In the second place, racial categories are historically fluid. A century ago Italians and Jews were considered distinct races; people back then would have been astonished at the thought of considering their descendants "white", but over time it happened. In decades to come, the same will probably happen with at least some groups now considered "non-white" as they become more culturally assimilated.
Finally, with the steady growth in inter-"racial" marriage, it won't be long before the racial categories we use today are obviously no longer able to describe reality.
The only significance of pseudo-news memes like the "white babies under 50%" report is that they give the right wing (white ring?) something they can use to keep their knuckle-dragging legions agitated and riled up.
Funny, insightful commentary. (Not such great math; don't know how Jay figures "the 1%" can be "500 people".)
ReplyDeleteIn the first place, it isn't even true.
ReplyDeleteIn the second place, racial categories are historically fluid. A century ago Italians and Jews were considered distinct races; people back then would have been astonished at the thought of considering their descendants "white", but over time it happened. In decades to come, the same will probably happen with at least some groups now considered "non-white" as they become more culturally assimilated.
Finally, with the steady growth in inter-"racial" marriage, it won't be long before the racial categories we use today are obviously no longer able to describe reality.
The only significance of pseudo-news memes like the "white babies under 50%" report is that they give the right wing (white ring?) something they can use to keep their knuckle-dragging legions agitated and riled up.
The article you linked to reminded me of an essay I read that referred to Enrique Iglesias as non-white. I was like, "Since when?"
Delete