Jeremy Dowsett’s article titled “What My Bike Has Taught Me about White Privilege” is a metaphorical comparison of riding a bicycle in a busy town and being a member of a minority group. The author uses this comparison to explore how both minority and majority groups view the concept of white privilege. The essay is a perfect portrayal of white privilege as a social construct that works to the advantage of minority groups and the detriment of minorities. Dowsett notes that “talking about racial privilege isn’t a way of telling white people they are bad people or racists or that they didn’t really earn what they have” (1010). Although white privilege is a real social construct, it does not mean that every white person is a racist taking advantage of the minorities. Adopting the blanket judgment that every white person thrives on white privilege is wrong, unrealistic, and amounts to stereotyping.
White privilege is inscribed in existing social systems that may take longer to change for social equality and equity to prevail. Like cyclists who must cope with dominating motor vehicles on the road, minority groups should adapt to the social conditions that seem to favor the white majority. Dowsett infers that even if all racists were eradicated, the existing system favoring whites would hardly change to favor minority groups (1008). Nevertheless, the author does not mention anything about the possibilities of redesigning transportation systems and infrastructure to suit different users’ needs. His omission might have been intentional since he might not have been interested in having a redesigned societal system that favors everyone regardless of race. However, the pursuit of equality and equity is a challenging endeavor that might take centuries to actualize. Acknowledging white privilege as a social construct vice that can be overcome would be a major step towards having a fair society.
Works Cited
Dowsett, Jeremy. “What My Bike Has Taught Me about White Privilege.” pp. 1007-1011.
The Idea of the Middle Class: White Collar Workers and Peruvian Society, 1900-1950 is a 266-page book authored by D. S. Parker and published in University Park, Pennsylvania by Pennsylvania State University Press in 1998. The book gives a detailed history of Lima’s middle class in the period between 1900 and 1950.
Parker gives a reflectively inventive and comfortably familiar assessment of the Latin American Society, specifically the Peruvians. His clear account follows the creation of the middle-class, its economic and cultural aspects, its political activity, and the way in which it evolved as Lima’s demographic and economic growth changed the city’s labor structure. For these grounds, The Idea of the Middle Class enjoys a wide audience from diverse population groups: economists, social historians, among others.
Parker analyses Peru’s middle class community by combining the techniques of social historians with interest on language as he examines the factors that led Peru’s white-collar employees to identify themselves as members of a special middle class. He follows the foundations of this new class identity and demonstrates the long-term effect that the phenomenon had on Peruvian economy, politics, and customs.
Summary
The Idea of the Middle Class centers on the intricate interaction between ideas and structure, between the personality of white-collar employees and how state mechanisms strengthened and articulated that personality. White-collar employees, locally known as empleados, viewed themselves as privileged members of the society, separate and superior to the blue-collar masses, known as obreros.
The beliefs of this middle class was not a universal idea aimed at restoring Peru’s image in a democratic bourgeois revolution, instead, the middle-class’ aim was to guard their privileges and hence their social dissimilarity through political means. Therefore, the middle-class’ plan led to a struggle to employ state mechanisms to strengthen, articulate, and guard their priviledge, instead of creating an alliance with the lower-ranked members of the society to depose the oligarchy.
The distinction between the privileged and unwashed masses had been created by the colonialists to indicate a disparity in moral worth (Parker 24). Superior status was demonstrated through a distinguished family legacy, an excellent education, a light skin tone, and correct dressing code. Parker informs us of the vagueness of using race to define one’s social position among the Peruvians (Parker 26), in this system, whites and mestizo (of Indian and white descent) occupied the highest level (42).
The separation between the empleados and obreros is initiated with their relationship to the nobilities. Empleados were the permanent employees in firms that were dominant in Peru’s economy. Their jobs demanded that one be literate and have elementary mathematical capabilities, as well as a reputable conduct for interaction with the public. On the contrary, obreros were temporary, unskilled employees, and had no direct contact with the business bosses.
To maintain one’s status as an empleado, one had to dress and eat appropriately, and live in prescribed locations, besides, the spouse should not have been employed and the children ought to have attended private schools. These social demands meant that the empleados suffered from inflation more than the obreros. These expectations were later changed and political demands were used to identify empleados (Parker 18).
Political demands used to categorize Peruvians were stated as law 4916 in 1924. In these laws, only empleados were assured of a 3-month severance in cases where one was fired without notice, and a payment of two months’ wages for every year in which one was employed. Besides, the employees were to be given life insurance and disability allowances (Parker 105).
Parker mentions that these labor policies led some obreros to reclassify their status as an empleado, while the new status did not come with material gains, it improved one’s status in the society. In the Peruvian society, status mattered more than material wealth, and the author corroborates this statement by informing us of students’ unwillingness to take up blue-collar jobs regardless of the pay (132).
Politically, the social and economic pressure felt by the empleados turned into support for Alianza Popular Revolucionaria Americana (APRA), the leading political party. Empleados were attracted to ARPA due to two factors: nationalism and racism. Through APRA, empleados felt their jobs were secure since the party campaigned against employment of foreigners, besides, APRA denounced firms that either underpaid or exploited empleados, thereby strengthening their support among the middle class (Parker 173).
Critical Evaluation
Overall, The Idea of the Middle Class gives an intriguing outlook of the creation of a different type of middle class; one based on retaining difference rather than conquering inequality. However, the weakness of Parker’s work is found on its lack of wider theoretical connections, from being drawn on historiography rather than on political science or sociology.
Parker’s explanation of the consumption patterns of the empleados could have been easily comprehended had he used Weber’s comprehension of a status group rather than from Marx’s idea of class. Weber’s theory states that an individual’s association to the ownership of the means of production is normally the foundation of group identity. The status group recognition of the empleados would have been further strengthened by the Latin American tradition of conexiones (connections).
In the Peruvian system, the probability of success is determined by who you know, such acquaintances will assist you in acquiring material wealth, jobs, and even a spouse. Under such circumstances, the empleados’ close connection with their bosses appears as less an outdated desire for status and pride, than a practical defense of their life success.
Therefore, in building his assessment, Parker challenges a generation of intellectuals to reconsider their thoughts on the formation and classification of social groups.
While The Idea of the Middle Class explains empleado identity, it also brings up vital questions for dependency theory. The author observes that small-scale businessmen did not define the values of the empleados because the petit bourgeoisie were foreign and hence not easy to organize.
The Wider Latin American Community
Social historians contend that no social class has bred more debate than the middle class, and nowhere has the debate been felt than in Latin America. This class is blamed for failing to steer the Latin American economy to greater strides, a role that the same group has carried out in other regions.
Besides, the group is also blamed for failing to instill democracy and progressive ideas in the region, for example, in Peru, the empleados sought government support instead of monitoring it activities. This failure can be attributed to the social pressures placed on them because of being members of the empleado.
Primary Sources
Parker provides a rich account of the lifestyle, values, and customs of this upcoming class and the persistence in seeking economic stability, propriety, and revolution in the Peruvian system. Using skillfully written biographical profiles based on a number of archival articles, Parker achieves success in enlivening the empleados in a way that creates an urgency to flip through the pages by using primary sources to support his statements.
Parker also utilizes a number of records drawn from data collected during the period between 1900 to1950, for example, on page 136, he gives unemployment statistics for selected occupations drawn from the 1931 statistics. These records indicate that unemployment percentage for masons was the highest, followed by carpenters, while farm workers were the least employed persons.
On page 77, he gives the reported occupations of ARPA members from the 1931 to 1945. Again, he gives empleado marriages in Lima by race from 1932 to 1947, records that clearly indicate that a higher percentage of empleados belonged to white/white and mestizo/mestizo marriages as compared to mixed marriages.
Parker also gives a ‘typical’ empleado’s (Rodrigo Gonzalez) household budget in 1949, Rodrigo earned 600 soles (described as a meager amount in 1949), his monthly budget adds to 572 soles. Other primary sources include the composition of Lima-based employees of a Peruvian company (1930) and a table on the Distribution of empleados by Sector and Gender, 1940 (Parker 212).
Conclusion
Parker provides a careful assessment of how the 20th century invention became an essential part of the Peruvian culture. This brilliant and painstaking examination of Peruvian white-collar employees gives a near-perfect mix of the material, cultural, and political elements of class formation.
Work Cited
Parker, David Stuart. The Idea of the Middle Class: White Collar Workers and Peruvian Society, 1900-1950. University Park, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998.
The world is full of people of different races, tribes and skin colors. Indeed, this is not a weakness, but a show of diversity. However, some individuals and groups have used their sociological status to oppress others. So far, racism remains the most common form of oppression. The white people have always believed that they are superior as compared to other people of different racial backgrounds. Undeniably, the notion of white supremacy, which is a belief in white dominance, is a reality, at least for those who have experienced it.
The notion of white supremacy advocates, and promotes the social and political supremacy of the white people over the rest. White supremacy bases its foundation in ethnocentrism and craving for racial hegemony. Consequently, this has resulted into oppression, social prejudice, anti-black sadism and anti-Semitic hostility. Astonishingly, very many supremacist groups have come up, each with its own conception.
For example, in United States of America, the emergence of white supremacist groups such as Ku Klux Klan, skinheads, and church of Creator have caused so much uproar and racial segregation in America. These groups are the common enemies of the state and those who vehemently stand to oppose them, put their lives at risk. For instance, these groups have managed to introduce white supremacist dogmas into the social fabric of American politics and key institutions resulting into unprecedented intolerance. Hitherto, United States has moved into a new-fangled era- an era of white preeminence (Wildman, 1996, pp.86-87).
Introduction
Many Americans believe that the emergence of White Supremacist groups occurred after the end of the American civil war. At first, these groups run their affairs clandestinely in order to circumvent the attention of the media and government institutions responsible for maintenance of law and order.
Traditionally, the white supremacist groups relied principally on the tittle-tattle notoriety to overawe their intended victims. However, as time went by, the groups increased its membership, and widened their territories. Interestingly, 25,000 white Americans seemed to support the ideologies of the white supremacist groups.
However, it is important to note that this is indeed a tiny faction as compared to the population of white people in United States of America at that particular time and even the present. The paper will discuss the strategies and ideologies employed by white supremacist groups to carry out their mission. The paper will also examine the liaison between three congregating and vastly expanding white supremacist groups- religious fundamentalists, the far right and the ultra-conservatives.
It is important to note that these white supremacist groups use various antagonist mechanisms of human rights desecrations such as racism, violence on women, religion and political leanings to fulfill their egoism. The paper will also examine and perhaps make lucid explanations on the correlation between gender disparity, homophobia, racial discrimination and anti-Semitism, under the umbrella of social structures and institutions (Adams & Roscigno, 2005, pp. 759-788).
White supremacist groups
History indicates that there are over three hundred white supremacist groups in America, and that no more than two groups resemble. Each group has its own way of operation that stretches from ostensibly inoffensive religious sects or levy dissenters to overtly confrontational, even brutal factions such as the Ku Klux Klan Klaverns (KKK) and the neo-Nazi skinheads.
It is vital to note that these white supremacist groups emanate as religious factions, who later recruit survivalists, anarchists and paramilitary operational mechanisms to achieve their mission. While some groups such as the Ku Klux Klan are on the decline now, some Hitler-inspired factions for example, Church of Creator and National Alliance are gaining momentum to replace the falling Ku Klux Klan.
History also records that some groups are adopting new named to replace the old ones for example, the hoods are now Swastikas. Likewise, the historical crosses group has changed its name to Uzis. Research shows that over two hundred thousand Americans not only support the operations of these groups, but also, make sure that they avail themselves whenever a group has a meeting or a rally.
These people have increasingly become too loyal to the point of donating money in order to support the activities of their groups. Additionally, each group has its own operational call network, with succinctly recorded messages that inform members on the venue and date of their next meeting.
The recorder messages are full of hate-motivated discourses that later initiate disharmony between the white and other people of different racial backgrounds for example, the Jews and the black people. Other intended targets include the gay persons, lesbians and women. The development of sophisticated technology has even made these supremacist groups to open their own racist radio and television shows, which appeal to white people to join their groups (Adams & Roscigno, 2005, pp. 759-788).
Ku Klux Klan
History asserts that although the American Civil war was a great success towards the realization of human rights, it cultivated hostility between the whites and blacks. In those days, the whites hated the blacks so much, and could go as far as beating and even killing them. In 1866, general Nathan Bedford Forrest founded the famous Ku Klux Klan whose members were mainly rich white business merchants who dressed differently from the rest by wearing white robes, pointed hats and masks.
The group targeted black men and women. Whenever they caught the victim, they will beat and finally kill him or her. Three years later, the architect of this group, Nathan Forrest, demanded the demobilization of the Ku Klux Klan. Although this happened, it gave members an opportunity to establish small Klans. In 1876, the Ku Klux Klan completely fished out due to the enactment of Jim Crow laws.
However, in 1915, Joseph Simmons founded the next Ku Klux Klan. The new group became so popular; the reason being, a film star by the name Griffith released a film that praised and instituted a renewed hope and apparition to the emerging new KKK. Joseph Simmons appointed Hiram Wesley as the head of the group, something he did up to 1939. Five years later from this time, the new Ku Klux Klan disintegrated.
However, the rise of civil rights movements in America in 1950s provides yet another opportunity for the emergence of another Ku Klux Klan- one that will perhaps continue to present time. It emerged that the group was far ruthless and had a special message from that of the foremost and subsequent Ku Klux Klans (Kronenwetter, 1992, pp. 19-23).
The first Ku Klux Klan founded by Nathan Bedford performed the roles of coercing rascals, carpetbaggers, and those imprisoned. In addition, this period saw the emergence of other groups based religion rater than racism and ready to perform hazing rituals.
Reasonably, these people wore differently to masquerade their identities. Initially, this first Ku Klux Klan used to flee slaves. However, as time went by, they realized that the freed slaves imposed danger to the Southern lifestyle. They therefore decided to manage the social and political status of the freed persons.
Additionally, they instituted new mechanisms aimed at blocking the African Americans from achieving education, advancing economically or take positions of leadership. The number of recruits kept on increasing, and the Klansmen sought to violent acts to perfect their mission. However, in 1867, a significant thing happened in America. The congress passed established ne law, Reconstruction Laws, aimed at wiping out this secular group.
The laws allowed black Americans to vote, and hold various positions in the government. However, these laws elicited anger among the Southerners who were mainly white-they themselves did enjoy these rights. The southern region constituted five military districts. Thus, some African Americans headed some of these military districts. The white residents under the administration of the African American leader felt mortified and mistreated. They could not stand any more shortchanging (William, 2002, pp. 23-27).
Now, the Klan felt that this was the best opportunity to fight the Reconstruction Laws and anything contained therein. Secretly, in 1867, the leaders of Ku Klux Klan called for a meeting at Nashville, Tennessee to derive their agenda. In the meeting, the members agreed to protect their interests and protect their fellow whites from any oppression instituted by the blacks.
Nonetheless, if any white American opposed the activities of Ku Klux Klan, the authority stripped his membership immediately. Soon, the Klansmen started destroying properties owned by blacks, lynching mutilating and whipping them.
Fire became the most common weapon of mass destruction. Whoever stood in their way, whether black or white, they would kill him or her. Although the Reconstruction Laws outlawed the killing of blacks, the Ku Klux Klan had little to care. Soon, America held elections and President Grant assumed power. With the assistance of congress, President Grant introduced new laws to curb the rising violence on black people of the south.
President Grant ordered the disbandment and arrest of Ku Klux Klan members. However, the arrested members did not receive any punishment. Later on, the group faded away following the election of Rutherford Hayes in 1876 (McClymer, 2006, pp. 19-37).
In 1915, something peculiar happened that revamped the forgotten group. A film star, Griffith D.W. released a film that praised the actions of the Ku Klux Klan. After watching the film, a Methodist Episcopal Church pastor, Joseph Simmons opted to establish a supremacist group resembling the one portrayed in the film, The Birth of a Nation.
He managed to recruit 34 members at the start, two of whom had served in the first Klan. However, unlike the first Klan, this clan majorly focused on anti-immigrant and opposition of religious groupings such as Catholicm and Jewish Culture. Five years later, the second Klan had managed to control many political and social institutions of America.
The Klan now enjoyed government protection. In a little while, the Klansmen attacked black and white Americans who dared to stand on their way. Nonetheless, in 1940, the leadership structure of Klan sank in rape and corruption where the courts found David Stephenson, one of the powerful Klan leaders, guilty of rape and murder. Later on, the popularity of the Ku Klux Klan fritters away hastily (Grant, 1916, pp. 13-37).
However, there came the period of civil rights movement in United States. By 1960, Jim Crow had managed to create the third and more violent Ku Klux Klan whose main mandate was to resist the ongoing civil rights movement in United States. In addition to whipping, mutilation, and hazing, the group also resorted to bombing of African Americans and white civil rights activists. The Klan had expanded expansively in all states of America.
They continued their violence acts of pulling activists out of their cars, beating them ostensibly, before setting fire on the bodies and the cars. Racial discrimination was at the peak. White parents refused to take their children to schools where black children also schooled.
They could go as far as yelling at the parents and even throwing stones to vehicles carrying black children. White teachers refused to teach black children. In 1980, two Ku Klux Klan attacked and killed Michael Donald-black American- and in 2005, Ku Klux Klan members burned a house in Ohio belonging to a Hispanic man on grounds of raping a white girl. Clearly, nobody can deny that the current Ku Klux Klan is the most violent of the three (Kronenwetter, 1992, p. 47-49).
Church of Creator
Another white supremacist group is the Church of Creator. This group started as a religious faction in 1973. The architects of this particular group engaged in what they termed “a racial holy war”. They engaged in violent acts aimed at separating the virulent white Americans (pure Aryan Races) from the African Americans. Perhaps in an attempt meant to fish out and wipe out the group, the government of United States through FBI is carrying out a number of arrests in order to stop the group.
For instance, in 1993, some member of this group developed a failed plot to bomb a Church based in Los Angeles. In addition, the Federal Bureau of Investigations links member of this group with several and mysterious murders, bank robberies and retaliatory attacks. Members of this supremacist group also believe that they car stir a vituperative race war in United States by attacking Jews and African Americans (Kronenwetter, 1992, pp. 49-58).
Neo-Nazi Skinhead Movement
So far, this group is the fastest growing white supremacist group in United States today. Currently, the group has a membership population of 3,500 people aged between thirteen and twenty-five. This group ardently complies with the Hitler worship and members move into a higher rank after consigning a racial crime.
Interestingly, even girls are members of this hate crime faction, and like their counterpart boys, they also engage in gang activities-activities that act as a gang initiation in order to ascend the leadership ladder. Adult skinheads are busy recruiting young adults to commit crimes on behalf of them. According to reports from FBI, the group has committed serious race crimes targeting African Americans, Jews, gays and lesbians.
Some of them have been involved in terror crimes targeting buildings and uniformed police officers. It is also worrying to note that the leaders of this group are busy planning and strategizing various ways of thinning out information that could spark hate and bigotry. The rising opposition to assimilation, interracial marriages and welfare tells much of this group. Members of this group have also been fiercest critics of affirmative actions and educational funding of minority groups.
However, due to leadership combats and interior wrangles, the group has lost some of its members. Indeed, this has threatened the operations of this group. If the squabbles and wrangles persist, then the group will finally fall. In another twist, members of this group have failed to agree on whether to use either violence or politics, or politics and violence in order to attain white supremacy (Dobratz & Shanks-Meile, 2000, pp. 19-31).
Conclusion
Indeed, it is true, the emergence of white supremacist groups has cause more harm than good in United States of America. Historically, these groups have resorted to violence, mutilation, hate crime and torture in their fight for white supremacy. Consequently, many African Americans, white civil rights activists, gay persons and lesbians have all suffered in their hands.
At one point, the unity of the group has made it augment powerfully. On the other hand, internal squabbles, leadership wrangle, congress legislations, and counter attacks have made these groups fall. The truth is these groups still exist-much stronger than in the past. It is now up to the American Congress and government to enact legislations and deal with these miscreant racial gangs.
Reference List
Adams, J. & Roscigno, V. (2005). White Supremacists, Oppositional Culture and the World Wide Web. Journal Storage, University on North Carolina Press, 84(2005), 759-788.
Dobratz, B. & Shanks-Meile, S. (2000). White power, white pride! The white separatist movement in the United States. John Hopkins University Press.
Grant, M. (1916). The Passing of the Great Race. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Kronenwetter, M. (1992). United they hate, white supremacist groups in America. New York: Walker Publishing Company.
McClymer, J. (2006). Race riots, lynching, and other forms of racism in the 1920s. Worcester, Massachusetts: Assumption College Press.
Wildman, M. (1996). Privilege Revealed: How Invisible Preference Undermines America. New York University Press.
Williams, M. (2002). The white separatist Movement. San Diego, California: Greenhaven Press.
Racism is deeply rooted in the history of the United States, provoking numerous severe conflicts, confrontations, and even the prolonged American Civil War. Until now, this problem has taken place in different forms, disturbing the public and attracting the intensified interest of many experts and scholars who strive to examine its causes, effects, and possible solutions. In the book White Privilege, Blakemore provides insight into the core historical forces conditioning the disadvantage of people of color and their impact on all social realms, including private life, politics, education, and media. Thus, this book review aims at describing the most appealing ideas delivered by the author, their implications, and contentious suggestions.
The Most Appealing Ideas
The first interesting thought is related to Blakemore’s criticizing position on the concept of white supremacy, indicating its adverse aftermath. This idea implies the natural superiority of the white race over other ethnical minorities, thereby justifying white privilege and power. White supremacist groups believe that their race should reside in a distinct, whites-only society to prevent white extinction and maintain their peculiar culture. In this regard, the author explains the connection of this ideology with other radical belief systems, such as neo-Nazism, ultra-nationalism, and fascism, that have already shown their atrocious features. Furthermore, the book specifies that white supremacism is guilt at most of the social disturbances in the USA, retarding the comprehensive national development and causing thousands of innocent deaths.
The second thought-provoking idea is linked to education, to which Blakemore gives special attention, regarding it as the essential institution that immensely influences the social atmosphere and related concerns. Despite noticeable achievements in the law field, the author indicates that racism is highly prevalent in many states’ educational entities, especially schools. Specifically, school funding mainly depends on property taxes; that is, schools situated in poor areas, mostly populated by people of color, gain lower financing than those located in higher-income districts. Besides, Blakemore states that as much research demonstrated, in higher education, faculty, especially in private institutions, more favor white men than other categories of enrollees. Finally, the book infers that racially biased education significantly contributes to the formation of specific social, behavioral patterns and disadvantages racial minorities.
The book also contains suggestive insights into other critical fields of human activity, including politics and media. For example, public opinion outlets are inclined to depict white families as prosperous and stable while black families as problematic, dysfunctional, and such that often connected with the criminal world. Moreover, African Americans with lighter skin or more European traits possess a higher opportunity to work in the media space. Concerning politics, many state legislators tend to be less responsive to African-American constituents, and voting behavior is frequently formed by racial conditions. In addition, spokesmen from other minorities are considerably underrepresented in all the states.
The Implications of the Ideas
In the educational regard, the impact of these ideas on my role as an educator is two-folded. Firstly, the book helps me realize that I should pay equal attention to all my students without distinguishing them by race. It is unreasonable to favor white individuals and disregard the needs of the Black, Latino, and the representatives of other ethnical groups since this will result in impaired learning outcomes. The workflow should be stable, creative, and natural, and disadvantaging people of color can totally disrupt this understanding. At the same time, understanding my role while interacting with learners, I also should advocate for the rights of ethical minorities to promote social stability and confident development of the US. I agree that racial concerns and such absurd ideas as white supremacy sever our society by generating various confrontations, turmoil, and tension. Thus, there is an apparent necessity in resolute actions and decisions to avert the emergence of severe social problems.
Challenging Ideas
However, some of the author’s assumptions can be challenged on closer consideration. For instance, Blakemore is inclined to exaggerate the issues he examines, mostly neglecting the recent substantial shifts and attainments in society in terms of racism. It is worth admitting that, currently, the situation is gradually acquiring more favorable and promising character in all fields, and, for instance, Black Americans can be seen more frequently in the media and politics. Educational establishments also realize the need to remedy the problem and even make a real effort to promote equality among all races. Indeed, many concerns still exist, and the overall context is far from ideal, but, definitely, American society needs time to progress in this question.
Conclusion
In summary, the paper has examined the most appealing ideas in the book White Privilege by Blakemore, their implications, as well as controversial suggestions. In particular, the most thought-provoking insight is associated with the author’s criticizing position on the concept of white supremacy, demonstrating its inferiority. Besides, the book concerns the racial issues in all dimensions of the media, politics, and education, including schools and higher institutions. As a result, these ideas will stimulate me to promote equality among students of all races and advocate for their rights. Finally, it is worth noting that Blakemore tends to overstate the overall situation and does not give due credit to the significant conducive changes that happened in the US recently.
It is true that the whites, also known as Caucasians, are the dominant group in America. However, they are not a basis to understand the experiences of the minority groups. They only help get a glimpse of what the ethnic minority lacks. This is because they are the reason for the mediocre lives of the ethnic minority. The only way to understand the experiences of the ethnic minority is by learning about these specific ethnic minority groups.
Direct interaction with these groups is one way of achieving this. The white Americans lead better lives and their lifestyles cannot be used to understand that of the ethnic minority groups. Even though the whites have equal exposure to the best available privileges and opportunities, they vary in terms of socioeconomic status. I think that the skin color signifies a lot because by the mere fact of racial cross-breeding, discrimination does not end.
Some of the ethnic minorities are descents of European immigrant but their black color of African origin and non-white facial features alienates them. The dominance by the whites nonetheless has stood the tests of time. The whites in America are a mixture of various immigrant descents but despite the cross-breeding, the white Americans continue to dominate in the US. There are various definitions that in use when referring to the term whites/Caucasian.
One definition has it that the whites are of European immigrant descent while another more recent definition has it that the whites are descents of Europe, Middle East and North Africa. The latter definition is presumably due to constantly diversified racial categories of the whites. Hence, everyone with white characteristics based on his or her skin color or facial features is a white regardless of his or her primordial race. The fact that ethnic minority exists shows that ethnicity is very eminent in the U.S.
It is because of ethnicity that the whites hold socioeconomic power, and they don’t suffer from prejudice and discrimination. The American national identity is for the whites hence; they are the nationals of America. But even the ethnic minorities have a bearing on the white identity.
Thus, they should enjoy the same privileges as the “white Americans”. Just the same way Barack Obama of East African descent received an equal opportunity to seek the American presidential seat is the same way that the ethnic minorities should receive equal opportunities to seek high paying jobs.
To some extent, this instance supports the proposition that discrimination against the ethnic minority has decreased. The notion by most whites is in fact changing and they believe that they are a different people who respect everyone. This needs confirmation because in the U.S., despite the fact that some ethnic minorities hold high job positions, a high preference is toward the whites.
High job positions, which are the basis for social power and wealth, are mostly held by the dominant ethnic groups. Structural discrimination is the reason for this kind of discrimination, which still exists in the U.S. As a way of clearing itself of discriminating against the ethnic minorities, white Americans point accusing fingers at structural discrimination.
The ethnic minorities are not aware of structural discrimination. According to them, structural discrimination exists only in the eyes of the whites. Much as they whites try to vindicate themselves of not being discriminative, the facts speak for themselves. The whites embrace ethnicity rooted in aspects such as skin color and social privileges, and because of these the less privileged in society (ethnic minorities) get looked down upon.