point, I was near to simply walking out right then and there. When I did eventually leave it occurred to me “What kind of person did they really think I was? That they saw my ‘ethnicity’ as evidence of a person who had natural criminal predilections just waiting for the right moment to exploit their hospitality?” I couldn’t know for certain, but I couldn’t look at them the say way again as they apparently always looked at me. At any rate, I was sufficiently affronted that it was the justification I needed to weight my wallet by a fewer extra dollars. 

Which brings me to the question of what is the measure of man. I know, of course, what is being reacted to are physical traits that society places certain values and stereotypes. The India-born Dinesh D’Souza—whose so-called documentary “Obama’s America” (based on his book “Roots of Obama’s Rage”) is nothing more or less than a dull,  overlong Republican campaign advertisement (which besides repeating the usual right-wing “socialist” propaganda predicts that the U.S. will become the “United States of Islam” if Obama is re-elected)—justifies it as “rational discrimination.” Thus when I recently encountered a headline in the local newspaper to the affect that “Latinos may get own race category on census form” in 2020, I thought that here at least was an acknowledgement that people do make inferences based on superficial factors, even if many Latinos in this country continue to live in a racial fantasy world that Anglos don’t recognize. According to the story, "Latino” and “Hispanic” will be “government-defined races,” rather than be counted as an ethnicity. Which of course makes some sense, I suppose, since even if they won’t admit it, most “Latinos” in this country are of mixed white and indigenous race—and look it. 

However, Seattle Times reporter Lornet Turnbull, who is black, is perhaps reflecting on her own discomfort and confusion about who qualifies to be victims of racial discrimination when she herself opinies that “Hispanic is an ethnicity, not a race, which means although those in the population share a common language, culture and heritage, they can be of any race.” The problem is that while there might be common ground in regard to language, Latin American countries have as much separate identities and interests as, say, the U.S., the UK, Canada and Australia—all of which could be classified as having an “ethnic” culture in, say, France or Germany, and vice versa. Like these countries, Latin America also racial issues, even if they choose to call them something else. As in this country, people are defined by race, and it only requires a visible trace of it. You don’t hate Latinos because they are “white”—you hate because of what makes a majority of them “brown.” And “brown” denotes race, not ethnicity.

Some people who use the term “Hispanic” prefer that it applies to people whose descendants originated from Spain or Portugal, while using “Latino” to describe mixed-race persons residing in the U.S. who can trace at least in part their origins from intermixture between Spanish (or other Europeans) and indigenous peoples—a notion that the sex-deprived Spanish conquistadors were much less aghast at than the English. Of course, other than the fact that another minority groups wish to have a “lock” on racial victimization, many—perhaps most—Latinos who are of some degree of brown complexion loath to accept the reality of the usual origin of the skin tone. Indigenous peoples are closely “related” to certain Asiatic peoples, and again that is not an “ethnicity,” but a race. Yet you frequently hear people say that discrimination or hate crimes against Latinos does not constitute “racism,” because they are an “ethnicity.” But the reality is that what people react negatively in a visceral way is the “racial” element they see.

Many black Americans who are educated and do not identify with the prevailing “black” culture consider themselves more “white” than black. But they are still black and viewed as such by white Americans; their “loyalty” to white cultural hegemony is always questioned if not in doubt. So too is it for Latinos who are mixed race who feel culturally white, and indeed many (perhaps most) are. Yet it hardly matters what they “think.” Because of their physical differences, we are told that Latinos must have their own “culture” distinct from white (or black—or Asian, for that matter), and it is of an implicitly inferior variety.

But there is far more complexity beyond the simplistic generalities that most Americans maintain.  As I noted in my previous post, nearly all Latin American countries are socially subdivided by class—and class is usually defined by race. I’ve never been anywhere south of the border, so I don’t have any first hand knowledge of life in Latin America, although you can sometimes tell how Latinos sometimes attempt to separate themselves in subtle ways from others that white Americans would generally lump them in the same “group” with. Since I alluded to Chile’s social structure recently, I decided to do a search for how people residing in that country view race. There was a person who called herself “Clare in Chile” who provided this "imaginary" conversation one might have on the streets of Chile:

Chilean person: There are real race issues in the states.

Me: Yes, there are huge problems. But I think race is a problem here.

Chilean: No, we don’t have race issues here. We do have issues with class.

Me: What do you mean.

Chilean: Well, people of lower class are really looked down upon.

Me: How can you tell who these people are?

Chilean: You just can.

Me: (finding a darker skinned Chilean in the crowd) What about that person… over there… what class are they?

Chilean: They are lower class.

Thus “race” and “class” are interchangeable concepts in this context. In the U.S., how one dresses, their level of education, their job and their celebrity have a place in establishing one’s “class,” but one’s race is always the “predictor” in what “class” of society you are placed in—just as D’Souza’s India is separated into “castes” and the vast majority of people are forced to  live in poverty because of it.

A man who called himself Gonzalo said:       

Yes, we have had racial issues in Chile for decades. You know, this country was made of inmigrants from Spain, Germany, Italy, and most Europe, many of whom gradually mixed up with the local indigenous population.

European’s education and skills soon let them take over the trade, mining, agriculture and other strategic business in Chile, leaving the less educated indigenous population bound to low-skilled jobs and poor education, cutting down their chances to overcome their situation.

There are 3 Chiles, one made mostly of inmigrant descendants, well educated and generally getting better jobs. You can tell them in the street by their aspect: taller, well dressed and white skinned (looking much like Mediterranean Europeans), though there are also many Asian descendants -mostly Jewish, Middle and Far East, holding a big share of the local economy.

The second Chile is made of a huge mid-class, racially mixed population. You can tell them out because they aren’t exactly white, but they don’t meet the Latino stereotype either. Most of them are office clerks, professionals and technicians who make just enough money for a decent living.

The last Chile is made of strong indigenous blood, They can’t afford enough education so they have remained near the poverty line for decades. You can tell them easily for their look, short stature, slang and well-defined cultural values. They show a notorious class-consciousness and discrimination to other classes, as autodefence against a social regime imposed on them by the huinca (spelled “ween-kah”, meaning white or Spaniard in Mapuche)

A Dr. John Cobin wrote:

Chileans are not racists, except perhaps toward violent, conniving, land-stealing, and treacherous Mapuche Indians in the south central part of the country (stay away from Temuco), and toward slimy Peruvians, who “work twice as long for half as much.” Of course my adjectives are applied to give readers a sense for how Chileans feel.

There are no black people in Chile to speak of, and there are hardly any Mexicans (at least none of the sort that many Americans hate). There are a few people from Korea, Japan, China, Vietnam, etc. who are all collectively called “Chinos” and are not despised, even though the Chileans often use the expression “he works like a Chinaman” (trabaja como chino/a) to describe people who work too hard. Neither blacks nor orientals are hated in Chile. People from other Latin countries besides the upper classes of Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil tend to be looked down upon. Bolivians and Peruvians are probably the most derided. There are some Arabs around, mostly from Palestine, and just a few people from India or Pakistan. Chileans like gringos (i.e., Americans, Canadians, and Europeans) in general.

Chilean populations come from a variety of backgrounds, especially in Punta Arenas (on the Strait of Magellan near Cape Horn) where one can find Portugese, Spanish, British, Italian, French, Italian, Croatian, Russian, and several other ethnic influences. In Santiago, there are significant populations of these groups, along with Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, and South Africans, plus a host of Jews, Palestinian Catholics, Eastern (Antiochian) Orthodox, Russian (Georgian) groups like the Molokans, and even a few Muslims.

Spain’s influence is felt and seen in almost all parts of Chile. The British left a significant influence in Valparaíso, Antofagasta, Iquique, Punta Arenas, and Santiago. French and Italians had some influence in Santiago. German immigrants (who often intermarried with Spaniards) had considerable influence in Valdivia, Osorno, and smaller areas of south central Chile like Panguipulli, Lanco, Rio Bueno, La Union, San Jose de Mariquina and Fresia. The Germans also had the most important influence all around Lake Llanquihue (Puerto Octay, Frutillar, Lllanquihue, and Puerto Varas) due to a major colonization effort in the 1860s-1880s which was sponsored by the Chilean government. One can still hear (old) German spoken in restaurants on occasion.  Hitler was very popular during most of World War II in south central Chile, albeit much less so in Santiago. Relatively few Germans came after that war.

The Spaniards wiped out most of the Indian populations in the South, leaving a remnant of Inca descendants in the North. What was left of the Indians did eventually get mixed with European blood, creating a class of “Morenos” or “Mestidzos.” The upper classes have resisted intermarrying with Indians, or anyone with Indian blood, up to the present day. European intermarriage is favored, including Caucasians from America or Canada. But the other classes continue to intermarry with the darker-skinned Mestidzo people.

It is perhaps not surprising in a climate like this that indigenous and mixed-race people decided to go elsewhere to find some form of human dignity—not, of course, that they have much of that here if you listen to politicians, xenophobes—and racists.