2020 Census Statistics Highlight Local Population Changes
census.gov
census.gov
Who are these “others” and how do they identify? At least in Oakland, CA I noticed the majority of people who reported Hispanic/Latino ethnicity selected “other” for race. Are we entering into post-racial identity? Did the Census screw up and forget a burgeoning identity?
Nah, all those people got a 23&me test and found out they were 1/64th cherokee or whatever, so they put themselves down as "Some Other Race alone or in combination ".
"Mixed" folks.
Same thing with college admissions. What should they select?
I disagree. In fact, I'd say that people (at least all the ones we know) are entirely one race: Human.
That's both reductive and misleading.
There is only one living sentient primate species on this planet. Homo Sapiens.
What's more, it's entirely possible that all humans are descended from a subset of 3-10k individuals who lived ~75,000 years ago[1].
Even more, there is often more genetic diversity within human groupings than between them[0].
What it is we're discussing is bigotry. And it should be called out for what it is: hateful prejudice for no real reason at all other than the anger and hatred of those who practice it.
Being Irish for example used to have a lot of baggage in the US, but that went away even though people still identify as being of Irish descent.
I'm not assuming that at all. Rather, I asserted that "race" as a social construct is outdated given our understanding of genetics and the extreme genetic similarity of all humans.
Whether anyone else agrees with me or has any particular feelings about "race" one way or another is irrelevant to anything I wrote.
As transportation has improved they’re becoming less relevant. In say 1,000 years things might become so blurred as to render them irrelevant, but for now it still meaningful.
The social concept of race is more iffy. As I pointed out if we treat 3/4 white 1/4th black as black then of course it doesn’t represent the underlying reality well.
There are good conversations to be had about when race should be discussed, but it sounds like you're advocating for a blanket ban.
Where did I even imply that?
My point is that the stuff that people consider defining characteristics of "race" are minor genetic differences and should be irrelevant.
That some folks feel otherwise is a teaching opportunity.
What's more, the social construct of "race" is just arbitrary and capricious.
As such, while we certainly should address the ideas and behaviors around bigotry (because that's what it is, as "racism" isn't an actual thing unless you're referring to a species other than homo sapiens.), and we should call it that, otherwise we're perpetuating the ignorance and hatred of such bigoted beliefs.
So let's not fiddle around with imprecise (and flat wrong) ideas about "race" and instead discuss the issues of bigotry. One is a bunch of bullshit made up by bigoted scumbags, and the other is the actual issue/situation.
>There are good conversations to be had about when race should be discussed, but it sounds like you're advocating for a blanket ban.
Let's rephrase the above: "There are good conversations to be had about when bigotry should be discussed.
As for what I'm advocating, either I'm an extremely poor communicator, or you read what you wanted to read into my statement. I'll leave the decision about which it is to the readers.
Granted, I did extrapolate from your first response. I said so because race (like class) is a social reality in the US, and being mixed race does mean that you experience the US differently. You replied to
> America is used to 3/4 white 1/4 black being considered black
by saying there are no races, which is literally true. However, you're also implying that people should not identify themselves as Black or White or a mix. Some of that is perfectly valid since the blood quantum system was oppressive. But you're also saying that people should only identify themselves as human, and doing otherwise is bigotry.
Sometimes you need to identify yourself as a minority group to find a community of people who share experience with you. Should people not identify as Black, or avoid celebrating Black success because there isn't a genetic basis to calling themselves or others Black? Maybe you'd benefit from thinking about the similarities (and differences) between race and ethnicity. Being White/Black in the U.S. is both a racial and ethnic deal. People can identify as Black while recognizing that there is no concrete test which can identify them as Black.
I didn't say, or even imply, that either.
I'll let you go and set up and knock down your straw men all by yourself.
Thanks!
Well you’d hope so or it wouldn’t be a very good census!
> The Census Bureau also released data visualizations, America Counts stories, and videos to help illustrate and explain these data. These resources are available on the 2020 Census results page. Advanced users can access these data on the FTP site.
There are five links in that paragraph. The first link points to over 100 other articles with graphic illustrations
It's not your civic duty anymore.
The government already has too much data, more than they need.
There are already attacks because the census used differential privacy.
People don't care about your privacy. We have to learn to stop giving out our data anywhere
Here's a example of how the privacy measures weaken the data because it's now too easy to trace it to people - https://twitter.com/HistDem/status/1410682403279060993
Here's the 16 states attacking your census data privacy - https://www.npr.org/2021/05/19/993247101/for-the-u-s-census-...
But you have to make a decision, do you give out all your data or fight back. Privacy won't come for free.
They don't need to do a census and they don't need most of the data on the census. Do we really think the solution to problem X is another study from a data scientist using census data.
This should worry you, and it's not a solvable problem. The more anonymous the data the lesser the quality.
" In a worst-case scenario, the bureau's researchers estimated, attackers with access to more commercial data could unmask the identities of as many 179 million people, or 58% of the population included in the 2010 census."