Mixed Race Studies

‘Breed out the Colour’ or the Importance of Being White

Australian Historical Studies
Volume 33, Issue 120 (2002)
pages 286-302
DOI: 10.1080/10314610208596220

Russell McGregor, Associate Professor of History
James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia

This article examines inter-war proposals to ‘breed out the colour’ of Aborigines of mixed descent. Positioning these proposals in the context of contemporary Australian nationalism, scientific discourses and administrative practice, the article concludes with a discussion of their alleged genocidal intent.

In Australia between the wars, ‘breeding out the colour’ was propounded as a solution to the ‘half-caste problem’. It was a perverse proposition. The supposed problems deriving from miscegenation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians would be remedied by instituting still more comprehensive regimes of miscegenation. But now miscegenation would be managed. And the perversity of absorption did not end there. It was a nationalist project, aspiring to keep Australia white; but it flew in the face of commonly understood notions of White Australia as a doctrine of racial purity. Absorption was intensely racist but at the same time defied prevalent racist assumptions of ‘hybrid inferiority’ and demands for the segregation of ‘half-castes’. It was in certain respects a eugenist strategy, but in others dashed with eugenic principles, Absorption held a component of humanitarian welfarism; it also evinced a profound disdain for the subjects of its welfare interventions, a disdain that could extend to the attempted eradication of all vestiges of Aboriginality. This aticle explores these multiple and conflicting imensions of schemes to ‘breed out the colour’ in the Inter-war years.

For all its myriad inspirations and aspirations, ‘breeding out the colour’ was above all just that: a stratagem to erase ‘colour’, to bleach Australia white through programs of regulated reproduction. So committed were its proponents to the process of whitening that one could imagine that they took whiteness as an end in itself, a taken-for-granted good. Perhaps they did. Whiteness was a potent signifier: of virtue, of racial superiority, above all in this context, of national membership. Breeding the colour out of persons of Aboriginal descent was equally a process of breeding them into the community of the nation. Inter-war programs of biological absorption should be understood, I argue, in the…

Read or purchase the article here.

Training for assimilation: Cecil cook and the ‘half‐caste’ apprentice regulations

Melbourne Studies in Education (Currently known as Critical Studies in Education)
Volume 29, Issue 1 (1987)
pages 128-141
DOI: 10.1080/17508488709556226

Tony Austin
Darwin Institute of Technology

One of the most significant consequences of the colonisation of Aboriginal Australia was a fast growing population of people of mixed Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal descent, known as ‘Half-castes’. As the increase in numbers became pronounced. Half-castes were vilified more vehemently even than other Aborigines. However, popular contempt was tinged with shame that children, fathered by Europeans and so with a mix of White blood, were left to be brought up as ‘savages’ in the bush or on the fringes of settlement. Hence legislation for the protection and control of Aborigines included special provision for Half-castes: they were to be given an improved chance to assimilate to White Australia.

This paper describes one attempt in the Northern Territory during the 1930s to prepare young people for assimilation—an apprenticeship scheme for Half-caste pastoral workers. The scheme is viewed in the context of Commonwealth Government policy for Half-castes and prevailing views about the intellectual capacity of Aborigines and Half-castes.

Social Darwinism and Aboriginal Intelligence

From the earliest days of Commonwealth control of the Northern Territory progressive officials with anthropological interests, like Chief Protectors Herbert Basedow and Baldwin Spencer had included in their policy proposals education and training for Aborigines and especially for Half-castes who were considered to be intellectually superior to other Aborigines. But these proposals were barely acted upon. In addition to general Commonwealth neglect of Aborigines and intermittent military and financial crises, the reason is to be found in Australian views about Aborigines’ intelligence.

Basedow and Spencer, in ascribing intellectual prowess (however limited) to Aborigines, were out of step with anthropological opinion. Late nineteenth century British, American and Australian anthropologists disseminated the belief that the Scale of Nature had become rigid, making progress for certain peoples impossible and so consigning them to a permanent place of inferiority in the struggle for survival. Such theories of evolutionary arrest, coupled with A.R. Wallace’s contention that moral and mental evolution had largely replaced physical evolution made the link between ‘savages’ and the apes, or at best with Neanderthal and Engis humans, conventional anthropological wisdom.

In Australia, ethnocentric Europeans reasoned that cessation of cultural evolution was demonstrated by Aborigines’ lack of recognisable institutions, rulers, morality, religion, parental pride, sense of humour or responsible treatment of the ‘fair sex’. Cultural discontinuity, it was argued, was a clear indication of intellectual inferiority. As [Charles] C. Staniland Wake put it, Aborigines ‘represent the childhood of humanity itself, revealing to us the condition of mankind, if not in primeval times, yet when the original potentialities of man’s being had been slightly developed by the struggle for existence’ Scientific substance for this view was provided by craniologists who alleged that Aboriginal brains were primitive and incapable of matching the power of those of the ‘higher races’. Features of Aboriginal brains were said to show an ‘infantile character… a type of anomaly which is referable to persistence of an immature (even a foetal) condition’.

Read or purchase the article here.

I’m Biracial—Not Black: Brooklyn Savvy Takes on Race

Brooklyn Savvy
NYC Life, NYC-TV
2010-12-27

Toni Williams, Host and Co-Executive Producer

Brooklyn Savvy takes on the complex topic of being “Biracial in America” with Juliette Fairley, actress and playwright of the “Mulatto Saga.” Join this riveting, candid discussion of Juliette’s journey as she discovers, and grapples with her mixed race identity. We discuss the changing social construct and President Barack Obama’s impact on the socio-political landscape for biracial people in America. The Savvy panel takes a hard look at what has changed.
 
And, a special note to our viewers, please let us know what you think of the show-this is not ordinary television. Join Host Toni Williams, and panelists, Karen Auster, Lisa Bing and Ellen Salpeter as we deal with an issue that is seldom discussed with this degree of authenticity!

Obama’s Presidential (Mixed) Race: Framing and Ideological Analysis of Blogs and News

University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
July 2011
217 pages

Iliana P. Rucker

DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Communication

The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States brought a heightened awareness to the role of race and produced speculation about the idealized notion of the achievement of a post-racial United States.

This dissertation examined mediated conversations on mixed race identity in response to some of the significant events in the Obama campaign and the first months of the Obama presidency. Specifically, this study examined the ways that newspapers and blogs construct discourses about race, mixed race, and racism. Further, I explored the biological, legal, and social implications as they relate to current constructions of mixed race identity. This dissertation centered the data collection around four pivotal discourses in the Obama era: (1) Obama’s announcement of his presidential candidacy; (2) Obama’s “A More Perfect Union” speech; (3) Obama’s election to the presidency; and (4) the arrest of Harvard professor Henry Gates. The parameters of these pivotal discourses allowed me to focus on what bloggers say about the events and how the newspapers reported them. Ideological criticism and framing analysis guided my study on racial identifications and negotiations related to Obama from three newspapers: New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Chicago Sun-Times; as well as four blogs: Mixed Roots, Beige-World, Light-skinned-ed Girl, and Twisted Curlz.

Three dominant frames emerged from the news coverage on the four discursive moments: race, dialogue, and history. I define the race frame as stories about the issues concerning race and racism; the dialogue frame as stories about a conversation, specifically at the national level; and the historical frame as stories about historic events. Three frames also emerged from the framing analysis of the blog posts: awareness, personalization, and racism. The awareness frame consists of postings about news and celebrity in mixed race community; the personalization frame as personal postings; and the racism frame as postings relating to issues concerning racism.

Ideological criticism facilitated the analysis of the news articles and blogs and allowed me to uncover several ideologies about race and mixed race emerge from these discursive constructions. The newspapers perpetuated the invisibility of Whiteness, the Black and White binary, hybrid heroism, and the erasure of racism ideologies. The preference for Obama as President, the salience of mixed race matters, and promotion of anti-racist work are ideologies in the blogs. While the blogs and news articles are different in format, style and purpose, taken together they give a look at the ongoing conversation that impacts discourses on race, racism, and mixed race. The interpretation of the findings explains how the media I examined reveal the social construction of race, the rhetoric of race, and agenda setting in each of the discursive moments in order to discuss current conceptualizations of race in the United States. In addition to an in-depth interpretation of framing and ideological analyses findings, the theoretical and methodological contributions are discussed.

Table of Contents

• CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
  • Personal Perspective
    • Researcher Perspective
    • Rationale
    • Data Collection and Analysis
      • News Media
      • Weblogs
    • Obama, Race, and Identity
      • Four Pivotal Moments in Discourses on Mixed Race
    • Assumptions
    • Research Questions
  • Key Concepts
    • Mixed Race Identity
    • Post-Racial United States
    • Media Conversations
  • Overview
• CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
  • Racial Identity
  • Biological Assumptions
    • One-drop rule
  • Legal Assumptions
    • Social Implications
  • Socially Constructing Race
    • Media Framing
    • Rhetorical and Ideological Framing
    • Rhetoric of Race
    • Terministic screens
      • Mixed Race and Media Representations
• CHAPTER 3: METHODS
  • Discursive Moments
  • Data Collection
  • Research Questions
  • Methods
    • Ideological analysis
    • Locating myself in the research
• CHAPTER 4: FRAMING ANALYSIS
  • Framing Analysis
    • Defining Frames
  • Framing Analysis of Newspapers
    • Race Frame
      • Racialized Obama script
      • Race is biological
      • Progressing past racism script
    • Dialogue Frame
      • National script
      • Debate script
    • History Frame
      • From the past script
      • Witnessing history script
  • Framing Analysis of Blog Posts
    • Awareness Frame
      • Mixed Race News script
      • Celebrity script
      • Questions script
    • Personalization Frame
      • Positionality
      • 2008 election experience
    • Racism Frame
      • Racial divide
      • Racial hatred
      • Challenging stereotyping and racial profiling script
• CHAPTER 5: IDEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
  • Defining Ideology
  • Ideological Analysis of News Discourse
    • Invisibility of Whiteness
    • Black and White Binary
    • Hybrid Heroism
    • Erasing Racism
  • Ideological Analysis of Blog Discourse
    • Obama for President
      • Defending Barack Obama
      • Acceptance
      • Obama is mixed
    • Anti-Racist Work
• CHAPTER 6: INTERPRETATION
  • Social Construction of Race
    • Rhetoric of race
  • Agenda Setting
  • Four Pivotal Moments in Discourses on Mixed Race
  • Conclusion
• CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION
  • Findings
    • RQ1: How do pivotal discourses during Obama’s campaign and early presidency stimulate conversations about race, mixed race identity, racism?
      • RQ1a: How do newspapers frame race and mixed race identity?
      • RQ1b: How do blogs frame race, mixed race, and racism?
    • RQ2: What ideologies about race, racism, and mixed race emerge from newspapers and blogs?
      • Newspapers
      • Blogs
    • RQ3: How do media discourses contribute to constructions of race?
    • RQ4: In what ways do the constructions suggest the possibility of a post-racial United States?
    • RQ5: How do newspapers and blogs set agendas that reinforce and oppose each other?
  • Contributions
    • Contributions to theory
    • Contributions to method
  • Future Research
  • Final Thoughts
  • References

Read the entire dissertation here.

Blood Politics: Race, Culture, and Identity in the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma

University of California Press
March 2002
267 pages
Paperback ISBN: 9780520230972

Circe Dawn Sturm, Associate Professor of Anthropology
University of Texas, Austin

• Finalist in the Non-fiction category of the Oklahoma Book Awards, Oklahoma Center for the Book
• 2002 Outstanding Book on Oklahoma History, Oklahoma Historical Society

Circe Sturm takes a bold and original approach to one of the most highly charged and important issues in the United States today: race and national identity. Focusing on the Oklahoma Cherokee, she examines how Cherokee identity is socially and politically constructed, and how that process is embedded in ideas of blood, color, and race. Not quite a century ago, blood degree varied among Cherokee citizens from full blood to 1/256, but today the range is far greater—from full blood to 1/2048. This trend raises questions about the symbolic significance of blood and the degree to which blood connections can stretch and still carry a sense of legitimacy. It also raises questions about how much racial blending can occur before Cherokees cease to be identified as a distinct people and what danger is posed to Cherokee sovereignty if the federal government continues to identify Cherokees and other Native Americans on a racial basis. Combining contemporary ethnography and ethnohistory, Sturm’s sophisticated and insightful analysis probes the intersection of race and national identity, the process of nation formation, and the dangers in linking racial and national identities.

Table of Contents

• List of Illustrations
• Acknowledgments
• Chapter One. Opening
• Chapter Two. Blood, Culture, and Race: Cherokee Politics and Identity in the Eighteenth Century
• Chapter Three. Race as Nation, Race as Blood Quantum: The Racial Politics of Cherokee Nationalism in the Nineteenth Century
• Chapter Four. Law of Blood, Politics of Nation: The Political Foundations of Racial Rule in the Cherokee Nation, 1907-2000
• Chapter Five. Social Classification and Racial Contestation: Local Non-National Interpretations of Cherokee Identity
• Chapter Six. Blood and Marriage: The Interplay of Kinship, Race, and Power in Traditional Cherokee Communities
• Chapter Seven. Challenging the Color Line: The Trials and Tribulations of the Cherokee Freedmen
• Chapter Eight. Closing
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index

What race do you identify Obama as? Does President Obama’s race effect your opinion of him?

SOC 119 – Voices from the Classroom
World in Conversation Project
Pennsylvania State University
2011-09-08

The first of 138+ student comments…

1. Personally President Obama’s race does not affect my opinion of him at all. When viewing Obama I consider him black, even though he is multiracial. Part of the reason I consider Obama to be black is because he looks black, and also when he was elected President there was pandemonium and celebration because he was seen as the first black President of the United States. I could not vote in the 2008 election because I was not old enough, but if I was Obama’s race would not have swayed my vote one way or the other in considering a candidate for election…
2. I consider Presiden Obama as multi racial because he is in fact half black and half white. I dont think it matters what race President Obama is. I think he should be respected as our Commander in Chief no matter what race or religion he is…
3. Our President, Barack Obama, is black. I have absolutely no opinion about what race my President is or any other important figure for that matter. Different people have different opinions about what President Obama is and if he is American and all of this nonsense but he is an American. He is an American that I consider to be black based on how I categorize people. Others may not agree with how I categorize who he is but that is how I go about business. I consider myself to be white and someone can disagree but I am still going to think I am white. My outlook on what someone is, is straight forward and I do not pass judgment based on what someone looks like besides that that person is what they are. As a result, Mr. Obama is black…
4. I identify Obama as a mixed race; he is not one hundred percent black, nor is he one hundred percent white. Obviously, his skin is darker than any other president we have had, but I don’t believe that this should be his sole identifier, nor should it be the only thing he is to be remembered for. He was raised by a white mother and is most definitely from a mixed background. Unfortunately, skin color is the first thing people see, and that is what sticks in people’s minds…
5. I am sure that almost everyone who had one glance at Obama would immediately classify him as Black, even though he is actually multiracial. Even so, his race did not change my opinion of him negatively, but rather positively I must say before and after I learned from class that he is multiracial…
6. What race do I identify Obama as and does Obama’s race effect my opinion of him? Previously to today’s sociology discussion, I thought that Barack Obama was black. I think I thought this because when he first ran for presidency, everyone made a huge deal that he would be the first black president in the United States. Clearly, I was wrong and learned that he is biracial. His Mother is a White American and his father is a Black Kenyan…
7. Despite what most people may say, President Barack Obama is multi-racial. He is only fifty percent black despite the fact that people refer to him as our “black president,” while the rest of his makeup includes white and possibly even Native American…
8. Although I do not know much about Obama’s background, just by looking at him I would classify him as a black person. I think that it was a phenomenal thing when a black man was elected as the president of the United States of America because it showed just how far we had come as a society. We had become one step closer to true racial equality…
9. First and foremost, I identify President Barack Obama as being a mixed race. Obama is English, Irish, and Kenyan. To me, that does not make him black, that makes him mixed. People were so hyped up with the fact that he is part black that I feel they chose to ignore the rest of his background. I can imagine this made some people upset…
10. I personally think that it is awesome that Obama is black. When I first heard that a black man was running for president, I was younger and pretty ignorant. I didn’t think he had a chance at winning at all. I figured most of America was more ignorant than I and that they were all republicans and/or racist. Clearly, I was extremely wrong…
11. Barrack Obama is the nation’s first black president. Most everybody I know categorizes Barrack Obama as a black man, as do I. If you were to ask me if Barrack Obama is black, I would say yes. But if you asked me what race Barrack Obama is, I would say multi-racial like I did on the clicker question asked in class…
12. I would consider President Obama to be multiracial, his father was black and his mother was white. But, does this affect my opinion of him? To say the honest truth, I absolutely do not have any knowledge in politics or government. I am not registered to vote, nor do I think I should have the right to vote knowing my lack of knowledge on the subject…
13. I view President Obama as multiracial although when he first started running for president I saw him as black because of all the hype of him possibly being the first black President of the United States. I personally think the debates that occurred about his race and religion got way out of hand during the election and often took the focus away from actual issues. For me personally it does not affect my opinion of him…
14. I personally identify Obama as a mixed individual. It is clearly seen that he is a man of mixed origins. It is also very apparent that he has some Black in him. Now to get into the total percents I don’t know what fraction of his blood is Black, Asian, etc. but the fact still remains that he has Black blood in him. To say that he is black is not totally wrong either…
15. Let me start off by saying that I consider Barack Obama to be a black man for the sheer fact that he seemed to identify with the black community throughout his campaign. I also understand that when you could possibly be the first black president in American history you do not want to ruin the hopes of millions of minorities by denying your heritage because you are multi-racial and not a fully black man. But since he does consider himself a black man and not multi-racial I have different feelings towards him than other white candidates…
16. I dont care at all that Obama is black or part Asian or whatever he is. To me he is black and that is just fine. I dont follow politics much but it’s hard to do worse than Bush. Obama inherited a shitty economy and I dont blame him at all for that. He did manage to catch Osama Bin Laden after Bush failed for however many years. That was pretty badass. He’s just a likable, intelligent, pretty good looking guy. The fact that he’s black doesnt do anything to detract from that…
17. When I first look at someone, I identify them by the color of their skin. Without talking to someone and finding out how he or she identifies him/herself, that’s all I can go by. With that idea in mind, I identify Barack Obama as a black male because his skin is clearly darker than mine and other white people. That does not affect my views, though…
18. Barack Obama’s father is from Africa and his mother is white. So I guess I would consider him biracial but I mostly view him as a black man. It is the easiest to identify him with because he is a man of color. To be honest his race does not alter my opinion of him but it does scare me. It makes me afraid for him, for me and for blacks in general. There is a ton of pressure on anybody who decides to become the president of the United States. Him being the first black president brings added pressure because he is the first of his kind to be in such a high position of power. This is a double edged sword because though he is in the position to knock down barriers and give more people of color the opportunity to become president he is also in position to give white America a reason to not vote for another candidate of color…

Read all of the other comments here.

Dorothy Roberts – Fatal Invention

The Tavis Smiley Show
PRI: Public Radio International
2011-07-08

Tavis Smiley, Host

Dorothy Roberts, George A. Weiss University Professor of Law and Sociology; Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights
University of Pennsylvania

Professor and legal scholar Dorothy Roberts explores the effects of race-based science in her new book, Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-first Century. It’s the first text of its kind to document the development of racial science and biotechnology based on genetics and to map its implications for equality in America.

The Biggest Lie About Race? That It’s Real

The Root
2011-07-26

Jenée Desmond-Harris, Contributing Editor

Dorothy Roberts says race is a social and political construct, and she won’t rest until we know it.

There’s a reason we’ll never come to a consensus on the most accurate racial classifications for Barack Obama or Tiger Woods. There’s a reason questions about ethnicity on the census and college applications feel impossible to an increasing number of Americans. There’s a reason you can be black in the United States, colored in South Africa and something else entirely in Brazil.

According to Dorothy Roberts, author of Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-Create Race in the Twenty-First Century, it’s because, despite centuries of efforts to treat race as if it’s a biological category, it is no more than social construction—created to oppress people—that changes with place, time and perspective.

The Root talked to Roberts about the profit that’s behind the re-emergence of myths about race, the impact for African Americans and health, and how we can continue to talk about it, minus the long-standing lies.

The Root: Fatal Invention is an attempt to correct major misunderstandings and myths about race. Explain what race is and what it isn’t.

Dorothy Roberts: I can say very definitively that race is an invented political system; it is not a natural biological condition of human beings. The human species is a single race. It is not biologically divided up into distinguishable races…

Read the entire article here.

Fatal Invention: Race and Science

The Brian Lehrer Show
WNYC
Monday, 2011-08-15

Brian Lehrer, Host

Dorothy Roberts, George A. Weiss University Professor of Law and Sociology; Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights
University of Pennsylvania

Dorothy Roberts, Kirkland & Ellis professor and faculty fellow at the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University, and author of Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics and Big Business Re-create Race In the Twenty-First Century, discusses how the findings of the Human Genome Project a decade ago stands in contrast to racial definitions in medicine and technology.

Download the audio here (00:13:04).

Whoa, We Have a Black President

Zócalo: Public Square
2011-09-08

Randall Kennedy Assesses Obama’s Triumphs—and Shortcomings—In Erasing the Color Line

Randall Kennedy, Harvard professor of law and author of The Persistence of the Color Line: Racial Politics and the Obama Presidency, had an assignment: to answer whether or not Obama has been erasing the color line. “By color line,” explained Kennedy, “I mean all of the sentiments, instincts, habits of mind, structures that wrongly stymie people because of race. Is Obama erasing that baleful aspect of political culture?”
 
In a word, said Kennedy, yes. But there was a caveat: the “Obama way” is to avoiding talking about race at every turn.
 
According to Kennedy, Obama’s most impressive feat was to treat making it to the White House as a realistic, tenable option. His legacy, Kennedy believes, will be the alteration of public psychology to a place of normalizing a black presidency. After four years, people will have accepted seeing a black man enter and exit Air Force One.
 
“It was so audacious because of the history of the U.S.,” he said.
 
As Kennedy reminded the audience, a crowd of a few hundred gathered in an auditorium in the Hammer Museum, African-Americans were largely excluded from politics until the Voting Rights Act of 1965. “Blacks were excluded by dint of terror throughout the deep South, excluded by dint of various legal shenanigans,” Kennedy said….

…Kennedy’s own criticisms of Obama only came up in the question-and-answer portion of the evening. Kennedy said he believes that Obama didn’t actively do enough to change the ideological landscape of the country and that he was sheepish about outwardly supporting liberal judges. Kennedy was most critical of Obama’s stances surrounding gay rights, finding it ironic that when Obama’s parents married across racial boundaries it was considered a felony in many places. Now Obama is pushing a “separate but equal” equivalent in the gay community…

Read the entire article here.
Watch the video and/or listen to the audio here.