Anti-Diversity

One phenomenon that I find interesting is the use of seperatist euphamisms in an attempt to describe one's race. More specifically I'm speaking of the widespread use of the term "African-American" to describe black Americans. While there are those that speak of themselves as Irish-American or Italian-American, they generally do so in the context of describing ancestry when that is the topic at hand, such as describing the requirements for membership for the Sons of Italy or a St. Patrick's Day parade. When ancestry isn't relevent to the conversation, peoples of European ancestry are generally described as "white" or "caucasian". Similar treatment for blacks, such as use of the terms "black" or "negro" has been decried to such a loud, pervasive and obnoxious level that the term used nearly universally in polite conversation, the media and nearly anything official is now "African-American". This is problematic to the goal of diversity for several reasons which seem to have a snowball effect. First, black people born in America and living in America are about as African as George Bush. Africa simply doesn't play into the equation here. It's dishonest but also, to take this conversation further, disturbingly seperatist. If we assume that peaceful racial diversity and harmony are a goal (note: I make no judgement here on racial seperation or the issue of segregation. That's for another post) then we must also assume that a certain amount of community integration is a part of that goal because, let's face it, groups of people, living together with no commonality (values, traditions, etc.) are not a community. Allowing one group to settle for, in fact even have imposed upon them, a generic color such as "white" while blacks insist on the term African-American is a means of placing unequal value on the two groups. It is, indeed, only one means of blacks seperating themselves from other races. Evidence of this can be seen in the existence of "Black Entertainment Television", periodicals directed at a strictly black audience (Jet, Ebony, etc.) and even special holidays invented for blacks (Kwanzaa, first celebrated in 1966 and invented by a black nationalist. Click here to read more) To the best of my knowledge, outside of white nationalist circles, there are no holidays or mass media vehicles (periodicals, TV networks, etc.) that cater to a specifically white audience. Black people seem to have demanded and won this seperation for themselves.

Now, the question becomes, does this assist in the formation of a harmonious, racially diverse community or hinder it? I think that the inescapable conclusion is that it hinders it. It bears repeating that the goal is a harmonious, racially diverse community of equality. It also bears repeating that for this to exist, said community must have some commonality in the way of values, traditions, and goals. When the goals of each of the seperate groups are at odds then that serves to hinder the harmony of the community. When the goal of one group is to seperate itself via the name it demands for itself, the holidays it demands for itself and whom it speaks to (I.E. speaking to one's own sub group rather than the community) via it's media vehicles then it can be safely assumed that that this group does not harbor the goal of the rest but rather works towards the antithesis of that goal.