Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
2. African-American is fine for history, but it is impractable for today's usage.
Mon Feb 6, 2012, 06:16 PM
Feb 2012

I think African-American is impracticable because we don't often know where someone lives, and their lineages. President Obama is African-Irish-American. Calling him African-American denies half his lineage.

I live in Montana, which is one the Canadian border. If I see a black person, I shouldn't assume he or she is American. Years ago, I met a black guy in Montana from France. We could label him African-French, but what if he had no French lineage? What if he had a half-brother who's mother was African and father was French? African-French would mean two different things in this regard.

On a more personal note, my family was split apart because of ethnic identity. Half my family is Irish, and half my family is Hungarian. My Hungarian grandfather tried to convince his grandchildren that we were mostly Hungarian, and this completely outraged my Irish relatives. Their strong, ethnic identity caused a riff in my family that never healed. This has caused me to have a strong distaste for ethnic identity, though I completely understand why oppressed, ethnic minorities feel strongly for ethnic identity.

I wonder what would happen to the Israel/Palestine conflict if they no longer identified as Jews and Palestinians. If they chose to only identity as humans, or as living beings, would they treat each other more humanely? I think they might.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A post I made on Yahoo on...»Reply #2