Primordialist definition

• What is primordialism vs. essentialism?
• Is there evidence for primordialism?

Identification

A Checkered history (morally fraught)

Category of practice not of analysis

• Does not fit social reality

Moving toward “primordialism”

“The attachment to another member of one’s kinship group is not just a function of interaction… It is because a certain ineffable signicance is attributed to the tie of blood”

the psychological attachment to descent-based membership is innate in humans (Gil-White 1999)

People use the essentialist definition.

primordialist definition of race/ethnicity:

an identity where membership is based on perceived descent such that it is

• inherited at birth
• even if not in fact, people believe that it:
  • is an immutable/unchangeable part of who a person is
  • a group in which all share some essential similarity
  • a group which shares a history and interests

Thus, ethnicity/race:

• durable/hard to change once created; changes are slow
• shared (or imagination of shared) culture (language, religion), tradition, history
• even if not natural, people treat them “as if” they are natural

Primordialist definition of ethnicity differs from essentialism:

• It does not accept essentialist definition of ethnicity, but states that most people in practice adopt an essentialist view of ethnicity (“ethno-biological Ethnic Transmission and Acquisition Model”).

• Gil-White proposes several hypotheses that derive from this.

• Most people are “essentialists”

• Belief in essentialism

\(\to\) acting as-if groups are essential

\(\to\) even behavior of those w/out essentialist beliefs is essentialist

• Ethno-biological/essentialist way of thinking is innate in human psychology \(\to\) will repeatedly emerge, not a function of historical context

• Changes in ethnicity can only occur slowly over time; not a result of individual choice

Gil-White surveys people’s “essentialist beliefs” in Mongolia

Is this sufficient to support primordialism?

• Is this “innate”?: limited sample,in one context, at one time
• Is essentialist view dominant?: nearly half of people open to ‘switching’ ethnicity of adopted child
• What do survey responses mean: answering survey questions \(\neq\) behavior in real-world settings
• Why these essential descent based rules?: why isn’t ethnicity inherited from mother? or why isn’t there a special mixed-group category (e.g. “mulatto”)?

Interviews with teens and young adults who are second generation Afro-Caribbean immigrants

• How do they experience and identify with ethnic and racial categories?

• Most choose between “African American” and a Afro-Caribbean (e.g. Jamaican, Haitian) identity

First-generation (Parents)

• distinguish themselves as different ethnic group than African Americans (black Americans)
• invoke cultural/value distinctions (often negative racial stereotypes)
• perceive themselves as having “higher” ethnic/racial status

Second-generation: ‘Ethnic’ Response

People who embraced ethnic status as “Afro-Caribbean”: Jamaican, Haitian, etc.

• in 2nd generation, loss of visible/audible cues lead them to be categorized as “black”
• work to get others to recognize them in chosen identity, not as “black”
• compare themselves to Black Americans; explain success because whites view them as different group

Distinguish themselves from Black Americans

• continue to espouse negative views of Black Americans
• do not view racism as a problem, does not affect them

Second-generation: ‘Ethnic’ Response

Face pressure to conform in all black settings, so engage in code-switching: able to belong as “black” in some contexts, not “black” in others.

Second-generation: ‘American’ Response

People who reject ethnic status as “Afro-Caribbean”, embrace “Black” identity

• adoption of Black identity and culture
• understand that they are seen as “black” by others
• reject parents’ negative views of Black Americans
• acknowledge Afro Caribbean heritage, but do not emphasize it

First-generation: ‘Immigrant’ Response

For people who recently arrive as immigrants and who maintain connections in home country:

• Don’t view “black American” or “Afro-Caribbean” identities as relevant
• Invoke identities that are relevant to their country of origin

1. Change in ethnicity takes place rapidly, often a result of individual choice

2. Individuals can shape how others perceive/label them: not constrained by ‘essentialist’ mindset

3. Same individuals may be categorized differently by different people, in different contexts

4. Immigrants are explicitly aware of these issues: essentialist mindset is not “innate” psychologically

One key reason that primordialism fails:

• there are many possible identities that people could claim:

  • e.g.: black, African, American, Haitian/Jamaican, Afro-Caribbean, Catholic?, and possibly even White, Afro-Caribbean Immigrant (e.g. Muhajir)

• if primordialism is correct, which one will innately be seen as “Essential”?

identification: the active process of categorizing a person as a member of a group or category

• may be done as self-identification
• may identify others

To understand ethnicity, need to focus on how people identify themselves, how they are identified by others

Can anybody identify as any ethnic/racial category?

What limits are there to identifying as a member of a group?