3 ms·

>Germany (under the euphemism "migration background") That's very different from the US keeping track of race though. After a generation there's no way for the

• tpush 6y ago
  > That's very different from the US keeping track of race though. You'll also never see a German statistic even using the word "race" for humans beings.
  • azernik 6y ago
    The use of "race" for ethnicity is indeed a uniquely American thing; most of the countries I've mentioned use "ethnicity" or "nationality".
    • kelnos 6y ago
      It's even weirder: in the US, ethnicity is a separate official category from race that has two buckets: either "hispanic or latino" or "not hispanic or latino". Which... what?
      • notfromhere 6y ago
        The US tracks ethnicity and race separately, and tracks Hispanic origin as the main driver of population growth is Hispanic migration
      • azernik 6y ago
        US got its initial Latino population from conquering bits of Mexico; and while in the US Latinos were a separate ethnic group from Anglos, the internal "racial" divisions in Mexican society between criollos and mestizos were important enough to collect data on. (And criollos considered themselves "white" and were unlikely to mark themselves as "Hispanic" if it were presented as a separate option.) US ethnic relations are weird.
  • nxpnsv 6y ago
    not for recent stats in any case...
• azernik 6y ago
  "Migration background" is defined as by the Statistisches Bundesamt as anyone having at least one grandparent who immigrated after 1949. We're only just getting into the period where descendants of e.g. Croatian immigrants of the '50s are not classified as being of "Migration background". This is, of course, only used for statistical purposes; this information isn't tracked on an individual basis for use in any day-to-day decisions.
• parineum 6y ago
  The German government doesn't know who it's citizen's parents are?