3 ms·

Mixed race people in the US are considered less 'privileged' only to white people, who find any race of people less privileged (as a whole, not on a case-by-cas

Mixed race people in the US are considered less 'privileged' only to white people, who find any race of people less privileged (as a whole, not on a case-by-case basis). But to minorities, people who are half white are seen as more privileged, especially in the black community.

specializeded 9y ago
Same w/ Mexican American communities around the states, mejorar la raza and all that
dragonwriter 9y ago
Mixed race people are often seen as outsiders by either race; how they personally identify can vary a lot (and often it's not simply with one or the other.)
- eesmith 9y ago
  When you say "outsider", be sure that you don't mean the racist "tragic mulatto" viewpoint that mixed blood inherently (ie, from biological reasons) leads to tragedy and hurt. Even when seen as 'outsiders', meaning, as part of a different ethnic group, it's still not uncommon under European colonial rule that mixed white/black people have more privilege than black people. That is, what you say is not at odds with what magic_beans said. Spanish rule in the Americas had race-based caste system. This included New Mexico. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Spain : > Eventually a caste system was created to describe the various mixes and to assign them a different social level. ... The upper echelons of government were staffed by Spaniards born in Spain (peninsulares), the middle and lower levels of government and other higher paying jobs were held by Criollos (Criollos were Spaniards born in the Americas, or—as permitted by the casta system—Spaniards with some Amerindian or even other ancestry.[139]) The best lands were owned by Peninsulares and Criollos, with Native communities for the most part relegated to marginal lands. Mestizos and Mulattos held artisanal positions and unskilled laborers were either more mixed people, such as Zambos, recently freed slaves or Natives who had left their communities and settled in areas with large Hispanic populations. Haiti inherited the French racial caste system. Quoting now from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti : > Haitian mulattoes became the nation's social elite and racially privileged. Numerous leaders throughout Haiti's history have been mulattoes. Comprising 5% of the nation's population, mulattoes have retained their preeminence, evident in the political, economic, social and cultural hierarchy in Haiti. In the South African apartheid system, "coloured" people (with mixed heritage) had higher status than "African" people (meaning black). While not explicit at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid you can infer from "Blacks were provided with services greatly inferior to those of whites, and, to a lesser extent, to those of Indian and coloured people." that black people were less privileged than mixed race people.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > When you say "outsider", be sure that you don't mean the racist "tragic mulatto" viewpoint that mixed blood inherently (ie, from biological reasons) leads to tragedy and hurt. No, I'm saying that, in practice a person if mixed White/Black background will often be seen and treated as something-distinct-from-White (and disfavored for that reason) by Whites and something-distinct-from-Black (and, again, disfavored for that reason) by Blacks. > Even when seen as 'outsiders', meaning, as part of a different ethnic group, it's still not uncommon under European colonial rule that mixed white/black people have more privilege than black people. Yes, in systems with de jure racism, often mixed race categories are in an intermediate legal position between legally pure members of the dominant race and legally pure members of the disfavored race. This actually is often part of why even the disadvantaged race, treats mixed race individuals, like advantaged-race individuals, as disfavored outsiders culturally, even long after that kind of legal system is gone. > That is, what you say is not at odds with what magic_beans said It was a refinement, not a disagreement.
    - eesmith 9y ago
      I wasn't suggesting that you were. It's a caution that the term "outsider" likely isn't the right word, because it's close to historical racist stereotypes, and from my admittedly poor understanding, might bring with it other connotations than what you mean. As I understand your use of 'outsider', a person with a white background is an outsider to blacks, and will be disfavored for that reason by blacks, and a person with a black background will be an outsider to whites and disfavored for that reason. In colonial countries the whites had the power, so even if what you say is true, it's a relatively small component to the power structure of the culture. What usually happens is that mixed race people form their own group, historically identified with terms like "mulatto" or "brown" or "coloured". They are not outsiders to other members of that group, and as a group have a privilege level between those of whites and of blacks. Your construction didn't seem to consider that a new racial group might form. The "tragic mulatto" concept, as I understand it, is based on the premise that there are only whites or blacks, that whites and blacks will both disfavor mixed race people, and that mixed race people will not form their own racial group with in-group privileges. This is why I believed a caution was in order.

specializeded 9y ago

Same w/ Mexican American communities around the states, mejorar la raza and all that

dragonwriter 9y ago

Mixed race people are often seen as outsiders by either race; how they personally identify can vary a lot (and often it's not simply with one or the other.)

eesmith 9y ago
When you say "outsider", be sure that you don't mean the racist "tragic mulatto" viewpoint that mixed blood inherently (ie, from biological reasons) leads to tragedy and hurt. Even when seen as 'outsiders', meaning, as part of a different ethnic group, it's still not uncommon under European colonial rule that mixed white/black people have more privilege than black people. That is, what you say is not at odds with what magic_beans said. Spanish rule in the Americas had race-based caste system. This included New Mexico. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Spain : > Eventually a caste system was created to describe the various mixes and to assign them a different social level. ... The upper echelons of government were staffed by Spaniards born in Spain (peninsulares), the middle and lower levels of government and other higher paying jobs were held by Criollos (Criollos were Spaniards born in the Americas, or—as permitted by the casta system—Spaniards with some Amerindian or even other ancestry.[139]) The best lands were owned by Peninsulares and Criollos, with Native communities for the most part relegated to marginal lands. Mestizos and Mulattos held artisanal positions and unskilled laborers were either more mixed people, such as Zambos, recently freed slaves or Natives who had left their communities and settled in areas with large Hispanic populations. Haiti inherited the French racial caste system. Quoting now from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiti : > Haitian mulattoes became the nation's social elite and racially privileged. Numerous leaders throughout Haiti's history have been mulattoes. Comprising 5% of the nation's population, mulattoes have retained their preeminence, evident in the political, economic, social and cultural hierarchy in Haiti. In the South African apartheid system, "coloured" people (with mixed heritage) had higher status than "African" people (meaning black). While not explicit at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apartheid you can infer from "Blacks were provided with services greatly inferior to those of whites, and, to a lesser extent, to those of Indian and coloured people." that black people were less privileged than mixed race people.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > When you say "outsider", be sure that you don't mean the racist "tragic mulatto" viewpoint that mixed blood inherently (ie, from biological reasons) leads to tragedy and hurt. No, I'm saying that, in practice a person if mixed White/Black background will often be seen and treated as something-distinct-from-White (and disfavored for that reason) by Whites and something-distinct-from-Black (and, again, disfavored for that reason) by Blacks. > Even when seen as 'outsiders', meaning, as part of a different ethnic group, it's still not uncommon under European colonial rule that mixed white/black people have more privilege than black people. Yes, in systems with de jure racism, often mixed race categories are in an intermediate legal position between legally pure members of the dominant race and legally pure members of the disfavored race. This actually is often part of why even the disadvantaged race, treats mixed race individuals, like advantaged-race individuals, as disfavored outsiders culturally, even long after that kind of legal system is gone. > That is, what you say is not at odds with what magic_beans said It was a refinement, not a disagreement.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    I wasn't suggesting that you were. It's a caution that the term "outsider" likely isn't the right word, because it's close to historical racist stereotypes, and from my admittedly poor understanding, might bring with it other connotations than what you mean. As I understand your use of 'outsider', a person with a white background is an outsider to blacks, and will be disfavored for that reason by blacks, and a person with a black background will be an outsider to whites and disfavored for that reason. In colonial countries the whites had the power, so even if what you say is true, it's a relatively small component to the power structure of the culture. What usually happens is that mixed race people form their own group, historically identified with terms like "mulatto" or "brown" or "coloured". They are not outsiders to other members of that group, and as a group have a privilege level between those of whites and of blacks. Your construction didn't seem to consider that a new racial group might form. The "tragic mulatto" concept, as I understand it, is based on the premise that there are only whites or blacks, that whites and blacks will both disfavor mixed race people, and that mixed race people will not form their own racial group with in-group privileges. This is why I believed a caution was in order.