Comment on US News ethnic diversity report

MORE MAJORITY/ MINORITY REPORTS


(See Dec 2012 Census publication)

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/at-the-edge/2012/07/24/study-of-census-data-finds-a-segregated-america-especially-for-blacks

Any study of ethnic diversity probably needs to recognize a few constraints imposed by reality - I'd start with these.

In the US, marginalized groups are called "minorities" because, statistically, they are just that: 10 to 20 percent of the population each, at maximum.  Even if every single household in a recognized "minority" either moved into a "majority" neighborhood or intermarried, just how many majority neighborhoods are likely to be integrated under such "ideal" circumstances?

I don't think I've seen any recognition of the difference in racial designations or meanings in differing areas of the US.  Our usual official racial categories (African-, Hispanic-, Asian-, Native American, and White) and unofficial ("Ethnic-Americans") don't necessarily carry the same cultural meanings in every region.  Typically, each "non-white" group was politically formed into a marginalized cheap-labor-pool or holder-of-obsolete-property-claims in a specific region; those who moved to regions unfamiliar with their experience could often (not always) negotiate a better definition for themselves based on the local "white" culture's lack of familiarity with them, which could translate into being just another "ethnic-American" sub-category.

In a related manner, some neighborhoods or quarters of certain cities have often functioned as refuges for "diversity" of various sorts.  New Orleans and San Francisco, among others have been famous for this.  Perhaps what we should expect is an expansion in the number of metro areas with such diverse city-quarters ("Social Silicon-Valleys?") where locals of every "race" can move and try re-defining themselves with more social freedom.

There was a time when other groups, now considered "white", were considered different enough to be called "races".  In fact, "race" could be considered a political category for chosen ethnic groups.  As some members of today's "races" integrate into the same neighborhoods, and indeed families, I'll bet we'll end up considering these "diverse" groups (by today's standards) just one expanded "white" group.  This won't be a conscious top-down policy, but a bottom-up consequence of everyday life.  "White" won't mean skin color so much as "default mainstream/ middle-class culture"... or maybe white and black will mean the un-integrated remnants of working-class subcultures, while "majority" will mean white-plus-integrated members of a mainstream middle-class.  To a great extent, such racial categories will become increasingly a matter of self-proclamation plus local acceptance of one's personal definition.

A twist on the above: to what extent has "African-American" become shorthand for "middle-class of African ancestry", while "Black" means "working/lower-class of African ancestry"; and if so, are similar patterns of social definitions evolving within our other racial/ ethnic categories?