However, most Latinos have, by and large, sidestepped this debate, content to concentrate on their own unique situation and to soft-peddle linkages with the concept of "multiracialism".
This has a couple of paradigms. Let's go over them, one by one.
There is little appreciable difference between the idea of being Latino and the idea of being multiracial with non-"black" ancestry. In both cases, hypodescent (One Drop Rule) is absent. In both cases there is far more ease in shifting identities. For example, Will Rogers was an American Indian/Caucasian multiracial in an era (early 20th Century) of some of the most virulent racism in U.S. history. Rogers was nevertheless allowed to alternately self-identify as Indian or "white" when the whim suited him. Similarly, Latinos like Desi Arnaz have been alternately accorded "white" status or Latino status when convenience was served. The effects of this are two-fold: Latinos and Non-"black" multiracials are both spared a permanent out-status which North American "blacks" (by contrast) have had to deal with. Moreover, both groups are quietly (and have been for years) making their way into the North American "white" group. For example, singer Linda Ronstadt and Robin Rather (daughter of newscaster Dan Rather) are "white" descendants of Latinos and Non-"black" multiracials respectively. One could ask, therefore, why would Latinos huff and puff about multiracial identity when they don't need to? Most people know that they are mixed-race, but their position on the social landscape, with their option of not having to deal with hypodescent and having the option of self-defining themselves either as "white" or non-"white" with little penalty, allows them to sidestep the entire issue of multiracialism.
In following the logic above, there are significant differences between Latinos and mixed race persons who do have African ancestry. Mixed race persons with "black" ancestry have to deal with hypodescent. Moreover, any such mixed-race person's ultimate assimilation into the "white" group has far more "traitorious" connotations, particularly if the mixed-race person in question self-identifies as "black". Many English-speaking persons of mixed race ancestry which includes "black" ancestry have battles on their hands which far outstrip those of other multiracials. These battles undergird much of the direction of what passes as the "multiracial movement". The ultimate effect of the above with respect to any assistance from or connections with Latinos is this: why would Latinos have to bother? They face very little of the battles that "black" mixed multiracials would encounter. For example, there may be some Indians enraged over the desertion of Dan Rather and his family from embracing a totally Indian identity, but it is relatively negligible. Likewise, some Latinos may fume at the sight of Desi Arnaz and family opting not to totally embrace "Latinoism". But this is also negligible. I recall a terrible movie or long ago starring Neil Diamond in which Desi's daughter played the part of a person who was not Latina at all. By contrast, however, Tiger Woods, whose self-identity as "Cablinasian" included his "black" ancestry has a fight on his hands from "blacks" who insist that he calls himself 100% "black".
One last thing...... how do Latinos and non-"black" multiracials get away with not being bound by hypodescent? That is something that North Americans have to answer. A.D. Powell once observed that the standards for "white" membership were abysmally non-strict. I could go one step farther and add that Latino status is even more so, particularly when African ancestry, as it is reckoned in the U.S., revolves around hair texture, not skin color. By way of illustration, Rafael Trujillo, the former Dominican dictator, was African on both sides of his family. Owing to his "criollo Latino" looks and his relatively non-kinky hair, Trujillo has had little written about him highlighting his "separate race" or his "black" race. It is this passage of my essay, by the way, which refers to my title above.
Unless North Americans intelligently and unemotionally deal with African ancestry and all its ramifications, they will never get around the debilitating and ravaging effects of the "black"/"white" schism. However, whether the North Americans get over the schism or not, there are plenty of people (Latinos and non-"black" multiracials) who are taking a bridge over it -- or detouring around it.
William Javier Nelson, Ph.D.
For a long time, writing in this webpage has touched on the adjacent position of Latinos with relation to English-speaking persons of multiracial ancestry. This position has assumed more and more importance as Latinos have increased their percentage of the U.S. population. Strictly speaking, Latinos, who, themselves, are far more likely to acknowledge mixed ancestry, could have long ago sharpened the focus and enlivened the debate about shifting "racial" boundaries. After all, which would one pay more attention to -- a relatively small number of offspring of North Americans who are starting to interracially marry, or a burgeoning population (Latinos) which has just about overtaken African Americans in population.
Also of interest by William Javier Nelson:
The Distortion of being a Minority in the U.S.A.
written by Naomi Zack
 |
 |
©2003 all rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part prohibited without
the express written consent of Interracial Voice.