Mixed Race Studies

Heredity and Racial Science for Elementary and Secondary Schools (Erblehre und Rassenkunde für die Grund- und Hauptschule) 2nd edition

Verlag Konkordia
Bühl-Baden, Germany
1937

Karl Bareth, Author

Alfred Vogel, Author

Source: German Propaganda Archive, Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Michigan

Archived and Translated by:

Randall Bytwerk, Professor of Communication Arts and Sciences
Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Michigan

Background: This is a teacher’s guide to racial instruction, covering the 4th through the 8th grades. I provide a translation of sections that strike me as particularly interesting. Bareth was an experienced teacher, and Vogel’s title is Rektor. Vogel also produced a set of posters to be used in classroom instruction. Published in 1937, before the alliance with Japan, there is some material on the “Yellow Peril.” Such material disappeared later.

…b) Race mixing among humans.

We have already spoken about one racial mixing. That had to do with the racial development of the German people. May we also speak of it as bastardization? If we look into the face of the German people, peering deeply into its spiritual life, we are absolutely convinced that the joining of these six races into one whole people was not a bastardization. Their genetic traits joined in a wonderful and harmonious way to form the German people, from which our German culture sprang.

We speak of bastardization in the case of a mixed race (Mischlinge) that develops from fundamentally different races or racial mixtures, as, for example, one between Europeans and Negroes, Europeans and Asians, Europeans and Indians, Europeans and Jews, etc. Such mixed race individuals carry the contradictory trains of both races, resulting in a confusion. Bastards are unhappy people. A bastard of European and Negroid decent has some of the characteristics of the white race, and some characteristics of the black race. He unsuited both for the jungles and hot sun of the south, but also for the north. Two souls live and compete within the breast of the bastard. He never finds peace and a harmonious, balanced life. The hard laws of blood force him to live a life of racial confusion and fragmentation…

Read the entire guide here.

Racial Discrimination in Medicine versus Race-Based Medicine: The Ethical, Legal and Policy Implications on Health Disparities

Georgetown Journal of Law & Modern Critical Race Perspectives
Volume 3, Issue 1 (Spring 2011)
pages 59-86

Christopher Ogolla, LL.M., J.D., M.A., M.P.H., B.A., Academic Support Instructor
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Texas Southern University

This paper explores the history of racial discrimination in medicine and evaluates the ethical and policy issues raised by race-based medicine. It notes that proponents of race-based medicine have failed to frame the debate in such a way that distinguishes it from racial discrimination in medicine and suggests that race-based medicine is more likely to pass muster if it is framed in terms of elimination of health disparities among different segments of the population. The paper attempts to answer questions such as whether race was and is still a dominant factor in medicine, and whether it is ethical to tie one’s advice (as a medical professional) to a patient’s race. More importantly, the paper explores the issue of whether race-based medicine can ever be justified.

The paper argues that traditional medicine sometimes supported by the government, fostered bias and discrimination against minorities and suggests that this history has injected a level of suspicion and cynicism in public discussions of race-based medicine. The paper evaluates benefits and pitfalls of race-based medicine and analyzes the ethical, legal and policy implications of such a practice. It recommends that there is some value in understanding the variable response to drugs and the ethics of producing drugs for those who need it most, even if they happen to be members of one ethnic group. The paper concludes by noting that race-based medicine promises to achieve optimal medical outcomes by helping physicians and patients choose patient-specific disease management approaches based on a patient’s genetic profile.

Read the entire article here or here.

Race Based Medication BiDil and African Americans

New York University
2009-10-16

Ann Morning, Associate Professor of Sociology
New York University

Ann Morning, Assistant Professor of Sociology, discusses race-based medications.

Professor Dorothy Roberts — Challenging Concepts of Race

Mixed Race Radio
Blog Talk Radio
2013-06-26, 16:00Z (12:00 EDT)

Tiffany Rae Reid, Host

Dorothy E. 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 is the fourteenth Penn Integrates Knowledge Professor, George A. Weiss University Professor, and the inaugural Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights at University of Pennsylvania, where she holds appointments in the Law School and Departments of Africana Studies and Sociology. An internationally recognized scholar, public intellectual, and social justice advocate, she has written and lectured extensively on the interplay of gender, race, and class in legal issues and has been a leader in transforming public thinking and policy on reproductive health, child welfare, and bioethics.

Professor Roberts is the author of the award-winning books Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (Random House/Pantheon, 1997) and Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare (Basic Books/Civitas, 2002), as well as co-editor of six books on constitutional law and gender. She has also published more than eighty articles and essays in books and scholarly journals, including Harvard Law Review, Yale Law Journal, and Stanford Law Review.  Her latest book, Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-First Century, was published by the New Press in July 2011.

For more information, click here.

From Medical Innovation to Sociopolitical Crisis: How Racialized Medicine Has Shifted the Scope of Racial Discourse and its Social Consequences

Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut
May 2013
51 pages

Danielle Antonia Craig

An essay submitted to the faculty of Wesleyan University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with Departmental Honors in Sociology

Using a case study of a congestive heart failure, BiDil, patented in 2005 for use only in African Americans, I attempt to understand and analyze how the movement of racialized medicine has informed and effected American understandings of race, racial identity, and health.

Read the entire essay here.

Ethnic minorities: defining ethnicity and race

The Scottish Public Health Observatory
Ethnic Minorities
Last Updated: 2012-03-06

Ethnicity

Ethnicity has been defined as:

“the social group a person belongs to, and either identifies with or is identified with by others, as a result of a mix of cultural and other factors including language, diet, religion, ancestry and physical features traditionally associated with race”. (1)

Ethnicity is essentially self-defined and may change over time. Classification of ethnicity is essentially pragmatic, based on categories that include common self-descriptions, are acceptable to respondents and that identify variations that are important for research or policy. There is increasing recognition that people may want to identify themselves with more than one ethnic group, and the “mixed” category introduced in the UK 2001 Census attempts to do this. The standard classification of ethnic group in the UK is that used in the 2011 Census (which was slightly different in each of the four countries of the UK). Ethnicity is different from country of origin, since many countries include more than one ethnic group.

Race

The concept of race is controversial. It is difficult to define a rationale for racial categories and there is no consistent agreement about an objective set of categories. Classifying individuals by their physical appearance and skin colour is unreliable and of questionable validity. Genetic studies have found some evidence of broad “continental” groups which are genetically similar.(2,3) However, there is little evidence that these correspond to commonly perceived racial categories.(4) There is wider genetic variation between individuals within one “racial” group (such as “white”) than there is between such “racial” groups (5)—indeed 93% to 95% of genetic variation is within population groups. Despite these difficulties, the term race is still widely used in legal and policy contexts…

Read the entire article here.

Lung function, race and ethnicity: a conundrum

European Respiratory Journal
Volume 41, Number 6  (June 1, 2013)
pages 1249-1250
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00053913

Philip H. Quanjer
Deptartment of Pulmonary Diseases and Department of Paediatrics
Erasmus Medical Centre
Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

In this issue Braun et al. make a plea for an international workshop to review aspects of race and ethnicity in relation to lung function. This is a timely initiative, as many people struggle in epidemiological and genetic studies, and in clinical practice, with the interpretation of test results in an increasingly multi-ethnic society. Our notions of race derive from Blumenbach, who defined “Four varieties of mankind, one species” (adding a fifth variety in 1781). Definitions of “race” and “ethnic” are confusing and often used interchangeably. This ambiguity is reflected in the frequent use of race/ethnicity, a transitional concept adopted for use while phasing out “race” from the USA census. At this stage the USA census recognises two ethnicities: “Hispanic or Latino”, and “not Hispanic or Latino”, and five races; Hispanic/Latino individuals have a mixed European, African and native American ancestry. American citizens were allowed to self-identify with more than one race in 2000: 2.4% self-identified as multiracial. In sharp contrast, France passed a law in 1978 barring the government from collecting all racial and ethnic data (the Act prohibits collecting “any information that shows, directly or indirectly, racial or ethnic origins, political, philosophical or religious opinions, trade union membership, moral principles, or information that relates to health or sexual life” without either the written consent of the individual or an advance recommendation of the National Commission for Information Technology and Civil Liberties, which must first be approved by the Conseil d’État). The collection of data on race and ethnicity by governments serves administrative and statistical purposes; the classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. However, this caveat is not heeded, and the classifications are widely used in everyday life, science and medicine, where race/ethnicity is used as a proxy for other phenomena.

Humans (Homo sapiens) originated in eastern Africa and migrated to the rest of the world. Analysis of microsatellite loci shows progressive loss of genetic diversity as our species grew and spread; genetic variability outside Africa is generally a subset of that within Africa. In general, a species is biologically defined as a group of similar organisms that can reproduce only with each other. Hence, genetically and biologically, Homo sapiens is one species, but with genetic diversity. Only 5–15% of genetic variation occurs between large groups living on different continents, the remaining variation occurring within such groups. A clustering algorithm applied to multilocus genotypes from worldwide human populations produced genetic clusters largely coincident with major geographic regions, suggesting that global human genetic diversity is a result of gradual variation and isolation by distance rather than major genetic discontinuities.

A widely held view among anthropologists, biologists and sociologists is that race is a socio-political construct based on the notion that groups can be demarcated on the basis of important and clear differences in phenotype, skin colour, ancestry, socio-economic status (SES) and geographical location, etc. Hoffman, a highly respected statistician who was particularly interested in the “negro problem” in the US, gave scientific racism its credibility and respectability. He posited that white people were at the top of the hierarchy and social order; “minority” racial groups were both biologically inferior and barriers to progress. One of Hoffman’s arguments was that “pure blacks” had “inferior vitality” because their vital capacity (VC) was found to be 6–12% smaller than in whites; this contributed to the belief that the inferior black race, that had a higher death rate, was doomed to extinction. The word “vital” in VC, so named by Hutchinson, and the smaller VC, led Hoffman to a value judgement. His views were contested by contemporary scientists, who pointed out that SES and inequalities in access to medical care, etc. should be taken into account in studies of biological differences between ethnic groups. Nevertheless, Hoffman’s views remained very influential; they have contributed to great atrocities and still affect personal interactions and social institutions.

Categorising subjects into racial/ethnic groups is done on the assumption that race/ethnicity is a proxy for genetic relatedness; this misrepresents genetic variation and leads to confounding. In general, in studies comparing differences in disease prevalence between two ethnic groups, if an unmeasured environmental variable (such as SES) co-varies in the same fashion as the proportion in one group, a racial difference might be due to this unmeasured variable. For example, in a study of differences in mortality between African and European Americans, Burney and Hooper concluded that the higher mortality in African Americans could only be explained by their lower forced VC, reminiscent of the views of Hoffman. Correlation does not prove causality: direct analysis of the relevant gene or causative factor is the only reliable way to evaluate risk in an individual.

Race, ethnicity and ancestral categories falsely suggest genetic homogeneity within and heterogenity between groups; they ignore the genetic variability within groups, gene–environment interactions and differences due to socially mediated mechanisms. Therefore, many scientists advocate abolishing such categorisation in research, versus those who believe there is still a role for the continued use of self-identified race and ethnicity in biomedical and genetic research…

Read the entire article here.

Defining race/ethnicity and explaining difference in research studies on lung function

European Respiratory Journal
Volume 41, Number 6  (June 1, 2013)
pages 1362-1370
DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00091612

Lundy Braun, Royce Family Professor in Teaching Excellence and Professor of Medical Science and Africana Studies
Brown University

Melanie Wolfgang
Brown University

Kay Dickersin, Professor, Director, Center for Clinical Trials
Johns Hopkins Center for Global Health
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

The 2005 guidelines of the American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society recommend the use of race- and/or ethnic-specific reference standards for spirometry. Yet definitions of the key variables of race and ethnicity vary worldwide. The purpose of this study was to determine whether researchers defined race and/or ethnicity in studies of lung function and how they explained any observed differences.

Using the methodology of the systematic review, we searched PubMed in July 2008 and screened 10 471 titles and abstracts to identify potentially eligible articles that compared “white” to “other racial and ethnic groups”.

Of the 226 eligible articles published between 1922 and 2008, race and/or ethnicity was defined in 17.3%, with the proportion increasing to 70% in the 2000s for those using parallel controls. Most articles (83.6%) reported that “other racial and ethnic groups” have a lower lung capacity compared to “white”; 94% of articles failed to examine socioeconomic status. In the 189 studies that reported lower lung function in “other racial and ethnic groups”, 21.8% and 29.4% of explanations cited inherent factors and anthropometric differences, respectively, whereas 23.1% of explanations cited environmental and social factors.

Even though researchers sought to determine differences in lung function by race/ethnicity, they typically failed to define their terms and frequently assumed inherent (or genetic) differences.

Read or purchase the article here.

Winning the Race

NYU Alumni Magazine
Fall 2012

Andrea Crawford

As the first African-American president runs for reelection, researchers examine the subliminal influence of political ads

 In 1990, longtime North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms was trailing challenger Harvey Gantt, an African-American who supported affirmative action, when the Helms campaign produced the infamous “hands” commercial. As the camera focused on the hands of a white person holding a letter, the narrator said: “You needed that job, and you were the best qualified, but they had to give it to a minority.” Helms went on to win the election.

In another famous appeal, an ad for the 1988 Republican presidential candidate George H.W. Bush featured the menacing mug shot of convicted murderer Willie Horton. The spot explained how the African-American had committed assault while on furlough from a Massachusetts prison—a program supported by Michael Dukakis, the state’s governor and the Democratic presidential candidate. Bush won the presidency in a landslide.

It was into this environment that Charlton McIlwain, associate professor of media, culture, and communication at the Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, came of age. These types of appeals clearly work, he thought, and he set out to determine how and why. Around the same time, David Amodio was first exploring research that showed self-avowed egalitarians actually exhibited unconscious biases. Now an NYU associate professor of psychology and neural science, he began his career asking how such automatic types of prejudice could exist in opposition to one’s beliefs. Until recently, these kinds of questions were complicated by a reliance on often-flawed self-reports—people simply feel uncomfortable admitting bias and are sometimes not even conscious of it. But today, McIlwain and Amodio have come together in a timely pursuit. As the first African-American president runs for reelection, they are investigating the power of racial appeals in political ads by turning to neuroscience…

Read the entire article here.

Race Is Not Biology

The Atlantic
2013-05-23

Merlin Chowkwanyun
Departments of History and Public Health
University of Pennsylvania

How unthinking racial essentialism finds its way into scientific research

During the past two weeks, much outrage has arisen over former Heritage Foundation staffer Jason Richwine’s Harvard doctoral dissertation, which speculated that IQ differences between “Hispanic” and “non-Hispanic’ populations were genetically rooted. The claims mirrored those of Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s scurrilous The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, which made similar claims about the intelligence of blacks. (Murray receives thanks in Richwine’s dissertation acknowledgments and wrote recently in National Review Online in defense of Richwine.)

The fury continues. In the past couple days, a group of scholars has circulated a petition excoriating Harvard for approving the dissertation and condoning scientific racism in the process. Their petition situates Richwine within an odious lineage stretching back to the era of eugenics and charges that his work rests on shoddy intellectual foundations. (These scholars are right: the late J. Phillipe Rushton, best known for claiming associations among race, brain size, and penis length, is cited by Richwine.) A group of 1,200 Harvard University students has also put together their own petition.

But the attacks on Richwine are missing something far more insidious than neo-eugenic claims about innately inferior intelligence between races. The backlash against Richwine and Murray, after all, gives some indication that their views are widely considered beyond the respectable pale in the post- Bell Curve era. Richwine and Murray are really extreme branches of a core assumption that is much more pervasive and dangerous because it isn’t necessarily racist on the surface: the belief in biological “races.” This first assumption is required to get to claims like Richwine’s, which argue that between Race A and Race B, differences exist (in “intelligence” or whatever else) that are grounded in the biological characteristics of the races themselves. Public outcry always greets the second Richwine-Murray-esque claim. But the first assumption required to reach it is more common and based on as shaky an intellectual foundation, even as it continues to escape equal scorn…

…In the past decade, a small but growing sub-field, anchored in multiple disciplines, has begun criticizing the unthinking racial essentialism that finds its way into scientific research more frequently than one might think, especially in medicine and public health orbits. One exemplar is the article ” “Racial Categories in Medical Practice: How Useful Are They?” which appeared in PLOS Medicine. Its authors first review the degree to which common conceptions of race have in fact historically shaped by administrative imperatives (not biological reality). They then issue a warning on the use of race as a proxy, writing that “once race is presumed, the ways in which multiple genetic inheritances interact with the environment within that individual seem to disappear. Clinical clues can become invisible.”…

Read the entire article here.