The Space Of Liminality: Who Is An Other?

In his book White by Law: The Legal Construction of Race (Revised and Updated 10th anniversary edition), Ian Haney López explores the legal construction of race, and in particular

In the essay “Color Lines” by Ralph Eubanks, the author explores the flawed logic of race from a scientific perspective. In the article, Eubanks explains the fact that a person cannot know the ancestry of another person or the nature of that person by looking at their race alone. Heritage is a much more complex concept than a simple racial categorization. In writing the article, the author sought to demonstrate that when looking at a person, you could not confirm their identity based on what percentage of a certain race they may have and that social construction meant to depict one group as being superior or inferior to another. This rhetorical analysis will therefore explore the importance of the rhetorical devices and strategies used by Eubanks to communicate with the audience.

The readings White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack, by Peggy McIntosh, White Women, Race Matters by Ruth Frankenberg and Representing Whiteness in the Black Imagination, by bell hooks, all cover the issue of whiteness from different perspectives. There are many aspects of whiteness; in this essay, I will argue that the two most important features are the absence of knowledge of the issue on the part of white people and stereotype consequences. A key point in racism is whiteness, and without understanding what whiteness means there can be no ending it. Once whites understand the problem of whiteness, they must accept the responsibility of creating it, and therefore finding a solution. Stereotypes are a second way to reinforce racism, with acknowledging the different stereotypes comes the power to dismantle them. Spatialization is a consequence of stereotyping, and therefore another issue of racism, which whites must accept. They have been unfairly privileged by and work to create equality.

Racial Formation in the United States by Michael Omi and Howard Winant made me readjust my understanding of race by definition and consider it as a new phenomenon. Through, Omi and Winant fulfilled their purpose of providing an account of how concepts of race are created and transformed, how they become the focus of political conflict, and how they shape and permeate both identities and institutions. I always considered race to be physical characteristic by the complexion of ones’ skin tone and the physical attributes, such as bone structure, hair texture, and facial form. I knew race to be a segregating factor, however I never considered the meaning of race as concept or signification of identity that refers to different types of human bodies, to the perceived corporal and phenotypic makers of difference and the meanings and social practices that are ascribed to these differences, in which in turn create the oppressing dominations of racialization, racial profiling, and racism. (p.111). Again connecting themes from the previous readings, my westernized influences are in a direct correlation to how to the idea of how I see race and the template it has set for the rather automatic patterns of inequalities, marginalization, and difference. I never realized how ubiquitous and evolving race is within the United States.

For this week’s memo, I decided to read “Racial Formations” by Omi and Winant. The reading talks about the meaning of race as being defined and challenged throughout society in both collective and personal practices. It also suggests that racial categories are created, changed, ruined, and renewed. Omi and Winant explore the idea that the conception of race developed progressively, ultimately being created to validate and rationalize inequality. It began with the denial of political rights and extended into the introduction of slavery and other forms of forcible labor.

What if we lived in a world where there were no races? What if people were not discriminated against because of the color of their skin or because they are different from what we see as acceptable? This is what Kwame Anthony Appiah tries to examine in his essay “Race, Culture, Identity: Misunderstood Connections.” Appiah tries to point out that “American social distinctions cannot be understood in terms of the concept of race.” (102) That America is made up of so many different races that no race is the more superior or in other cases inferior to one another. America is defined by its cultural diversity; it is what makes America the nation that it is. It is the reason that we as Americans have freedoms other people

Matthew Frye Jacobson’s Whiteness of a Different Color offers innovative insight into the concept of “race” and the evolution of “whiteness” throughout American history. Jacobson focuses his analysis on the instability of racial identification over time and how race has been created and perceived throughout different stages of history. He states in his introduction that “one of the tasks before the historian is to discover which racial categories are useful to whom at a given moment, and why” (p.9) and while he is successful in some respects, his analysis is somewhat incomplete in providing a full scope of the power relations that created, altered and maintained racial identities in the United States. While Jacobson offers a detailed

Working Towards Whiteness is about immigrants who are coming to the United States during the twentieth century and struggling to become white. This is because America has this identity of being white and the new immigrants are facing the problem of fitting in based on their race and class. The states have applied restriction so that they can preserve the population to be more white. In Roediger historical studies he brings these practices to light and his goals to draw attention to the biased white supremacist policy of the government in the regulations of immigration. Roediger most evident strength would be that he has the adaptation of the “in-between” status of the new immigrants coming in, which they are neither accepted as white neither can they be able to identify themselves as their pre-existing background.

One of the most prevalent themes throughout the world’s history is the dispute over race and racial differences. But, there is a problem: the majority of the population doesn’t have a clear understanding of what race is. Race is a socially constructed grouping of people that was created in order for people to differentiate themselves from one another and has many sources of influence. While most people believe race is determined by biological characteristics (hair type, skin color, eye shape, etc.), this is not true. To make things more complicated, there is no cut and dry definition to race. Authors of Race and Ethnicity in Society, Elizabeth Higginbotham and Margret Anderson, claim that there are seven different distinct ways to define race. They begin with the popular belief of biological characteristics, and, as mentioned before, through social construction. They go on to note that race can be formed from an ethnic group, from social class rank, from racial formation by institutions, and also can form from one’s self-definition (Higginbotham & Anderson, 2012, p. 13). All of these ways to define race have been seen throughout our history, and many of them have caused problems for minorities, especially in the United States.

‘Whiteness’ is a socially constructed category of race, where people who are not ‘white’ are racially designated while ‘whites’ escape designation as if their racial category is not historically and ideologically based (Puzan, 2003). Race is socially constructed (Dyer, 1997) and it is important to acknowledge this in order to address its impact. Unless whiteness is labelled and confronted, being ‘white’ is usually considered the ‘norm’ which acquires certain social privileges, while all other socially-constructed categories of ‘race’ are considered different or, as Puzan (2003) terms it, the ‘racialised Other’.

Defining someone by their skin color is an everyday phenomenon. Many people see a specific shade of skin and believe they know exactly how that person is going to speak, carry, and illustrate themselves. It seems to be embedded in one’s head at a young age to have specific views given by family, friends, and coworkers such as, believing interracial relationships are immoral, or it being acceptable to judge others according to their skin color. In the articles “Race is a Four Letter Word” by Teja Arboleda and “Mr. Z” by M. Carl Holman, the color of the authors skin plays a substantial role on how they are treated and perceived. Living in a society that doesn’t understand one’s culture can make their life extremely difficult.

history. The color of a person’s skin has been a deciding factor on the amount of respect

Rather than merely examining the affects of racism on people of color, the book turns its attention to whiteness and how a system of white privilege, supported and perpetuated by whites, also damages whites by inhibiting them from making meaningful connections with other human beings. Until I almost reached the end of this book I was uncomfortable and disturbed by the way the book made me feel. As a white male, I am aware of the pain that my ancestors have created for others to advance the free world. I have pain for those who suffered and disagree with actions that were taken by my white predecessors. But I believed that we are now in a much more advanced world where we have chosen the first black president and equality was a focus of most Americans. Identifying with my culture as currently being a white supremacist society is something I have never considered, or would not want to consider. In Neuliep, within the Coudon and Yousef’s Value orientations, we perceive the human nature orientation within the United States with people being essentially rational. This term, rational, can be somewhat subjective. And if we continue with the same value system, and look from ‘the self’ values, we foster our self-identities from the influence of our culture’s values. If we are to reflect truthfully to how our country evolved and what we ‘had to do’ to create our freedom by limiting the freedom of other, how would we then perceive

A place that has been built for white people through systematic oppressions and exclusions of any racialized other. This is reflected in the population of Steamboat, where 89% of the population is white (Race and Ethnicity in Steamboat Springs, Colorado (City) - Statistical Atlas). This is a place where whiteness is not even questioned as a race. Throughout this paper I am going to examine Steamboat as a white place, first by using Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s concept of a single story as well as Pulido’s examination of white privilege to examine how Steamboat

Emerging during the post-WWII reality of the United States, the term “multiculturalism” has long been embedded into the fabric of American understandings of race and ethnicity. Despite recent efforts to move ‘beyond multiculturalism’, this word and the color-blind ideology supporting it will continue to shape the trajectory of attitudes, policies and activism in the United States. Similarly, multiculturalism in Germany—which was adopted from US-American concepts to address Germany’s own unique post-WWII large-scale—will continue to shape the trajectory of group relations in Germany. As such, this paper focuses on a comparative perspective between Germany and the United States and their respective perceived need for and utilization of the rhetoric of multiculturalism(s). What can we come to understand about multiculturalism in two cases of Germany and the United State? By building off existing sociological perspectives on each case individually and existing academic comparisons, it will become clear, that while distinctively a “(ethno)racial project:” (Omi and Winant) and perhaps as an ethno(racial) project, multiculturalism is used in both countries differently: in the US it is supposed to be answer to the race problem in an ironically “color-blind” society that increases the attention on ethnic and most importantly racial differences; in