The Chicago Tribune
columnist Clarence Page, on May 5, 2013 ,
noted the absurdity of the question on “race” contained in Question 9 of the
U.S. Census: “How to update census’ race question.” (See image of Question 9 below.) In addition to checking
“white,” or “black, African Am. or Negro,” or “American Indian or Alaska
Native,” there are several additional choices that are Asian nationalities or
ethnicities. (The term “Negro” will be dropped.) The question not only confuses
“race” with ethnicity and nationality, it also implicitly affirms the false
idea that “races” exist as biological entities. This lie is not something that
the U.S. Government should be perpetuating.
Mr. Page begins the column by noting the confusion of a
woman who considered herself “white” but who recently discovered that she had
an African-American ancestor. Was she “white” or “African-American”? Her
dilemma was published on TheRoot.com. That website also published a short article
linking to Mr. Page’s Tribune column:
“The Census Race Question Isn't Working.”
While Mr. Page criticizes the old “race” boxes, I did not
think his critique went far enough. Thus, I posted the following comment to
TheRoot.com article:
Yes, the Census form question on “race” makes no sense. But
it needs more revision than you suggest. Genetically, there is no such thing as
a “race.” (Even if they existed, most Americans are mixed with one thing or
another--as the young “white” woman discovered.) “Races” are not biological
realities but are mythical social constructs that falsely impose rigid
categories on a continuum. It is a very powerful and harmful myth that we must
expose as nothing but a myth. (This does not mean that “affirmative action” has
to be ended--the harm that the myth has done needs to be remedied.) Thus, the
census question should not ask about anyone’s “race,” but instead should ask,
“What ‘race’ or ethnicity do others generally consider you to be?” That gets the
information needed to monitor discrimination without affirming the myth.
--John L. Hodge (author--JohnLHodge.com)
--John L. Hodge (author--JohnLHodge.com)
A reader
replied to my comment by noting the harm of affirmative action programs. This
is my reply to his reply:
. . . affirmative action does not have to be based solely
on color. It should take into consideration other factors and shift its focus
to impoverished backgrounds regardless of color, but still address the past
adverse effects of racism where appropriate. AA needs to change but not be
abandoned.
As I argued in Chapter 5 of my book, How We Are Our Enemy--And How to Stop, the concept of affirmative action should not be abandoned.
We cannot ignore the immense harm the false concept of “race” has inflicted on
us. It is wrong to close our eyes and just say, “Too bad, but there is nothing
we can do now.” Nonetheless, a shift needs to be made from a purely “racial” or
gender-based affirmative action to focus more on remedying the effects of
poverty and poor education regardless of the color, ethnicity or gender of
the victims.
The point is that we can attack the myth of “race” and at
the same time find ways to address the immense harm that the myth of “race” has
caused and continues to cause.
The parenthetical statement in my comment, “Even if they [races] existed, most
Americans are mixed with one thing or another,” is based on a book, DNA USA: A Genetic Portrait of America by Bryan
Sykes .
Here is the absurd Question 9 on the U.S.
Census Form:
Also see my previous post, It’s Past Time to Relegate “Race” to History .