Ethnic groups Essay Example for Free

Ethnic groups Essay Historical descriptions of ethnic groups are normally aimed at establishing certain pattern of perception and interpretation and as well at as clarifying racial differences and peculiarities. On the other hand, the essays, written by the representatives of American nation, sometimes prominently demonstrate biased attitude towards the archetypical ‘otherness’. In Gjerde’s book one can find the extracts from historical documents, addressing such ethnic groups as Chinese, Mexicans and Hindu. Due to the fact that East Asian immigrants deprived Americans of their work in food production at the beginning of the 20th century, the statement about their immorality doesn’t seem surprising. The earlier documents assume that Chinese lifestyle is unacceptable for American citizens, due to their immoral beliefs and convictions in family as a basis of sound society. Moreover, such ‘nominal’ households are viewed as pathology: â€Å"there are apparently few families living as such, with legitimate children† (p. 276). Furthermore, J. Blaine argues that Chinese should not be regarded as Christians, as their patterns of social life tremendously differ from those of European immigrants, who seek to settle down and begin family life in the U. S. His arguments seem quite unusual for a modern reader: â€Å"You cannot work a man who must have beef and bread, alongside of a man, who can live on rice† (p. 277). In 1911, the Asiatic Exclusion league held that Asian immigrants experienced troubles getting along with local communities and integrating into American society. It is important to keep in mind that multiculturalism arose in the U. S. comparatively not long ago, so the beginning of the 20th century was definitely a period of racial discrimination: for instance, Asians (Chinese, Hindu and Japanese) were charged with their religious beliefs and the extrapolation of their understanding of worship and spirituality onto the Christian land, where they erected they pagan shrines and arranged rituals, which offended contemporary moral tradition. European immigrants, in turn, are portrayed as individuals with low intelligence and poor morality, especially Polish Jews, who adopted American names, but belonged to the distinct religious groups and seemed dangerous due to their craftiness (Levin, 1997). The ex-Europeans are shown similar to Caliban, the mythological monster: due to the domination of Lombroso’s criminological physiognomy, they are regarded as dangerous given their appearance, including large stature and poor active dictionary, which seems an indicator of mental tardiness. â€Å"That the Mediterranean peoples are morally below the races of Northern Europe is as certain as any social fact. Even when they were dirty, ferocious barbarians, these blonds were truthtellers [†¦] Immigration officials find that the different peoples are as day and night in point of veracity, and report vast trouble in extracting the truth from certain brunet nationalities† (p. 285). Even the closest ‘siblings’ of Americans, the British, are also described as narrow-minded people, who have no ambitions or aspirations (Levin, 1997, Fraser, 1995). Mexican immigrants are depicted by Mr. Box as impulsive individuals, whose blood contain the mixture of Mediterranean, Spanish and Indian genes and, moreover, mixed with Negroes and mulattos and therefore can be considered an inferior race that lacks more or less established traditions and common sense. In addition, the author indicates that Mexicans are illiterate and negligent in terms of basic sanitary and hygiene and therefore are particularly exposed to viral diseases. Crime and pauperism are also attributed to this ethnic group, as Mexicans have exceptionally rush and impetuous natures and are therefore predisposed to serious deviance and disobedience. The case known as ‘Thind v. United States’ conceptualizes the meaning of race and distinguishes between ethnic groups in order to draw the most correct definition of American as a representative of the nation. ‘Race’ as a legal term is addressed through the descriptions of certain groups, which possess common characteristics, in addition, the paper recognizes that Americans, Hindu and Caucasians have common ancestor, whereas there is a notable diversity in terms of appearance. The paper nonetheless takes discriminatory approach to nativism and indicates that Hindu immigrants cannot be viewed as native Americans in any case, as they inherit their ethnic characteristics, whereas French, german and British immigrants easily assimilate into American nation and therefore can be regarded as ‘free whites’. John Highman, analyzing the document, claims that racial nativism is a historically controversial issue given the complicated social and political development of the United States: the notion or race and the moral evaluation of racial characteristics are completely determined by contemporary attitudes towards various cultural groups. In addition, the methodological problems underlies in the gradual modification of public understanding of race, whose original indicator was skin color when the first scholars were attempting to identify and outline the racial constructs. Such pragmatic and oversimplified approach was to great extent convenient in the period of colonization, as they allowed literally making difference between aliens and peers and maintain Christian superiority in the country. The epoch of Romanticism was marked with the so-called Anglo-Saxonism, which pointed to the uniqueness of race, especially Anglo-Saxon derivation, appealing to psychology and emotional intelligence. Naturalists, on the contrary sought to identify the similarities of external appearance: skin color, stature and skull form. â€Å"Quite commonly, the school associated physical with cultural differences and displayed, in doing so, a feeling of white superiority over colored race. On the whole, however, the leading scientific thinkers did not regard race differences as permanent, pure and unalterable† (p. 293). The natural scientists addressed the notion of heredity and further gave birth to eugenics, the science about artificial selection and resulted in the numerous immigration restrictions, primarily –because of the belief in the inheritance of personality traits, which, as one can conclude from historical documents were stigmatized as unacceptable practically in relations to each immigrant group. At the same time, Ripley, an anthropologist, after studying the traits and characteristics of European population, categorized Europeans into three groups: Teutonic, Mediterranian and Alphine. Due to the scientific enlightenment, the final historical event that resulted in the definition of ‘free white American’ was Grant’s study, which suggested the supremacy of Anglo-Saxon group and implied the acceptance of European ethnic groups, proved as racially and genetically close to Americans. Haney-Lopez provides a brief historical overview of the Thind’s and Ozawa’s cases and shows the so-called societal pressure upon the Court’s decision: even though Thind unquestionably was ‘Caucasian’ (the descendant of white race), he wasn’t identified as ‘free white’, because of commonly shared standard of whiteness, which he failed to fit into. In Ozawa’s case, the Court simply pointed to the plaintiff’s Mongolian origin and rejected the color test only because of the dominant position of ‘whiteness’-oriented religious values, which were likely to be challenged through â€Å"overlapping of races†(p. 301). When Thind required naturalization, the prejudiced attitude towards Hindu ethnic group became a considerable obstacle, whereas scientific facts showed that his petition should have been satisfied, but the verdict referred to the opinion of average man. This means, the issue of race is not purely physiological or psychological, but refers more to the multifaceted social construct, which, as it has been noted, relates to the perception of ‘otherness’. In fact, if the Court had naturalized Thind, numerous political changes should have been introduced, such as wage norms and labor standards for Hindu, so the judicial body acted in favor of government political course. Reference list Levin, M. (1997).Why Race Matters : Race Differences and What They Mean (Human Evolution, Behavior, and Intelligence). Praeger. Fraser, S. (1995). The bell curve wars : race, intelligence, and the future of America. New York : BasicBooks. Gjerde. Racialization of Immigrants, 1880-1930, pp. 275-290. Highman, J. The Evolution of Thought on Race and the Development of Scientific Racism. In Gjerde, pp. 291-298 Haney-Lopez, I. The Evolution of Legal Constructions of Race and ‘Whiteness’. In Gjerde, pp. 298-305