Race Census Aff – mags compiled by Lenny Brahin Jaden Lessnick Jillian Gordners Brian Roche 1AC
Download 0.87 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Census data gets misused – Japanese internment proves
- Census doesn’t accurately collect race data – this has severe implications for minority groups
AT: Case turnsTop levelGovernment profiling yields zero societal benefits – there’s only a risk it perpetuates racismCox 08 – Major, Civil Rights Activist, http://majorcox.com/blog/2008/10/stop-asking-about-race-in-census/, 6/26/15 BRoche In a recent column [~1997], George Will of the Washington Post, makes a thoughtful contribution to the national dialogue on race. In that column, Mr. Will calls for the elimination of race classifications in the government census. Regular readers know that is a position I have long advocated. I welcome Mr. Will to my side of the debate. In his column, “Abolishing Census Categories Could Make Us All Americans,” Mr. Will acknowledges that racial identities do not fall into “fixed, easily definable categories.” He notes for example, the law once classified the “Irish” race as nonwhite. At the same time, he opens the door to include the following as members of the white brotherhood: Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass, Jesse Owns and Roy Campanella; by virtue of the fact that each of these Americans had a white parent. He affirms in the white-race cousinhood Martin Luther King, who had a white grandmother, as well as W.E.B. Du Bois and Malcolm X, who had white ancestry. When President Clinton called on Americans to begin a constructive dialogue about race, I am confident he didn’t expect to hear from George Will. The President expected the conversation about race to be conducted within the traditional black/white racial paradigm; the way Americans always talk about race (white domination and black victimization). That didn’t happen, because many Americans are getting over their obsession with race and becoming more inclusive and tolerant of others who look different. More Americans are marrying other-race spouses than ever before. According to the census, the number of interracial children in 1990 exceeded 2 million. Will says, the census racial category ‘Other’ doesn’t correctly describe these children. As he put it, “…the ‘other’ category is unsatisfactory, because it does not contribute to an accurate snapshot of the population, and it offends sensibilities: Why should a child of a white-black marriage be required to identify with one parent, or as an ‘Other’?” The answer to Will’s question, is this; Many Americans, and the President may be among them, don’t want to eliminate government racial categories. These Americans say that if we end race classifications there will be no way for the responsible agencies of government to track the progress, or lack thereof, toward eliminating racial discrimination. To those who argue that we need government racial bean-counters to track race discrimination; I say, “cow manure.” Clearly, it doesn’t take the United States government to tell you when somebody is being discriminated against. Just watch the U.S. Senate debate on C-SPAN or look at a picture of the members of the board of directors of any major corporation. You would not be reading this column if you were oblivious to the fact that far too few women and people of color are in either picture. At the same time, you are equally blinded if you see skin color, by itself, as the determining factor in anything: not rates of poverty, not crime, not fatherlessness, nor any of the other social pathologies government racial bean-counters so often ascribe to dark-skinned Americans. The sad reality is race classification taints the individual’s internalized value system, spoiling the way individuals views themselves. Classifying individuals into racial groups results in group-thinking, with members of the group exchanging individuality for a group-identity. In America, both stereotypes; white superiority and black inferiority, stem from group-thinking. Our culture tends to program many white people to see themselves as superior to non-white people. Therefore, non-white folks are forced to accept an inferior view of themselves or re-internalize their perceived inferior status as one of victimization. George Will’s column does the American people a great service by providing wide publication of some of the absurdities surrounding government racial classifications. As Americans learn to identify and avoid the irrational aspects of racial-group-think politics, our nationhood will be strengthened. Until that time, we will continue to be divided by such mundane human traits as skin color, hair texture and eye appearance. Census data gets misused – Japanese internment provesMinkel 7 [JR Minken is a lab technician and freelance journalist, and has written one book, Instant Egghead Guide: The Universe. “Confirmed: The U.S. Census Bureau Gave Up Names of Japanese-Americans in WW II” 3-30-07 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/confirmed-the-us-census-b/] JG Despite decades of denials, government records confirm that the U.S. Census Bureau provided the U.S. Secret Service with names and addresses of Japanese-Americans during World War II.∂ The Census Bureau surveys the population every decade with detailed questionnaires but is barred by law from revealing data that could be linked to specific individuals. The Second War Powers Act of 1942 temporarily repealed that protection to assist in the roundup of Japanese-Americans for imprisonment in internment camps in California and six other states during the war. The Bureau previously has acknowledged that it provided neighborhood information on Japanese-Americans for that purpose, but it has maintained that it never provided "microdata," meaning names and specific information about them, to other agencies.∂ A new study of U.S. Department of Commerce documents now shows that the Census Bureau complied with an August 4, 1943, request by Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau for the names and locations of all people of Japanese ancestry in the Washington, D.C., area, according to historian Margo Anderson of the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee and statistician William Seltzer of Fordham University in New York City. The records, however, do not indicate that the Bureau was asked for or divulged such information for Japanese-Americans in other parts of the country.∂ Anderson and Seltzer discovered in 2000 that the Census Bureau released block-by-block data during WW II that alerted officials to neighborhoods in California, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho and Arkansas where Japanese-Americans were living. "We had suggestive but not very conclusive evidence that they had also provided microdata for surveillance," Anderson says. Census doesn’t accurately collect race data – this has severe implications for minority groupsSchmitt 1 [Eric Schmitt, Count of 2000 Census Said to Err by Millions, New York Times, 3-16-2001,http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/16/us/count-of-2000-census-said-to-err-by-millions.html] ARLINGTON, Va., March 15— The Bush administration has described the 2000 census as the most accurate in American history, but the Census Bureau said today that it missed at least 6.4 million people last year and counted at least 3.1 million people twice.∂ Census officials have yet to complete their analysis of last year's count. By one measure, Howard Hogan, a chief statistician for the 2000 census, estimated that as many as 7.6 million people might have been missed, and 4.3 million more could have been counted twice. That is an improvement over the 1990 census, which overlooked 8.4 million and counted 4.4 million others twice, for a net undercount of 4 million.∂ The data released today underscores that vast numbers of minority members, renters and the poor, the people most often missed in the decennial head counts, are likely to be denied hundreds of millions of dollars in federal assistance unless the 2000 census data is adjusted to make up for uncounted people.∂ The Census Bureau's acting director said today that the agency would recommend by this fall whether to use statistically adjusted data in allocating federal aid that is based on population. About $185 billion a year was distributed based on population counts from the 1990 census.∂ ''We're going to be working on a process where by the end of the summer we can make a recommendation as to whether these data should be adjusted for other purposes,'' William G. Barron Jr., the bureau's acting director, told a meeting of census advisory committees here.∂ Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.87 Mb. Share with your friends:
|