Covering The Coverage: On Ben Vargas And What It Means To Be “Ethnic”

A story on Ben Vargas, the Latino fire fighter who joined 17 white, non-Latino firemen in a lawsuit against New Haven for the city’s decision forgo a test for promotions often failed by minorities, asked whether Latinos were “ethnics or a racial minority.” The author’s take seemed to be that, no, they were not a racial minority. To which we ask, “How did you come to this conclusion?” and also “what, exactly, is ‘an ethnic?’”

The article’s author, Providence-based writer Froma Harrop, recalls a discussion she had with The Dallas Morning News columnist Richard Estrada in which she told him she felt that “Latinos didn’t seem so much a racial minority to me as just another ethnic group.” Estrada, says Harrop replied, “Yes.”

Harrop does not go into the specifics of that particular discussion, but there are a few things about what she did choose to mention that we feel bear calling out or clarification. For one, the racialization of Latinos in the U.S. is complicated. So, while it true to say that Latinos cannot be a racial minority because they are not comprised of a monolithic race of people, it is also true that we are a group of people who are consistently racialized on many levels. At Guanabee, we often poke fun at the idea that Latinos are “brown,” but this is an actual perception of us shared by many and is reflected in the way Latinos are treated and discussed in this country. The fact is, if you happen to possess certain physical characteristics, you’re more likely to be ostracized. If you don’t happen to “look Latino,” often enough your Latinoness is called into question or you’re allowed to “pass.” The perception of Latinos as a race holds very real consequences. So, while one can feel totally justified in saying that, no, Latinos are absolutely not a racial minority, one would also be justified is saying that, yes, actually, we very much are.

Perhaps more troubling to us, however, is the idea that because Harrop cites one discussion with one Latino, she has reached a conclusion about all Latinos. That’s a pretty slippery slope. Richard Estrada can and did speak for Richard Estrada - his experiences, his opinions, his ideas as gathered from his research through his specific lens. The fact that Estrada would often “trace the nuances of the Mexican-American experience while framing it in the long sweep of American history” does not place him in the position to be a mouthpiece for all Mexican-Americans, much less all U.S.-Latinos. To insinuate otherwise is to also insinuate that Latinos are incapable of dissenting thoughts or opinions. We don’t equate the thoughts expressed in one white writer’s editorial piece to those of all white writers, so why would we do so with a Latino writer unless we find Latinos, as a group, to be some uncomplicated and misunderstood “other?”

The same hold true for Harrop’s troubling portrayal of Vargas as some sort of example for the Latino community, even seemingly calling out his “Latino cred” by pointing out that he likes rice and beans. Vargas’ views on affirmative action are his own. He speaks for Ben Vargas. He does not speak for all Latinos. He does not speak for all men. He does not speak for all firefighters. His views might prove to be palatable to some, and his ethnicity might tempt those to make the argument that “See? Some minorities are against affirmative action!” but “some,” obviously, does not mean “all.” This isn’t a peon or a token; this is a person with his own unique set of ideas and convictions.

And, then, there’s this:

The whole concept seems dated in the age of Obama. But to the extent that affirmative action made sense, it did so only for American blacks. African-Americans had suffered a unique trauma of slavery and Jim Crow. No other group came to this country in chains.

Sure, Latinos can talk of discrimination and nasty remarks, but their experience has been largely an immigrant one. Every group that comes here gets beaten up.

Novelist Willa Cather urged greater respect for the Danish women who did laundry and cooked meals on the Nebraska frontier in the 19th century. A hundred years ago, Cajun children were punished for speaking French in Louisiana schools.

As the American generations move away from their foreign origins, the old culture tends to rest more in recipes and less in the sense of being different from co-workers who root for the same football team. That combo platter of identity, rather than race, is what makes Latinos seem ethnic — and many middle-class blacks, as well.

Latinos are ethnic. As are blacks of all classes. As are white people from myriad national origins. We’re not sure how the concept of ethnicity has come to bypass all white people and has come to label anyone who happens to be thought of as outside the “norm,” but, hey. There there it is.

We won’t go into Harrop’s decision to treat experiences with prejudice in this country as some sort of Olympics of oppression except to ask how, exactly, this is helpful in terms of discussing race relations.

The fact remains that every group is made up of individuals, and these individuals have their own unique experiences with identity politics. Yes, the discrimination of many Latinos in this country has been as a result of their immigration status… as well as the color of their skin. Or their language. Or their income. Or their religion. Or their political beliefs.

Yes, the discrimination of many black people in the U.S. has been a result of racial prejudice… as well as their immigration status. As well as their income. And religion. And political beliefs.

So we guess all we have to ask Froma Harrop is “Who are you to decide these things for other people? Why are you qualified to make a definitive statement in regards to the experiences of others?”

Think on it. We’ll be shelving beans in the ethnic food aisle if you need us.

Are Latinos Ethnics or a Racial Minority? [Real Clear Politics]