Unformatted Attachment Preview
16
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Mexico: Diversity South of the Border
Canada: Multiculturalism Up North
Brazil: Not a Racial Paradise
Israel and the Palestinians
Republic of South Africa
Listen to Our Voices
Africa, It Is Ours!
Research Focus
Intergroup Contact and South Africa
#ONCLUSION s 3UMMARY s +EY 4ERMS s
2EVIEW 1UESTIONS s #RITICAL 4HINKING
WHAT WILL YOU LEARN?
How Does Diversity Function South of the Border?
How Does Multiculturalism Function up North?
Why Is Brazil Not a Racial Paradise?
What Are the Tensions between Israel and Palestine?
Why Is Inequality Entrenched in the Republic of South Africa?
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
370
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Beyond the United
3TATES 4HE #OMPARATIVE
Perspective
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Subordinating people because of race, nationality, or religion is not a social
phenomenon unique to the United States; it occurs throughout the world. In
Mexico, women and the descendants of the Mayans are given second-class
status. Despite its being viewed as a homogeneous nation by some, Canada
faces racial, linguistic, and tribal issues. Brazil is a large South American nation
with a long history of racial inequality. In Israel, Jews and Palestinians struggle
over territory and the definition of each other’s autonomy. In the Republic of
South Africa, the legacy of apartheid dominates the present and the future.
Confrontations along racial, ethnic, or religious lines can lead to extermination,
expulsion, secession, segregation, fusion, assimilation, or pluralism.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
371
372 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
Listen to the Chapter Audio on mysoclab.com
C
world systems theory
a view of the global
economic system as
divided between nations
that control wealth and
those that provide natural
resources and labor
EExplore the Concept
Social Explorer Activity:
Comparing Ethnicity Changes
in the American Population
on mysoclab.com
onfrontations between racial and ethnic groups have escalated in frequency and intensity in
the twentieth century. In surveying these conflicts, we can see two themes emerge: the previously considered world systems theory and ethnonational conflict. World systems theory considers the global economic system as divided between nations that control wealth and those
that provide natural resources and labor. Historically, the nations we are considering reflect
this competition between the “haves” and “have-nots.” Whether the laborers are poor Catholics in Ireland or Black Africans, their contribution to the prosperity of the dominant group
created the social inequality that people are trying to address today (Wallerstein 1974, 2004).
Ethnonational conflict refers to conflicts among ethnic, racial, religious, and linguistic
groups within nations. In some areas of the world, ethnonational conflicts are more significant than tension between nations as the source of refugees and even death. As we can see
in Figure 16.1, countries in all parts of the world, including the most populous nations, have
significant diversity within their borders. These conflicts remind us that the processes operating in the United States to deny racial and ethnic groups rights and opportunities are also
at work throughout the world (Connor 1994; Olzak 1998).
Explore on mysoclab.com
The sociological perspective on relations between dominant and subordinate groups
treats race and ethnicity as social categories. As social concepts, they can be understood
only in the context of the shared meanings attached to them by societies and their members. Although relationships between dominant and subordinate groups vary greatly, there
are similarities across societies. Racial and ethnic hostilities arise out of economic needs
and demands. These needs and demands may not always be realistic; that is, a group may
Ethnic Diversity Worldwide
Source: Smith 2008:22–23.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
FIGURE 16.1
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 373
seek out enemies where none exist or where victory will yield no rewards. Racial and ethnic
conflicts are both the results and the precipitators of change in the economic and political
sectors (Barclay, Kumar, and Simms 1976; Coser 1956).
Relations between dominant and subordinate groups differ from society to society, as
this chapter shows. Intergroup relations in Mexico, Canada, Brazil, Israel, and South Africa
are striking in their similarities and contrasts.
ethnonational conflicts
conflicts between ethnic,
racial, religious, and
linguistic groups within
nations. These conflicts
replace conflicts between
nations
Mexico: Diversity South of the Border
Usually in the discussions of racial and ethnic relations, Mexico is considered only as a source
of immigrants to the United States. In questions of economic development, Mexico again
typically enters the discussion only as it affects our own economy. However, Mexico, a nation
of 111 million people (in the Western hemisphere, only Brazil and the United States are
larger) is an exceedingly complex nation (see Table 16.1). It is therefore appropriate that
we understand Mexico and its issues of inequality better. This understanding will also shed
light on the relationship of its people to the United States.
Read the
Read on mysoclab.com
In the 1520s, Spain overthrew the Aztec Indian tribe that ruled Mexico. Mexico Document Our Mother’s
remained a Spanish colony until the 1820s. In 1836, Texas declared its independence Grief on mysoclab
from Mexico, and by 1846 Mexico was at war with the United States. As we described in .com
Chapter 9, the Mexican–American War forced Mexico to surrender more than half of its
territory. In the 1860s, France sought to turn Mexico into an empire under Austrian prince
Maximilian but ultimately withdrew after bitter resistance led by a Mexican Indian, Benito
Juárez, who later served as the nation’s president.
TABLE 16.1
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Five-Nation Comparison
Country
Population
(in millions)
GNI per capita ($)
(U.S. = $45,850)
Groups Represented
Current Nation’s
Formation
Mexico
110.6
14,270
Mexican Indians, 9%
1823: Republic of
Mexico declared independence from Spain
Canada
34.1
36,220
French speaking, 13%
Aboriginal peoples, 4%
“Visible” minorities, 16%
1867: Unified as a
colony of England
1948: Independence
Brazil
193.3
10,070
1889: Became indepenWhite, 48%
Pardo (brown, moreno, mulatto), 39% dent of Portugal
Afro-Brazilians, 7.5%
Asian and indigenous Indians, 1%
Israel
7.6
29,800
Jews, 76%
Arabs, 23%
1948: Independence
from British mandate
under United Nations
Palestinian
Territories
3.9
4,247
Palestinians, 99%
Others, 1%
(Excluding Jewish settlements)
1999: Israel cedes
authority under Oslo
Accords
South Africa
49.9
9,780
Black Africans, 76%
Whites, 13%
Coloureds, 9%
Asians, 3%
1948: Independence
from Great Britain
Note: All data for 2010 or most recently available.
Sources: Author estimates, based on Canak and Swanson 1998; Castillo 2011; Central Intelligence Agency 2011; Haub 2010;
South African Institute of Race Relations 2010; Statistics Canada 2011.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
374 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
mestizo
people in the Americas
of mixed European
(usually Spanish) and local
indigenous ancestry
The Mexican Indian People and the Color Gradient
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
In contemporary Mexico, a major need has been to reassess the relations between the
indigenous peoples—the Mexican Indians, many descended from the Mayas, and the
government of Mexico. In 1900, the majority of the Mexican population still spoke Indian
languages and lived in closed, semi-isolated villages or tribal communities according to
color gradient
ancestral customs. Many of these people were not a part of the growing industrialization
the placement of people
in Mexico and were not truly represented in the national legislature. Perhaps the major
on a continuum from light
change for them in the twentieth century was that many intermarried with the descendants
to dark skin color rather
of the Europeans, forming a mestizo class of people of mixed ancestry. The term mestizo
than in distinct racial
is used throughout the Americas to refer to people of mixed European (usually Spanish)
groupings by skin color
and local indigenous ancestry. Mestizos have become increasingly identified with Mexico’s
growing middle class. They have developed their own distinct culture and, as the descendants of the European settlers are reduced in number and influence, have become the
true bearers of the national Mexican sentiment.
Meanwhile, however, these social changes have left the Mexican Indian people even
further behind the rest of the population economically. Indian cultures have been stereotyped as backward and resistant to progress and modern ways of living. Indeed, the
existence of the many Indian cultures was seen in much of the twentieth century as an
impediment to the development of a national culture in Mexico.
As noted in Chapter 9, a color gradient is the placement of people on a continuum from
light to dark skin color rather than in distinct racial groupings by skin color. This is another
example of the social construction of race, in which social class is linked to the social reality
(or at least the appearance) of racial purity. At the top of this gradient or hierarchy are the
criollos, the 10 percent of the population who are typically White, well-educated members
of the business and intellectual elites with familial roots in Spain. In the middle is the
large impoverished mestizo majority, most of whom have brown skin and a mixed racial
lineage as a result of intermarriage. At the bottom of the color gradient are the destitute
Mexican Indians and a small number of Blacks, some of them the descendants of 200,000
African slaves brought to Mexico. The relatively small Black Mexican community received
national attention in 2005 and 2006 following a series of racist events that received media
attention. Ironically, although this color gradient is an important part of
day-to-day life—enough so that some Mexicans use hair dyes, skin lighteners, and blue or green contact lenses to appear more European—nearly
all Mexicans are considered part Mexican Indian because of centuries of
intermarriage (Villarreal 2010).
On January 1, 1994, rebels from an armed insurgent group called the
Zapatista National Liberation Army seized four towns in the state of Chiapas
in southern Mexico. Two thousand lightly armed Mayan Indians and peasants backed the rebels—who had named their organization after Emiliano
Zapata, a farmer and leader of the 1910 revolution against a corrupt dictatorship. Zapatista leaders declared that they had turned to armed insurrection
to protest economic injustices and discrimination against the region’s Indian
population. The Mexican government mobilized the army to crush the revolt
but was forced to retreat as news organizations broadcast pictures of the confrontation around the world. A ceasefire was declared after only 12 days of
fighting, but 196 people had already died. Negotiations collapsed between
the Mexican government and the Zapatista National Liberation Army, and
there has been sporadic violence ever since.
In response to the crisis, the Mexican legislature enacted the Law on
Indian Rights and Culture, which went into effect in 2001. The act allows
62 recognized Indian groups to apply their own customs in resolving conflicts and electing leaders. Unfortunately, state legislatures must give final
approval to these arrangements, a requirement that severely limits the
rights of large Indian groups whose territories span several states. Tired
The poverty of Mexican Indians is well docuof waiting for state approval, many indigenous communities in Chiapas
mented and in some instances has led to violent protests for social change.
have declared self-rule without obtaining official recognition.
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 375
Although many factors contributed to the Zapatista revolt, the subordinate status of
Mexico’s Indian citizens, who account for an estimated 14 percent of the nation’s population, was surely important. More than 90 percent of the indigenous population lives in
houses without access to sewers, compared with 21 percent of the population as a whole.
And whereas just 10 percent of Mexican adults are illiterate, the proportion for Mexican
Indians is 44 percent (Stahler-Sholk 2008).
The Status of Women
Often in the United States we consider our own problems to be so significant that we fail
to recognize that many of these social issues exist elsewhere. Gender stratification is an
example of an issue we share with almost all other countries, and Mexico is no exception.
In 1975, Mexico City was the site of the first United Nations conference on the status of
women. Much of the focus was on the situation of women in developing countries; in that
regard, Mexico remains typical.
Women in Mexico did not receive the right to vote until 1953. They have made significant progress in that short period in being elected into office, but they have a long
way to go. As of 2011, women accounted for 26 percent of Mexico’s national assembly
(Inter-Parliamentary Union 2011).
Even when Mexican women work outside the home, they are often denied recognition
as active and productive household members, and men are typically viewed as heads of
the household in every respect. As one consequence, women find it difficult to obtain
credit and technical assistance in many parts of Mexico and to inherit land in rural areas.
Men are preferred over women in the more skilled jobs, and women lose out entirely
as factories, even in developing nations such as Mexico, require more complex skills.
In 2009, only 47 percent of women were in the paid labor force, compared with about
76 percent in Canada and 72 percent in the United States (Organisation on Economic
Co-operation and Development 2011).
In recent decades, Mexican women have begun to address an array of economic, political,
and health issues. Often this organizing occurs at the grassroots level and outside traditional
government forums. Because women continue to serve as household managers for their families, even when they work outside the home, they have been aware of the consequences of the
inadequate public services in low-income urban neighborhoods. As far back as 1973, women
in Monterrey, the nation’s sixth-largest city, began protesting the continuing disruptions of
the city’s water supply. At first, individual women made complaints to city officials and the
water authority, but subsequently, groups of female activists emerged. They sent delegations
to confront politicians, organized protest rallies, and blocked traffic as a means of getting
media attention. As a result of their efforts, there have been improvements in Monterrey’s
water service, although the issue of reliable and safe water remains a concern in Mexico and
many developing countries (Bennett 1995; Bennett and Rico 2005).
Mexico is beginning to recognize that the issue of social inequality extends beyond
poverty. A national survey found that eight out of 10 Mexicans felt it was as important to
eliminate discrimination as poverty, yet 40 percent said that they did not want to live next
to an Indian community, and one-third considered it “normal” for women not to earn as
much as men (G. Thompson 2005).
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Canada: Multiculturalism Up North
Multiculturalism is a fairly recent term in the United States; it is used to refer to diversity.
In Canada, it has been adopted as a state policy for more than two decades. Still, many
people in the United States, when they think of Canada, see it as a homogeneous nation
with a smattering of Arctic-type people—merely a cross between the northern mainland
United States and Alaska. This is not the social reality.
One of the continuing discussions among Canadians is the need for a cohesive national
identity or a sense of common peoplehood. The immense size of the country, much of
which is sparsely populated, and the diversity of its people have complicated this need.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
376 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
The First Nation
Canada, like the United States, has had an adversarial relationship with its native peoples.
However, the Canadian experience has not been as violent. During all three stages of Canadian history—French colonialism, British colonialism, and Canadian nationhood—there
has been, compared with the United States, little warfare between Canadian Whites and
Canadian Native Americans. Yet the legacy today is similar. Prodded by settlers, colonial
governments (and later Canadian governments) drove the Native Americans from their
lands. Already by the 1830s, Indian reserves were being established that were similar to
the reservations in the United States. Tribal members were encouraged to renounce their
status and become Canadian citizens. Assimilation was the explicit policy until recently
(Champagne 1994; Waldman 1985).
The 1.2 million native peoples of Canada are collectively referred to by the government
as the First Nation or Aboriginal Peoples and represent about 4 percent of the population.
This population is classified into the following groups:
Status Indians—The more than 600 tribes or bands officially recognized by the government, numbering about 680,000 in 2006, of whom 40 percent live on Indian reserves
(or reservations).
Inuit—The 50,480 people living in the northern part of the country, who in the past
were called Eskimos.
Métis (pronounced “may-TEE”)—Canadians of mixed Aboriginal ancestry, officially
numbering 390,000 and many of whom still speak French Métis, a mixed language
combining Aboriginal and European words.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Another 35,000 Canadians of mixed native ancestry are counted by the government as
First Nation people, but there are perhaps another 600,000 non–status Indians who selfidentify themselves as having some Aboriginal ancestry but who are not so considered by
the Canadian government (Huteson 2008; Statistics Canada 2010).
The Métis and non–status Indians have historically enjoyed no separate legal recognition, but efforts continue to secure them special rights under the law, such as designated
health, education, and welfare programs. The general public does not understand these
legal distinctions, so if a Métis or non–status Indian “looks like an Indian,” she or he is
subjected to the same treatment, discriminatory or otherwise (Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada and Canadian Polar Commission 2000, 4).
The new Canadian federal constitution of 1982 included a charter of rights that
“recognized and affirmed . . . the existing aboriginal and treaty rights” of the Canadian
Native American, Inuit, and Métis peoples. This recognition received the most visibility
through the efforts of the Mohawk, one of the tribes of status Indians. At issue were land
rights involving some property areas in Quebec that had spiritual significance for the
Mohawk. Their protests and militant confrontations reawakened the Canadian people
to the concerns of their diverse native peoples (Warry 2007).
Some of the contemporary issues facing the First Nation of Canada are very similar
to those faced by Native Americans in the United States. Contemporary Canadians are
shocked to learn of past mistreatment leading to belated remedies. Exposure of past sexual
and physical abuse of tens of thousands in boarding schools led to compensation to former
students and an official apology by the government in 2008. Earlier in 2006, as part of a
legal settlement, the government set aside $2 billion for payments to surviving students
and to document their experiences.
Tribal people feel that environmental justice must be addressed because of the disproportionate pollution they experience. Seeking better opportunities, First Nation people
move to urban areas in Canada where social services are slowly meeting the needs.
The social and economic fate of contemporary Aboriginal Peoples reflects many challenges. Only 40 percent graduate from high school compared to more than 70 percent
for the country as a whole. The native peoples of Canada have unemployment rates
twice as high and an average income one-third lower (Farley 2008; Guly and Farley 2008;
Statistics Canada 2010; Warry 2007).
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 377
In a positive step, in 1999 Canada created a new territory in response to a native land claim in which the resident Inuit (formerly called Eskimos) dominated. Nunavut
(“NOO-nah-voot”), meaning “our land,” recognizes the
territorial rights of the Inuit. Admirable as this event is,
observers noted it was easier to grant such economic
rights and autonomy to 29,000 people in the isolated
expanse of northern Canada than to the Aboriginal
Peoples of the more populated southern provinces of
Canada (Krauss 2006).
The Québécois
Assimilation and domination have been the plight of
most minority groups. The French-speaking people of Similar to the situation of indigenous people in the United States,
the province of Quebec—the Québécois, as they are Brazil, and Mexico, Canada has only recently begun to make
known—represent a contrasting case. Since the mid- amends for past injustices to its First Nation people. Pictured here
1960s, they have reasserted their identity and captured are primary school students in the Gioa Haven, settlement of the
Nunavut Territory, which has been given special autonomy from the
the attention of the entire nation.
central government of Ottawa.
Quebec accounts for about one-fourth of the nation’s
population and wealth. Reflecting its early settlement by
the French, fully 95 percent of the province’s population claims to speak French compared Québécois
with only 13 percent in the nation as a whole (Statistics Canada 2011).
the French-speaking
The Québécois have sought to put French Canadian culture on an equal footing with people of the province of
English Canadian culture in the country as a whole and to dominate in the province. At Quebec in Canada
the very least, this effort has been seen as an irritant outside Quebec and has been viewed
with great concern by the English-speaking minority in Quebec.
In the 1960s, the Québécois expressed the feeling that bilingual status was not enough.
Even to have French recognized as one of two official languages in a nation dominated
by the English-speaking population gave the Québécois second-class status in their view.
With some leaders threatening to break completely with Canada and make Quebec an
independent nation, Canada made French the official language of the province and the
only acceptable language for commercial signs and public transactions. New residents are
now required to send their children to French schools. The English-speaking residents
felt as if they had been made aliens, even though many of them had roots extending back
to the 1700s (Salée 1994).
In 1995, the people of Quebec were given a referendum that they would vote on alone:
whether they wanted to separate from Canada and form a new nation. In a very close vote,
50.5 percent of the voters indicated a preference to remain united with Canada. The vote
was particularly striking, given the confusion over how separation would be accomplished
and its significance economically. Separatists vowed to keep working for secession and called
for another referendum in the future, although surveys show the support for independence
has dropped. Many French-speaking residents now seem to accept the steps that have been
taken, but a minority still seeks full control of financial and political policies (Mason 2007).
Canada is characterized by the presence of two linguistic communities: the Anglophone
and the Francophone, with the latter occurring largely in the one province of Quebec.
Outside Quebec, Canadians are opposed to separatism; within Quebec, they are divided.
Language and cultural issues, therefore, both unify and divide a nation of 33 million people.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Immigration and Race
Immigration has also been a significant social force contributing to Canadian multiculturalism.
Toronto and Vancouver both have a higher proportion of foreign-born residents than either
Los Angeles or New York City. Canada, proportionately to its population, receives consistently
the most immigrants of any nation. About 20 percent of its population is foreign-born, with
an increasing proportion being of Asian background rather than European.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
378 Chapter 16
visible minorities
in Canada, persons
other than Aboriginal or
First Nation people who
are non-White in racial
background
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
Canada also speaks of its visible minorities—persons other than Aboriginal or First
Nation people who are non-White in racial background. This would include much of
the immigrant population as well as the Black population. In the 2006 census, the visible
minority population accounted for 16 percent, compared to less than 5 percent 25 years
earlier. The largest visible minority are the Chinese, followed by South Asians collectively,
Black Canadians, and Filipinos (Bélanger and Malenfant 2005; Statistics Canada 2010).
People in the United States tend to view Canada’s race relations in favorable terms. In
part, this view reflects Canada’s role as the “promised land” for slaves escaping the U.S.
South and crossing the free North to Canada, where they were unlikely to be recaptured.
The view of Canada as a land of positive intergroup relations is also fostered by Canadians’
comparing themselves with the United States. They have long been willing to compare
their best social institutions to the worst examples of racism in the United States and to
pride themselves on being more virtuous and high-minded (McClain 1979).
The social reality, past and present, is quite different. Africans came in 1689 as involuntary immigrants to be enslaved by French colonists. Slavery officially continued until 1833.
It never flourished because the Canadian economy did not need a large labor force, so
most slaves worked as domestic servants. Blacks from the United States did flee to Canada
before slavery ended, but some fugitive slaves returned after Lincoln’s issuance of the
Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. The early Black arrivals in Canada were greeted in
a variety of ways. Often they were warmly received as fugitives from slavery, but as their
numbers grew in some areas, Canadians became concerned that they would overwhelm
the White population (Winks 1971).
The contemporary Black Canadian population, about 2.5 percent of the nation’s
population, consists of indigenous Afro-Canadians with several generations of roots in
Canada, West Indian immigrants and their descendants, and a number of post–World
War II immigrants from the United States. Slightly more than half of Canada’s Blacks
are foreign born. Racial issues are barely below the surface, as evidenced by rioting in
2008 in a Montreal neighborhood that is predominantly Black and Hispanic. Rioting was
precipitated by the police shooting of a Honduran teenager. After a weekend of looting,
peace was restored amid promises to improve police–community relations (Gosselin
2008; Statistics Canada 2011).
In 1541, Frenchman Jacques Cartier established the first European settlement along
the St. Lawrence River, but within a year he withdrew because of confrontations with the
Iroquois. Almost 500 years later, the descendants of the Europeans and Aboriginal Peoples
are still trying to resolve Canada’s identity as it is shaped by issues of ethnicity, race, and
language.
Brazil: Not a Racial Paradise
To someone who is knowledgeable about race and ethnic relations in the United States,
Brazil seems familiar in several respects. Like the United States, Brazil was colonized by
Europeans who overwhelmed the native people. Like the United States, Brazil imported
Black Africans as slaves to meet the demand for laborers. Even today, Brazil is second only
to the United States in the number of people of African descent, excluding nations on
the African continent. Another similarity is the treatment of indigenous people. Although
the focus here is on Black and White people in Brazil, another continuing concern is the
treatment of Brazil’s native peoples as this developing nation continues to industrialize.
Legacy of Slavery
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
The current nature of Brazilian race relations is influenced by the legacy of slavery, as
is true of Black–White relations in the United States. It is not necessary to repeat here a
discussion of the brutality of the slave trade and slavery itself or of the influence of slavery
on the survival of African cultures and family life. Scholars agree that slavery was not the
same in Brazil as it was in the United States, but they disagree on how different it was and
how significant these differences were (Elkins 1959; Tannenbaum 1946).
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 379
Brazil depended much more than the United States on the slave trade. Estimates place
the total number of slaves imported to Brazil at 4 million, eight times the number brought
to the United States. At the height of slavery, however, both nations had approximately the
same slave population: 4–4.5 million. Brazil’s reliance on African-born slaves meant that
typical Brazilian slaves had closer ties to Africa than did their U.S. counterparts. Revolts and
escapes were more common among slaves in Brazil. The most dramatic example was the
slave quilombo (or hideaway) of Palmores, whose 20,000 inhabitants repeatedly fought off
Portuguese assaults until 1698. Interestingly, these quilombos have reappeared in the news
as Black Brazilians have sought to recognize their claims related to these settlements.
The most significant difference between slavery in the southern United States and in
Brazil was the amount of manumission—the freeing of slaves. For every 1,000 slaves, 100 were
freed annually in Brazil, compared to four per year in the U.S. South. It would be hasty to
assume, however, as some people have, that Brazilian masters were more benevolent. Quite
the contrary. Brazil’s slave economy was poorer than that of the U.S. South, and so slave owners in Brazil freed slaves into poverty whenever they became crippled, sick, or old. But this
custom does not completely explain the presence of the many freed slaves in Brazil. Again
unlike in the United States, the majority of Brazil’s population was composed of Africans and
their descendants throughout the nineteenth century. Africans were needed as craft workers,
shopkeepers, and boatmen, not just as agricultural workers. Freed slaves filled these needs.
quilombo
slave hideaways in Brazil
mulatto escape hatch
notion that Brazilians of
mixed ancestry can move
into high-status positions
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
The “Racial Democracy” Illusion
For some time in the twentieth century, Brazil was seen by some as a “racial democracy”
and even a “racial paradise.” Indeed, historically the term race is rare in Brazil; the term côr
or color is far more common. Historian Carl Degler (1971) identified the mulatto escape
hatch as the key to the differences in Brazilian and American race relations. In Brazil, the
mulatto or moreno (brown) is recognized as a group separate from either brancos (Whites)
or prêtos (Blacks), whereas in the United States, mulattos are classed with Blacks. Yet this
escape hatch is an illusion because mulattoes fare only marginally better economically
than Black Brazilians or Afro Brazilians or Afro-descendant, the term used there to refer to
the dark end of the Brazilian color gradient and increasingly used by college-educated
persons and activists in Brazil. In addition, mulattoes do not escape through mobility into
the income and status enjoyed by White Brazilians. Labor market analyses demonstrate
that Blacks with the highest levels of education and occupation experience the most discrimination in terms of jobs, mobility, and income. In addition, they face a glass ceiling that
limits their upward mobility (Daniel 2006; Fiola 2008; Schwartzman 2007).
Today, the use of dozens of terms to describe oneself along the color gradient (see
Chapter 12) is obvious in Brazil because, unlike in the United States, people of mixed
ancestry are viewed as an identifiable social
group. The 2010 census in Brazil classified
48 percent White, 43 percent pardo (mestizo,
brown, or mulatto), 6 percent Afro-Brazilian, and
1 percent Asian and indigenous Brazilian Indian
(Castillo 2011).
In Brazil, today as in the past, light skin color
enhances status, but the impact is often exaggerated. When Degler advanced the idea of the
mulatto escape hatch, he implied that it was a
means to success. The most recent income data
controlling for gender, education, and age indicate
that people of mixed ancestry earn 12 percent more
than Blacks. Yet Whites earn another 26 percent
more than the pardo. Clearly, the major distinction
is between Whites and all “people of color” rather
than between people of mixed ancestry and Afro- Increasingly, people of Brazil are coming to terms with the significant
social inequality evident along color lines.
Brazilians (IBGE 2006; Telles, 1992, 2004).
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
380 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
Brazilian Dilemma
Gradually in Brazil there has been the recognition that racial prejudice and discrimination
do exist. A 2000 survey in Rio de Janeiro found that 93 percent of those surveyed believe
that racism exists in Brazil and 74 percent said there was a lot of bias. Yet 87 percent of the
respondents said they themselves were not racist (Bailey 2004, 2009b).
During the twentieth century, Brazil changed from a nation that prided itself on its freedom from racial intolerance to a country legally attacking discrimination against people of
color. One of the first measures was in 1951 when the Afonso Arinos law was unanimously
adopted, prohibiting racial discrimination in public places. Opinion is divided over the
effectiveness of the law, which has been of no use in overturning subtle forms of discrimination. Even from the start, certain civilian careers, such as the diplomatic and military
officer ranks, were virtually closed to Blacks. Curiously, the push for the law came from
the United States, after a Black American dancer, Katherine Dunham, was denied a room
at a São Paulo luxury hotel.
Today, the income disparity is significant in Brazil. As shown in Figure 16.2, people of
color are disproportionately clustered in the lowest income levels of society. Although
not as disadvantaged as Blacks in South Africa, which we take up later in this chapter, the
degree of inequality between Whites and people of color is much greater in Brazil than
in the United States.
There is a long history of activism among Afro-Americans overcoming the challenge of
a society that thinks distinctions are based on social class. After all, if problems are based
on poverty, they are easier to overcome than if problems are based on color. However,
activism is also understandable because societal wealth is so unequal—the concentration
of income and assets in the hands of a few is much greater than even in the United States.
For Afro-Brazilians, even professional status can achieve only so much in one’s social standing. An individual’s blackness does not suddenly become invisible simply because he or
she has acquired some social standing. The fame achieved by the Black Brazilian soccer
player Pelé is a token exception and does not mean that Blacks have it easy or even have
a readily available “escape hatch” through professional sports.
A dramatic step was taken to explicitly acknowledge the role of race when affirmative
action measures were introduced. Quotas were begun in 2007, by which students could
indicate their race with their college-entrance applications. Reflecting the color gradient
and the lack of clear-cut racial categories, committees were actually created to examine
photographs of prospective students for the purpose of determining race. In its initial
implementation, charges of reverse racism and specific cases of inexplicable classifications
being made were common. Coming up with solutions in Brazil will be just as intractable
as the problems themselves (Ash 2007; Bailey 2009a; Bailey and Péria 2010; Daniel 2006;
Dzidzienyo 1987; Fiola 2008).
Israel and the Palestinians
Diaspora
the exile of Jews from
Palestine
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Watch the Video
Synagogue Doubles As
Mosque mysoclab.com
In 1991, when the Gulf War ended, hopes were high in many parts of the world that a comprehensive Middle East peace plan could be hammered out. Just a decade later, after the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and then the toppling of the Egyptian government
in 2011, which was the first Arab state to diplomatically recognize Israel, the expectations
for a lasting peace were much dimmer. The key elements in any peace plan were to resolve
the conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors and to resolve the challenge of the Palestinian refugees. Although the issues are debated in the political arena, the origins of the
conflict can be found in race, ethnicity, and religion.
Watch on mysoclab.com
Nearly 2,000 years ago, the Jews were exiled from Palestine in the Diaspora. The
exiled Jews settled throughout Europe and elsewhere in the Middle East, where they
often encountered hostility and the anti-Semitism described in Chapter 14. With the
conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity, Palestine became the site of many
Christian pilgrimages. Beginning in the seventh century, Palestine gradually fell under
the Muslim influence of the Arabs. By the beginning of the twentieth century, tourism
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 381
FIGURE 16.2
2000+
Income Distribution by
Race
Brazil
Note: Monthly income for Brazil
and the United States in 1996; for
South Africa, 1998.
Monthly Income
1500
Source: Government agencies as
reported in Telles 2004:108.
Brown–Black
White
1000
500
20
10
0
10
20
30
2000+
Monthly Income
South Africa
1500
Black–Coloured
White
1000
500
20
10
0
10
20
30
4000+
United States
Monthly Income
3000
2000
Black
White
1000
20
10
0
10
20
30
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Percent
had become established. In addition, some Jews had migrated from Russia and established settlements that were tolerated by the Ottoman Empire, which then controlled
Palestine.
Great Britain expanded its colonial control from Egypt into Palestine during World War
I, driving out the Turks. Britain ruled the land but endorsed the eventual establishment of
a Jewish national homeland in Palestine. The spirit of Zionism, the yearning to establish
a Jewish state in the biblical homeland, was well under way. From the Arab perspective,
Zionism meant the subjugation, if not the elimination, of the Palestinians.
Thousands of Jews came to settle from throughout the world; even so, in the 1920s,
Palestine was only about 15 percent Jewish. Ethnic tension grew as the Arabs of Palestine
were threatened by the Zionist fervor. Rioting grew to such a point that in 1939, Britain
yielded to Palestinian demands that Jewish immigration be stopped. This occurred at the
same time as large numbers of Jews were fleeing Nazism in Europe. After World War II,
Jews resumed their demand for a homeland, despite Arab objections. Britain turned to
Zionism
traditional Jewish religious
yearning to return to the
biblical homeland, now
used to refer to support for
the state of Israel
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
382 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
the newly formed United Nations to settle the dispute. In May 1948, the British mandate
over Palestine ended, and the state of Israel was founded.
The Palestinian people define themselves as the people who lived in this former British mandate, along with their descendants on their fathers’ side. They are viewed as an
ethnic group within the larger group of Arabs. They generally speak Arabic, and most of
them (97 percent) are Muslim (mostly Sunni). With a rapid rate of natural increase, the
Palestinians have grown in number from 1.4 million at the end of World War II to about
7 million worldwide: 700,000 in Israel, 2.6 million in the West Bank, and 1.7 million in the
Gaza Strip (Central Intelligence Agency 2011; Third World Institute 2007:419).
Arab–Israeli Conflicts
No sooner had Israel been created than the Arab nations—particularly Egypt, Jordan, Iraq,
Syria, and Lebanon—announced their intention to restore control to the Palestinian Arabs,
by force if necessary. As hostilities broke out, the Israeli military stepped in to preserve the
borders, which no Arab nation agreed to recognize. Some 60 percent of the 1.4 million
Arabs fled or were expelled from Israeli territory, becoming refugees in neighboring countries. An uneasy peace followed as Israel attempted to encourage new Jewish immigration.
Israel also extended the same services that were available to the Jews, such as education
and health care, to the non-Jewish Israelis. The new Jewish population continued to grow
under the country’s Law of Return, which gave every Jew in the world the right to settle
permanently as a citizen. The question of Jerusalem remained unsettled, and the city was
divided into two separate sections—Israeli Jewish and Jordanian Arab—a division both sides
refused to regard as permanent.
In 1967, Egypt, followed by Syria, responded to Israel’s military actions to take surrounding territory in what came to be called the Six-Day War. In the course of defeating
the Arab states’ military, Israel occupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (Figure 16.3).
The defeat was all the more bitter for the Arabs as Israeli-held territory expanded.
Although our primary attention here is on the Palestinians and the Jews, another significant ethnic issue is present in Israel. Among Israel’s Jews, about 67 percent are Israeli-born,
23 percent are European or American, 6 percent are African, and 6 percent are Asian. The
Law of Return has brought to Israel Jews of varying cultural backgrounds. European Jews
have been the dominant force, but a significant migration of the more religiously observant
Jews from North Africa and other parts of the Middle East has created what sociologist Ernest
Krausz (1973) called “the two nations.” Not only are the various Jewish groups culturally
diverse but also there are significant socioeconomic differences: the Europeans generally
are more prosperous, better represented in the Knesset (Israel’s parliament), and better
educated. The secular Jews feel pressure from the more traditional and ultraorthodox Jews,
who push for a nation more reflective of Jewish customs and law (Central Intelligence Agency
2011; Sela-Sheffy 2004; Third World Institute 2007:291).
The Intifada
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Intifada
the Palestinian uprising
against Israeli authorities
in the occupied territories
The occupied territories were regarded initially by Israel as a security zone between it
and its belligerent neighbors. By the 1980s, however, it was clear that the territories were
also serving as the location of new settlements for Jews migrating to Israel, especially
from Russia. Palestinians, though enjoying some political and monetary support of Arab
nations, saw little likelihood of a successful military effort to eliminate Israel. Therefore, in
December 1987, they began the first Intifada, the uprising against Israel by the Palestinians
in the occupied territories through attacks against soldiers, the boycott of Israeli goods,
general strikes, resistance, and noncooperation with Israeli authorities. The target of this
first Intifada, lasting five years, was the Israelis.
The Intifada was a popular grassroots movement whose growth in support was as much
a surprise to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Arab nations as it was
to Israel and its supporters. The broad range of participants in the Intifada—students,
workers, union members, professionals, and business leaders—showed the unambiguous
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 383
FIGURE 16.3
LEBANON
SYRIA
Israeli and Palestinian
Lands
GOLAN HEIGHTS
Golan Heights–Israel seized
the Golan from Syria during the
1967 war and has occupied it
ever since.
Sea
of
Galilee
Haifa
Jordan River
Nazareth
Mediterranean
Sea
Tel-Aviv
WEST BANK
Gaza Strip–The Gaza
Strip was controlled by
Egypt until Israel
occupied it during the
1967.
Ramla
Ramallah
Jerusalem
Jericho
Bethlehem
Hebron
West Bank and East
Jerusalem–Israel took the
West Bank and East Jerusalem
from Jordan during the 1967 war.
GAZA STRIP
Dead Sea
ISRAEL
EGYPT
JORDAN
Palestinian opposition to occupation. The Intifada began out of the frustration of the
Palestinians within Israel, but the confrontations were later encouraged by the PLO, an
umbrella organization for several Palestinian factions of varying militancy.
With television news footage of Israel soldiers appearing to attack defenseless youths,
the Intifada transformed world opinion, especially in the United States. Palestinians came
to be viewed as people struggling for self-determination rather than as terrorists out to
destroy Israel. Instead of Israel being viewed as the “David” and its Arab neighbors “Goliath,” Israel came to take on the bully role and the Palestinians the sympathetic underdog
role (Hubbard 1993; Third World Institute 2007).
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
The Search for Solutions amid Violence
The 1993 Oslo Accords between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman
Yasser Arafat and subsequent agreements ended the state of war and appeared to set in
motion the creation of the first-ever self-governing Palestinian territory in the Gaza Strip
and the West Bank. Hardliners on both sides, however, grew resistant to the move toward
separate recognized Palestinian and Israeli states. Rabin was assassinated at a peace rally by
an Israeli who felt the government had given up too much. Succeeding governments in Israel
took stronger stands against relinquishing control of the occupied territories. Meanwhile,
the anti-Israel Hamas party was elected to power following the death of Arafat in 2004.
Despite the assurances at Oslo, Israel did not end its occupation of the Palestinian territories by 1999, justifying its actions as necessary to stop anti-Israel violence originating in
Palestinian settlements. Complicating the picture was the continued growth of 121 officially
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
384 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
recognized Israeli settlements in the West Bank, bringing the total population to 300,000 by 2009. Palestinians, assisted by Arabs in other countries,
mounted a second Intifada from 2000 through 2004, which was precipitated
by the Israeli killing of several Palestinians at a Jerusalem mosque. This time,
militant Palestinians went outside the occupied territories and bombed civilian sites in Israel through a series of suicide bombings. Each violent episode brought calls for retaliation by the other side and desperate calls for a
ceasefire from outside the region. Israel, despite worldwide denunciation,
created a 600-mile “security barrier” of 30-foot-high concrete walls, ditches,
and barbed wire to try to protect its Jewish settlers, which served to limit the
mobility of peaceful Palestinians trying to access crops, schools, hospitals,
and jobs (MacFauquhar 2011; Prusher 2009).
The immediate problem is to end the violence, but any lasting peace
must face a series of difficult issues, including the following:
Beginning in 2005, Israel started constructing
a 30-foot-high 6oo-mile barrier for security purposes, but the wall also served to keep Palestinians from schools and jobs.
The status of Jerusalem, Israel’s capital, which is also viewed by
Muslims as the third-most-holy city in the world.
The future of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank of the Palestinian Authority territories.
The future of Palestinians and other Arabs with Israeli citizenship.
The creation of a truly independent Palestinian national state with
strong leadership.
Israel–Palestinian Authority relations, with the latter’s government
under control of Hamas, which is sworn to Israel’s destruction.
The future of Palestinian refugees elsewhere.
Added worries are the uneasy peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors and the
sometimes interrelated events in Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran.
The last 60 years have witnessed significant changes: Israel has gone from a land under
siege to a nation whose borders are recognized by almost everyone. Israel has come to terms
with the various factions of religious and secular Jews trying to coexist. The Palestinian
people have gone from disfranchisement to having territory. The current solution is fragile
and very temporary, as is any form of secession with a foundation for accommodation amid
continuing violence.
Republic of South Africa
In every nation in the world, some racial, ethnic, or religious groups enjoy advantages
denied to other groups. Nations differ in the extent of this denial and in whether it is
supported by law or by custom. In no other industrial society has the denial been so
entrenched in recent law as in the Republic of South Africa.
The Republic of South Africa is different from the rest of Africa because the original
African peoples of the area are no longer present. Today, the country is multiracial, as
shown in Table 16.2.
The largest group is the Black Africans who migrated from the north in the eighteenth
century as well as more recent migrations from neighboring African countries over the last 20
years. The Coloured (or Cape Coloureds), the product of mixed race, and Asians (or Indians)
make up the remaining non-Whites. The small White community consists of the English and
the Afrikaners, the latter descended from Dutch and other European settlers. As in all other
multicultural nations we have considered, colonialism and immigration have left their mark.
The permanent settlement of South Africa by Europeans began in 1652, when the Dutch
East India Company established a colony in Cape Town as a port of call for shipping vessels
bound for India. The area was sparsely populated, and the original inhabitants of the Cape
of Good Hope, the Hottentots and Bushmen, were pushed inland like the indigenous
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
The Legacy of Colonialism
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 385
TABLE 16.2
Racial Groups in the Republic of South Africa
Whites (%)
All Non-Whites
(%)
Black Africans
(%)
Coloureds
(%)
Asian Indians
(%)
1904
22
78
67
9
2
1936
21
79
69
8
2
1951
21
79
68
9
3
2010
9
91
79
9
3
2021 (projected)
8
90
80
9
2
Note: “All Non-Whites” totals subject to rounding error.
Sources: Author’s estimates, based on Statistics South Africa and Bureau of Market Research in MacFarlane 2006a:8–9;
South African Institute of Race Relations 2007:6, 12; MacFarlane 2008:2; Berghe 1978:102.
peoples of the New World. To fill the need for laborers, the Dutch imported slaves from
areas of Africa farther north. Slavery was confined mostly to areas near towns and involved
more limited numbers than in the United States. The Boers, semi-nomads descended from
the Dutch, did not remain on the coast but trekked inland to establish vast sheep and cattle
ranches. The trekkers, as they were known, regularly fought off the Black inhabitants of
the interior regions. Sexual relations between Dutch men and slave and Hottentot women
were quite common, giving rise to a mulatto group referred to today as Cape Coloureds.
The British entered the scene by acquiring part of South Africa in 1814, at the end of
the Napoleonic Wars. The British introduced workers from India as indentured servants
on sugar plantations. They had also freed the slaves by 1834, with little compensation to
the Dutch slave owners, and had given Blacks almost all political and civil rights. The Boers
were not happy with these developments and spent most of the nineteenth century in a
violent struggle with the growing number of English colonists. In 1902, the British finally
overwhelmed the Boers, leaving bitter memories on both sides. Once in control, however,
they recognized that the superior numbers of the non-Whites were a potential threat to
their power, as they had been to the power of the Afrikaners.
The growing non-White population consisted of the Coloureds, or mixed population, and
the Black tribal groups, collectively called Bantus. The British gave both groups the vote but
restricted the franchise to people who met certain property qualifications. Pass laws were
introduced, placing curfews on the Bantus and limiting their geographic movement. These
laws, enforced through “reference books” until 1986, were
intended to prevent urban areas from becoming overcrowded
with job-seeking Black Africans, a familiar occurrence in colonial Africa (Marx 1998; van den Berghe 1965).
pass laws
laws that controlled
internal movement by nonWhites in South Africa
apartheid
the policy of the South
African government
intended to maintain
separation of Blacks,
Coloureds, and Asians
from the dominant Whites
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Apartheid
In 1948, South Africa was granted its independence from
the United Kingdom, and the National Party, dominated by
the Afrikaners, assumed control of the government. Under the
leadership of this party, the rule of White supremacy, already
well under way in the colonial period as custom, became more
and more formalized into law. To deal with the multiracial population, the Whites devised a policy called apartheid to ensure
their dominance. Apartheid (in Afrikaans, the language of
the Afrikaners, it means “separation” or “apartness”) came to
mean a policy of separate development, euphemistically called
multinational development by the government. At the time, these
changes were regarded as cosmetic outside South Africa and
by most Black South Africans.
South Africa employed an explicit system of de jure
segregation under apartheid that included spatial separation on trains, as shown in these separate entry points in
Johannesburg. Whites waited at the front of trains, while
Black South Africans waited at the rear.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
386 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
The White ruling class was not homogeneous. The English and Afrikaners belonged to
different political parties, lived apart, spoke different languages, and worshipped separately,
but they shared the belief that some form of apartheid was necessary. Apartheid can perhaps
be best understood as a twentieth-century effort to reestablish the master–slave relationship. Blacks could not vote. They could not move throughout the country freely. They were
unable to hold jobs unless the government approved. To work at approved jobs, they were
forced to live in temporary quarters at great distances from their real homes. Their access
to education, health care, and social services was severely limited (Wilson 1973).
Events took a significant turn in 1990, when South African Prime Minister F. W. De Klerk
legalized 60 banned Black organizations and freed Nelson Mandela, leader of the African
National Congress (ANC), after 27 years of imprisonment. Mandela’s triumphant remarks
after his release appear in Listen to Our Voices.
Listen to Our Voices
Africa, It Is Ours!
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Amandla! Amandla! i-Afrika,
able to forgive. The sight of
mayibuye! [Power! Power!
freedom looming on the horiAfrica, it is ours!]
zon should encourage us to
My friends, comrades and
redouble our efforts. It is only
fellow South Africans, I greet
through disciplined mass action
you all in the name of peace,
that our victory can be assured.
democracy and freedom for all.
We call on our white compaI stand here before you not as
triots to join us in the shaping
a prophet but as a humble serof a new South Africa. The freevant of you, the people.
dom movement is the political
Nelson Mandela
Your tireless and heroic sachome for you, too. We call on
rifices have made it possible for
the international community to
me to be here today. I therefore place the
continue the campaign to isolate the apartremaining years of my life in your hands.
heid regime.
On this day of my release, I extend my
To lift sanctions now would be to run the
sincere and warmest gratitude to the milrisk of aborting the process toward the comlions of my compatriots and those in every
plete eradication of apartheid. Our march
corner of the globe who have campaigned
to freedom is irreversible. We must not allow
tirelessly for my release.
fear to stand in our way.
Negotiations on the dismantling of apartUniversal suffrage of a common voters’
heid will have to address the overwhelming
role in a united democratic and nonracial
demand of our people for a democratic nonSouth Africa is the only way to peace and
racial and unitary South Africa. There must
racial harmony.
be an end to white monopoly on political
In conclusion, I wish to go to my own
power.
words during my trial in 1964. They are
And [there must be] a fundamental
as true today as they were then. I wrote:
restructuring of our political and economic
I have fought against white domination,
systems to ensure that the inequalities of
and I have fought against black dominaapartheid are addressed and our society
tion. I have cherished the idea of a demothoroughly democratized. . . .
cratic and free society in which all persons
Our struggle has reached a decisive
live together in harmony and with equal
moment. We call on our people to seize this
opportunities.
moment so that the process toward democIt is an ideal which I hope to live for and
racy is rapid and uninterrupted. We have
to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for
waited too long for our freedom. We can no
which I am prepared to die.
longer wait. Now is the time to intensify the
Source: Mandela 1990. Copyright © 1990 by
struggle on all fronts.
the New York Times Company. Reprinted by
To relax our efforts now would be a mispermission of the New York Times.
take which generations to come will not be
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 387
The next year, De Klerk and Black leaders signed a National Peace Accord, pledging
themselves to the establishment of a multiparty democracy and an end to violence. After a
series of political defeats, De Klerk called for a referendum in 1992 to allow Whites to vote
on ending apartheid. If he failed to receive popular support, he vowed to resign. A record
high turnout gave a solid 68.6 percent vote that favored the continued dismantling of legal
apartheid and the creation of a new constitution through negotiation. The process toward
power sharing ended symbolically when De Klerk and Mandela were jointly awarded the
1993 Nobel Peace Prize (Marx 1998; Ottaway and Taylor 1992; Winant 2001).
The Era of Reconciliation and Moving On
In April 1994, South Africa held its first universal election. Apartheid had ended. Nelson
Mandela’s ANC received 62 percent of the vote, giving him a five-year term as president.
Mandela enjoyed the advantage of wide personal support throughout the nation. He
retired in 1999 when his second term ended. His successors have faced a daunting agenda
because of the legacy of apartheid.
A significant step to help South Africa move past apartheid was the creation of the
Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). People were allowed to come forward
and confess to horrors they had committed under apartheid from 1961 through 1993.
If they were judged by the TRC to be truly remorseful, and most were, they were not
subject to prosecution. If they failed to confess to all crimes they had committed, they
were prosecuted. The stories gripped the country as people learned that actions taken
in the name of the Afrikaner government were often worse than anyone had anticipated
(Gobodo-Madikizela 2003).
The immediate relief that came with the end of apartheid has given way to greater
concerns about the future of all South Africans. In Research Focus, we consider how intergroup contact may affect the views expressed by contemporary South Africans.
With the emergence of the new multiracial government in South Africa, we see a country
with enormous promise but many challenges that are similar to those of our own multiracial
society. Some of the controversial issues facing the ANC-led government are very familiar
to citizens in the United States.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Desperate poverty: Despite the growth of a small but conspicuous middle class among
Black South Africans, poverty rates stand at 40 percent, compared to 4–5 percent of
White South Africans.
Affirmative action: Race-based employment goals and other preference programs have
been proposed, yet critics insist that such efforts constitute reverse apartheid.
Medical care: The nation is trying to confront the duality of private care for the affluent
(usually Whites) and government-subsidized care (usually for people of color). AIDS
has reached devastating levels, with 11 percent of the population having HIV or AIDS
as of 2010.
Crime: Although the government-initiated violence under apartheid has ended, the
generations of conflict and years of intertribal attacks have created a climate for crime,
illegal gun ownership, and disrespect for law enforcement.
School integration: Multiracial schools are replacing the apartheid system, but for some,
the change is occurring too fast or not fast enough. Although 15 percent of Whites hold
a college degree, only 1.8 percent of Black South Africans are so advantaged.
These issues must be addressed with minimal increases in government spending as the government seeks to reverse deficit spending without an increase in taxes that would frighten away
needed foreign investment. As difficult as all these challenges are, perhaps the most difficult
is land reform (Dugger 2010; Geddes 2010; South African Institute of Race Relations 2010).
The government has pledged to address the issue of land ownership. Between 1960
and 1990, the government forced Black South Africans from their land and often allowed
Whites to settle on it. Beginning in 1994, the government took steps to transfer 30 percent
of agricultural land to Black South Africans. Where feasible, the government plans to
restore the original inhabitants to their land; where this is not feasible, the government
is to make “just and equitable compensation.” The magnitude of this land reform issue
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
388 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
contact hypothesis
an interactionist
perspective stating that
intergroup contact
between people of equal
status in noncompetitive
circumstances will reduce
prejudice
Research Focus
)NTERGROUP #ONTACT AND 3OUTH !FRICA
There is little question that the Republic
of South Africa’s recent history has been
defined by racism. With less than two decades
since the end of apartheid, every aspect of
South African society from transportation
to hospitals to sports reflects this legacy. So
how do White and Black South Africans get
along on a daily basis? They are certainly
more likely to meet on an equal-status basis
whether it is in schools or the workplace than
they were under apartheid. This would seem
to be an ideal opportunity to test the validity of contact hypothesis. First introduced
in Chapter 2, the contact hypothesis draws
upon the interactionist perspective stating
that intergroup contact between people of
equal status in noncompetitive circumstances
will reduce prejudice. Can this hold true in
a country with such a long history of intergroup discrimination and conflict supported
by the central government?
Since the end of apartheid, surveys show
that Black Africans are increasingly identifying themselves by the national social identity
of “South African” while retaining their own
tribal identity. Afrikaans- and English-speaking
Whites seem to more increasingly identify with
their ethnic group and are less likely to see
themselves less as South Africans. This would
not seem to suggest that intergroup contact in
the new South Africa can lead to lessening of
prejudice. Yet, national surveys conducted in
the twenty-first century find contact and especially more regular, intimate contact leads to
more positive feelings among racial groups
in South Africa. Successive studies show
increased interaction especially by Whites,
as measured by self-reports of having nonWhite friends or dining with those friends.
Contact across racial lines seems to have less
positive impact on the attitudes held by Black
South Africans. Tests of the contact hypothesis
among South African college students showed
relatively little contact across racial lines but
when it does occur, more positive feelings follow, especially among Whites.
Why do White South Africans seem to be
affected more positively by contact? Even if
the contemporary contact is harmonious, it
occurs within the social context of unequal
power position in which “Whiteness” is privileged over “Blackness.” Researchers note
that given the racist backdrop of today’s
South Africa, Whites may be quicker to evaluate intergroup contact as equal whereas the
long-oppressed Black South Africans may
find equal status more difficult to accept.
This is understandable since so often even
today Black–White relationships are still
occurring, with Whites in a distinctly more
powerful position, while the reverse is much
less likely. Furthermore, given the magnitude of structural change that South Africa
must undergo, it may be especially difficult
for Black South Africans to be quick to move
beyond the Apartheid past. Intergroup contact is not a panacea anywhere, including
South Africa, but, rather, one element moving from an exclusionary society to a more
pluralistic one.
Sources: Bornman 2010, Gibson and
Classen 2010; Pettigrew 2010; Tredoux
and Finchilescu 2010; Vincent 2008.
cannot be minimized. Originally, the goal was to achieve the land transfer by 2004, but
this has now been deferred to 2025. Certain critics say at the current rate it will take until
2060 to reach the 2004 objective (South Africa Institute of Race Relations 2010).
As shown in the figure below, each society, in its own way,
illustrates the processes in the Spectrum of Intergroup
Relations first introduced in Chapter 1. The examples
range from the Holocaust, which precipitated the emergence of Israel, to the efforts to create a multiracial
government in South Africa. A study of these five societies, coupled with knowledge of subordinate groups in
the United States, provide the background from which
to draw some conclusions about patterns of race and
ethnic relations in the world today.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Conclusion
Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 389
SPECTRUM OF INTERGROUP RELATIONS
SEGREGATION
EXPULSION
ASSIMILATION
INCREASINGLY UNACCEPTABLE
MORE TOLERABLE
EXTERMINATION
SECESSION
FUSION
PLURALISM
or genocide
or partitioning
or amalgamation or melting pot
or multiculturalism
Holocaust in
Europe
precipitated
Israeli state
formation
Initial
exile of
Jews
from
Palestine
Zionism
Goal of
some
Québécois
Quilombos
in Brazil
Prado in
Brazil
Apartheid
Mexican
Indians and
Spaniards
Indian
reserves
in Canada
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Palestinian
Territory
By looking beyond our borders, we gather new
insights into the social processes that frame and define
intergroup relationships. The colonial experience has
played a role in all cases under consideration in this
chapter but particularly in South Africa. In Mexico
and South Africa, which have long histories of multiethnic societies, intergroup sexual relations have been
widespread but with different results. Mestizos in Mexico occupy a middle racial group and experience less
tension, whereas in South Africa, the Cape Coloureds
had freedoms under apartheid almost as limited as
those of the Black Africans. South Africa enforced de
jure segregation, whereas Israeli communities seem to
have de facto segregation. Israel’s and South Africa’s
intergroup conflicts have involved the world community. Indigenous people figure in the social landscape
of Canada, Brazil, and Mexico. Policies giving preference to previously devalued racial groups are in place
in both Brazil and South Africa. Complete assimilation
is absent in all five societies considered in this chapter
and is unlikely to occur in the near future; the legal
and informal barriers to assimilation and pluralism
vary for subordinate people choosing either option.
Looking at the status of women in Mexico reminds us
of the worldwide nature of gender stratification and
Immigrants
to Canada
Métis of
Canada
Coloureds of
South Africa
Status
Indians
in Canada
Multiracial
government
of South
Africa
Jewish
groups
within Israel
also offers insight into the patterns present in developing nations.
If we add the United States to these societies, the
similarities become even more striking. The problems
of racial and ethnic adjustment in the United States
have dominated our attention, but they parallel past
and present experiences in other societies with racial,
ethnic, or religious heterogeneity. The U.S. government has been involved in providing educational,
financial, and legal support for programs intended
to help particular racial or ethnic groups, and it continues to avoid interfering with religious freedom.
Bilingual, bicultural programs in schools, autonomy
for Native Americans on reservations, and increased
participation in decision making by residents of ghettoes and barrios are all viewed as acceptable goals,
although they are not pursued to the extent that many
subordinate-group people would like.
The analysis of this chapter has reminded us of the
global nature of dominant–subordinate relations along
dimensions of race, ethnicity, religion, and gender.
In the next chapter, we provide an overview of racial
and ethnic relations as well as explore social inequality
along the dimensions of age, disability status, and sexual
orientation.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
390 Chapter 16
Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective
7HAT $O 9OU 4HINK
Study and Review on mysoclab.com
Summary
1. Mexico’s mosaic of mestizos and native indigenous people creates a diversified society,
with segments of the population that definitely feel disadvantaged and ignored.
2. Canada, with one of the largest proportions of indigenous peoples, continues to
develop strategies to promote economic development while preserving cultural
traditions. A similar pattern has emerged among the growing immigrant community.
3. The sizable French-speaking population within Canada has asked and receives consideration for its special cultural heritage, which is not fully endorsed by others in the nation.
4. Brazil is not a racial paradise, as has sometimes been suggested, but continues to deal
with significant disparity among people of color.
5. Israel has both a significant Arab population and a diverse Jewish community among
whom there are sharp political and religious differences.
6. Palestinians in the occupied territories are in a desperate economic situation that has
been aggravated by violent divisions within their ranks and by reprisals from Israel in
response to attacks from those within the territories.
7. The apartheid era in South Africa underscores how race can be a tool for total
subjugation of millions of people.
8. The South Africa of the post-apartheid era is marked by reconciliation of the
different racial groups, which are facing significant issues involving land, education,
health, and public safety.
Key Terms
apartheid / 385
the policy of the South African
government intended to maintain
separation of Blacks, Coloureds,
and Asians from the dominant
Whites
color gradient / 374
the placement of people on a
continuum from light to dark skin
color rather than in distinct racial
groupings by skin color
Diaspora / 380
the exile of Jews from Palestine
Intifada / 382
the Palestinian uprising against Israeli
authorities in the occupied territories
mestizo / 374
people in the Americas of mixed
European (usually Spanish) and local
indigenous ancestry
mulatto escape hatch / 379
notion that Brazilians of mixed ancestry
can move into high-status positions
pass laws / 385
laws that controlled internal movement
by non-Whites in South Africa
Québécois / 377
the French-speaking people of the
province of Quebec in Canada
quilombo / 379
slave hideaways in Brazil
visible minorities / 378
in Canada, persons other than
Aboriginal or First Nation people who
are non-White in racial background
world systems theory / 372
a view of the global economic system as
divided between nations that control
wealth and those that provide natural
resources and labor
Zionism / 381
traditional Jewish religious yearning to
return to the biblical homeland, now
used to refer to support for the state of
Israel
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
contact hypothesis / 388
an interactionist perspective stating
that intergroup contact between
people of equal status in
noncompetitive circumstances will
reduce prejudice
ethnonational conflict / 373
conflicts between ethnic, racial,
religious, and linguistic groups within
nations. These conflicts replace
conflicts between nations
Chapter 16 Beyond the United States: The Comparative Perspective 391
Review Questions
1. Identify who the native peoples are and what their
role has been in each of the societies discussed in
this chapter.
2. On what levels can one speak of an identity issue
facing Canada as a nation?
4. How have civil uprisings affected intergroup tensions
in Mexico and Israel?
5. To what extent are the problems facing Brazil
and South Africa today part of the legacy of racial
divisions?
3. What role has secession played in Canada and Israel?
Critical Thinking
1. Social construction of race emphasizes how we create
arbitrary definitions of skin color that then have social
consequences. Drawing on the societies discussed,
select one nation and identify how social definitions
work in other ways to define group boundaries.
3. The conflicts outlined in this chapter are examples
of ethnonational conflicts, but how have the actions
or inactions of the United States contributed to
these problems?
2. Apply the functionalist and conflict approaches of
sociology first introduced in Chapter 1 to each of the
societies under study in this chapter.
MySocLab®
Watch. Explore. Read. MySocLab is designed just for you. Each chapter features a pre-test and
post-test to help you learn and review key concepts and terms. Experience Racial and Ethnic Relations
in action with dynamic visual activities, videos, and readings to enhance your learning experience.
Here are a few activities you will find for this chapter:
Watch on mysoclab.com Core Concepts video clips feature sociologists in action, exploring
important concepts in the study of Ethnicity. Watch:
Synagogue Doubles As Mosque
Social Explorer is an interactive application that allows you to
explore Census data through interactivemaps. Explore the Social Explorer Report:
Social Explorer Activity: Comparing Ethnicity Changes in the American Population
Explore on mysoclab.com
MySocLibrary includes primary source readings from various noted
sociologists from around the world. Read:
Our Mother’s Grief
ISBN 1-256-63918-4
Read on mysoclab.com
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth Edition, edited by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Pearson. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
1
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Ranking Groups
Types of Groups
Listen to Our Voices
Problem of the Color Line
Does Race Matter?
Biracial and Multiracial Identity: Who Am I?
Research Focus
Multiracial Identity
Sociology and the Study of Race and Ethnicity
The Creation of Subordinate-Group Status
The Consequences of Subordinate-Group Status
Resistance and Change
#ONCLUSION s 3UMMARY s +EY 4ERMS
2EVIEW 1UESTIONS s #RITICAL 4HINKING
WHAT WILL YOU LEARN?
How Does Society Rank Different Groups?
What Are the Four Types of Groups?
Does Race Still Matter?
How is Biracial and Multiracial Identity Defined?
How Is Sociology Applied to the Study of Race and Ethnicity?
What Leads to the Creation of Subordinate-Group Status?
What Are the Consequences of Subordinate-Group Status?
How Does Change Occur in Race Relations?
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
2
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
Exploring Race and Ethnicity
Minority groups are subordinated in terms of power and privilege to the majority,
or dominant group. A minority is defined not by being outnumbered but by
five characteristics: unequal treatment, distinguishing physical or cultural traits,
involuntary membership, awareness of subordination, and ingroup marriage.
Subordinate groups are classified in terms of race, ethnicity, religion, and
gender. The social importance of race is derived from a process of racial
formation; any biological significance is relatively unimportant to society. The
theoretical perspectives of functionalism, conflict theory, and labeling offer
insights into the sociology of intergroup relations.
Immigration, annexation, and colonialism are processes that may create
subordinate groups. Other processes such as extermination and expulsion may
remove the presence of a subordinate group. Significant for racial and ethnic
oppression in the United States today is the distinction between assimilation and
pluralism. Assimilation demands subordinate-group conformity to the dominant
group, and pluralism implies mutual respect among diverse groups.
Minority women are more likely to be poor, which creates what sociologists
have termed the matrix of domination. Although dominant groups seek to define
the social landscape, groups who experience unequal treatment have in the
past resisted power and sought significant social change and continue to do so
today.
3
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
4 Chapter 1
Exploring Race and Ethnicity
Listen to the Chapter Audio on mysoclab.com
R
ace and ethnicity in the twenty-first century. The United States has a Black president but
when his parents were married in 1961 in Hawaii, the marriage of a White person and
Black African would have been illegal in 22 of the other states. Shoppers in supermarkets
readily find seasonings of chili peppers, cumin, ginger, and roasted coriander, reflecting
the influx of immigrants and their food tastes being accepted by more and more Americans. Yet recent research shows that if a person with a strong accent says, “Ants do sleep,”
we are less likely to believe it than if said by someone with no accent.
Race and ethnicity is exceedingly complex in the United States. A Methodist church
in Brooklyn founded by European immigrants more than a century ago is now operated by Latino parishioners whose numbers have dwindled to 30. To keep the church
going they lease space to a growing Chinese Methodist church, which numbers over
a thousand. Meanwhile, in nearby Queens, a Methodist church split between Latin
Americans and Caribbean immigrants has just made room for a separate Pakistani
Methodist congregation.
Also consider the racial and ethnic stereotypes that are shamelessly exhibited on Halloween, when many young adults view the festivities as a “safe” way to defy social norms.
College students report seeing fellow White students dressed in baggy jeans wearing gold
chains and drinking malt liquor to represent “gangstas.” Some add blackface makeup to
complete the appearance. Such escapades are not limited to misguided youth. National
retailers stock a “Kung Fool” ensemble complete with Japanese kimono and a buck-toothed
slant-eyed mask. Also available is “Vato Loco,” a stereotyped caricature of a bandana-clad,
tattooed Latino gang thug.
Racial and ethnic tensions are not limited to the real world; they are
also alive and well in the virtual world. Hate groups, anti-Jewish organizations, and even the Ku Klux Klan thrive on Web sites. Such fringe
groups, enjoying their First Amendment rights in the United States,
spread their messages in many languages globally via the Internet,
whereas the creation of such hate sites is banned in Canada, Europe,
and elsewhere.
Facebook has emerged as a significant way in which people interact, but it also is a means to learn about others by their online profile.
Already by 2007, colleges and universities cited Facebook as the major
source of prospective students (or their parents) requesting roommate
changes even before arriving on campus, because of the intended
roommate’s race, religion, or sexual orientation (Collura 2007; Dolnick 2010; Lev-Ari and Keysar 2010; Mueller, Dirks, and Picca 2007;
Working 2007).
The United States is a very diverse nation and is becoming even more
so, as shown in Table 1.1. In 2010, approximately 17 percent of the population was members of racial minorities, and another 16 percent or so
were Hispanic. These percentages represent over three out of 10 people
in the United States, without counting White ethnic groups or foreignborn Whites. As shown in Figure 1.1, between 2010 and 2050 the Black,
Barack Obama’s historic campaign and his
Hispanic, Asian, and Native American portion of the population in the
elevation to becoming the 44th president of
United States is expected to increase from 36 percent to 54 percent.
the United States in January 2009 marks a
Although the composition of the population is changing, problems of
significant moment in U.S. history. The fact that
prejudice, discrimination, and mistrust remain.
he is the first African American (and also the first
Ranking Groups
In every society not all groups are treated or viewed equally. Identifying
a subordinate group or a minority in a society seems to be a simple task.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
person who is not White) to serve as president
demonstrates how much progress has been
achieved in race relations in this country. It also
serves to underscore both how long it has taken
and how much more needs to be accomplished
for the United States to truly be “a more perfect
union” as stated in the Constitution.
Chapter 1
Exploring Race and Ethnicity 5
TABLE 1.1
Racial and Ethnic Groups in the United States
Classification
RACIAL GROUPS
Whites (non-Hispanic)
Blacks/African Americans
Native Americans, Alaskan Natives
Asian Americans
Chinese
Asian Indians
Filipinos
Vietnamese
Koreans
Japanese
Pacific Islanders, Native Hawaiians, and
other Asian Americans
ETHNIC GROUPS
White ancestry (single or mixed,
non-Hispanic)
Germans
Irish
English
Italians
Poles
French
Scottish and Scotch-Irish
Jews
Hispanics (or Latinos)
Mexican Americans
Puerto Ricans
Cubans
Salvadorans
Dominicans
Guatemalans
Other Hispanics
TOTAL (ALL GROUPS)
Number in Thousands
Percentage of Total Population
194,553
34,658
2,476
14,229
3,106
2,602
2,476
1,482
1,336
767
2,460
63.0
11.2
0.8
4.6
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.8
50,708
36,915
27,658
18,085
10,091
9,412
9,417
6,452
50,478
31,798
4,624
1,785
1,648
1,415
1,044
8,164
308,746
16.5
12.0
9.0
5.9
3.3
3.1
3.1
2.1
16.3
10.3
1.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
2.6
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
Note: All data for 2009 except three racial groups listed at top, Hispanic total and subgroups, and total population figure,
which are for 2010. Percentages do not total 100 percent, and subheads do not add up to totals in major categories
because of overlap between groups (e.g., Polish American Jews or people of mixed ancestry such as Irish and Italian).
Source: 2009 data from American Community Survey 2010:Tables B02006, B03001, C04006; 2010 data from Davidson
and Pyle 2011:117; Ennis et al. 2011; Humes et al. 2011.
In the United States, the groups readily identified as minorities—Blacks and Native Americans, for example—are outnumbered by non-Blacks and non-Native Americans. However,
minority status is not necessarily the result of being outnumbered. A social minority need
not be a mathematical one. A minority group is a subordinate group whose members have
significantly less control or power over their own lives than do the members of a dominant
or majority group. In sociology, minority means the same as subordinate, and dominant is used
interchangeably with majority.
Confronted with evidence that a particular minority in the United States is subordinate to the majority, some people respond, “Why not? After all, this is a democracy, so
minority group
a subordinate group whose
members have significantly
less control or power over
their own lives than do the
members of a dominant or
majority group
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
6 Chapter 1
Exploring Race and Ethnicity
the majority rules.” However, the subordination of a minority involves more than its
inability to rule over society. A member of a
African
Asian
Americans
and Pacific
subordinate or minority group experiences
12.8%
Islanders
a narrowing of life’s opportunities—for
5.0%
Hispanic
Hispanic
White
success, education, wealth, the pursuit of
31.3%
16.3%
non-Hispanic
happiness—that goes beyond any personal
46%
White
shortcoming he or she may have. A minornon-Hispanic
ity group does not share in proportion to
African
63.9%
Americans
its numbers what a given society, such as
12.8%
American
the United States, defines as valuable.
Indian
Being superior in numbers does not
1.0%
guarantee
a group control over its desAsian
and other
tiny and ensure majority status. In 1920,
9.9%
the majority of people in Mississippi
FIGURE 1.1
and South Carolina were African AmeriPopulation of the United States by Race and Ethnicity, 2010 and 2050
cans. Yet African Americans did not have
(Projected)
as much control over their lives as did
According to projections by the Census Bureau, the proportion of residents of Whites, let alone control of the states of
the United States who are White and non-Hispanic will decrease significantly
Mississippi and South Carolina. Throughby the year 2015. By contrast, there will be a striking rise in the proportion
out the United States today are counties
of both Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans.
or neighborhoods in which the majority
Source: Bureau of the Census 2010b.
of people are African American, Native
American, or Hispanic, but where White
Americans are the dominant force. Nationally, 50.7 percent of the population is
female, but males still dominate positions of authority and wealth well beyond their
numbers.
A minority or subordinate group has five characteristics: unequal treatment, distinguishing physical or cultural traits, involuntary membership, awareness of subordination,
and ingroup marriage (Wagley and Harris 1958):
2010
2050 (projected)
1. Members of a minority experience unequal treatment and have less power over
their lives than members of a dominant group have over theirs. Prejudice, discrimination, segregation, and even extermination create this social inequality.
2. Members of a minority group share physical or cultural characteristics such as
skin color or language that distinguish them from the dominant group. Each
society has its own arbitrary standard for determining which characteristics are
most important in defining dominant and minority groups.
3. Membership in a dominant or minority group is not voluntary: people are born
into the group. A person does not choose to be African American or White.
4. Minority-group members have a strong sense of group solidarity. William Graham
Sumner, writing in 1906, noted that people make distinctions between members
of their own group (the ingroup) and everyone else (the outgroup). When a
group is the object of long-term prejudice and discrimination, the feeling of “us
versus them” often becomes intense.
5. Members of a minority generally marry others from the same group. A member
of a dominant group often is unwilling to join a supposedly inferior minority
by marrying one of its members. In addition, the minority group’s sense of
solidarity encourages marriage within the group and discourages marriage to
outsiders.
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
Although “minority” status is not about numbers, there is no denying that the White
American majority is diminishing in size relative to the growing diversity of racial and
ethnic groups, as illustrated in Figure 1.2.
Chapter 1
Exploring Race and Ethnicity 7
Perc
Percentage
or more
5
50.0
to 49.9
3
36.3
to 36.2
2
25.0
to 24.9
1
10.0
then 10.0
L
Less
FIGURE 1.2
Minority Population by County
In four states (California, Hawaii, New Mexico, and Texas) and the District of Columbia, as well as
in about one-tenth of all counties, minorities constitute the numerical majority.
Types of Groups
There are four types of minority or subordinate groups. All four, except where noted, have
the five properties previously outlined. The four criteria for classifying minority groups
are race, ethnicity, religion, and gender.
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
Racial Groups
The term racial group is reserved for minorities and the corresponding majorities that
are socially set apart because of obvious physical differences. Notice the two crucial words
in the definition: obvious and physical. What is obvious? Hair color? Shape of an earlobe?
Presence of body hair? To whom are these differences obvious, and why? Each society
defines what it finds obvious.
In the United States, skin color is one obvious difference. On a cold winter day when
one has clothing covering all but one’s head, however, skin color may be less obvious
than hair color. Yet people in the United States have learned informally that skin color is
important and hair color is unimportant. We need to say more than that. In the United
States, people have traditionally classified themselves as either Black or White. There is
no in-between state except for people readily identified as Native Americans or Asian
Americans. Later in this chapter, we explore this issue more deeply and see how such
assumptions have very complex implications.
Other societies use skin color as a standard but may have a more elaborate system of
classification. In Brazil, where hostility between races is less than in the United States,
numerous categories identify people on the basis of skin color. In the United States, a
person is Black or White. In Brazil, a variety of terms such as cafuso, mazombo, preto, and
escuro are used to describe various combinations of skin color, facial features, and hair
texture.
racial group
a group that is socially set
apart because of obvious
physical differences
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
8 Chapter 1
Exploring Race and Ethnicity
ethnic group
a group set apart
from others because
of its national origin
or distinctive cultural
patterns
The designation of a racial group emphasizes physical differences as opposed to cultural distinctions. In the United States, minority races include Blacks, Native Americans
(or American Indians), Japanese Americans, Chinese Americans, Arab Americans, Filipinos, Hawaiians, and other Asian peoples. The issue of race and racial differences has
been an important one, not only in the United States but also throughout the entire
sphere of European influence. Later in this chapter, we examine race and its significance
more closely. We should not forget that Whites are a race too. As we consider in Chapter 5, who is White has been subject to change over time as certain European groups
historically were felt not to deserve being considered White, but over time, partly to
compete against a growing Black population, the “Whiting” of some European Americans has occurred.
Some racial groups may also have unique cultural traditions, as we can readily see in the
many Chinatowns throughout the United States. For racial groups, however, the physical
distinctiveness and not the cultural differences generally prove to be the barrier to acceptance by the host society. For example, Chinese Americans who are faithful Protestants
and know the names of all the members of the Baseball Hall of Fame may be bearers of
American culture. Yet these Chinese Americans are still part of a minority because they
are seen as physically different.
Ethnic Groups
Ethnic minority groups are differentiated from the dominant group on the basis of cultural differences such as language, attitudes toward marriage and parenting, and food
habits. Ethnic groups are groups set apart from others because of their national origin or
distinctive cultural patterns.
Ethnic groups in the United States include a grouping that we call Hispanics or Latinos
and include Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and other Latin Americans in
the United States. Hispanics can be either Black or White, as in the case of a dark-skinned
Puerto Rican who may be taken as Black in central Texas but may be viewed as Puerto
Rican in New York City. The ethnic group category also includes White ethnics such as
Irish Americans, Polish Americans, and Norwegian Americans.
The cultural traits that make groups distinctive usually originate from their homelands or, for Jews, from a long history of being segregated and prohibited from becoming a part of the host society. Once in the United States, an immigrant group may
maintain distinctive cultural practices through associations, clubs, and worship. Ethnic
enclaves such as a Little Haiti or a Greektown in urban areas also perpetuate cultural
distinctiveness.
Ethnicity continues to be important, as recent events in Bosnia and other parts
of Eastern Europe have demonstrated. More than a century ago, African American
sociologist W. E. B. Du Bois, addressing in 1900 an audience at a world antislavery
convention in London, called attention to the overwhelming importance of the color
line throughout the world. In “Listen to Our Voices,” we read the remarks of Du Bois,
the first Black person to receive a doctorate from Harvard, who later helped to organize the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Du
Bois’s observations give us a historic perspective on the struggle for equality. We can
look ahead, knowing how far we have come and speculating on how much further we
have to go.
Religious Groups
Racial and Ethnic Groups, Thirteenth edition, by Richard T. Schaefer. Published by Merrill Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2012 by Pearson Education, Inc.
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
Association with a religion other than the dominant faith is the third basis for minoritygroup status. In the United States, Protestants, as a group, outnumber members of all
other religions. Roman Catholics form the largest minority religion. Chapter 5 focuses
on the increasing Judeo–Christian–Islamic diversity of the United States. For people who
are not a part of the Christian tradition, such as followers of Islam, allegiance to the faith
often is misunderstood and stigmatizes people. This stigmatization became especially
Chapter 1
Exploring Race and Ethnicity 9
Listen to Our Voices
Problem of the Color Line
ISBN 1-256-48952-2
In the metropolis of the modof culture bends itself towards
ern world, in this the closing
giving Negroes and other dark
year of the nineteenth cenmen the largest and broadest
tury, there has been assembled
opportunity for education and
a congress of men and women
self-development, then this
of African blood, to delibercontact and influence is bound
ate solemnly upon the presto have a beneficial effect upon
ent situation and outlook of
the world and hasten human
the darker races of mankind.
progress. But if, by reason of
W. E. B. Du Bois
The problem of th...