Many people today correlate culture with race or other binding aspects of human nature. Judith Goode explains the importance of teaching cultural diversity so as to counteract these ideas. It is important for people to understand what culture is, how it is shaped by society and power, and how it differs from region to region. Capitalism and colonialism led to the homogeneous perception of Western culture while anthropology was left to study “the Other.” In the 1970s, anthropology began to view culture as dynamic – a product of constant changes – rather than defined by geographic factors. Cultural boundaries shift due to power struggles and conflict. The shifting boundaries crate a different connotation or interpretation to old customs and practices. Our individual identities shift with out interactions with various institutions and thus affects our personal classification within the cultural divisions.
The US is harder to characterize as one culture because it is a “nation of immigrants.” Studies focus on abstract ideas of unity and liberal democracy when describing a common culture. This is wrong, we need to accept the difference among groups of people. More importantly we have to learn that cultures and cultural boundaries are changing. The shift has to be from “melting pot” to “unity in diversity.” This pluralist view allows people to retain their individual identities while also contributing to the over-all defining nature of the United States. Goode argues against the typical classifications of: white, black, Native American, Asian American, and Hispanic. She is saying that this clumps together the vastly diverse group of European immigrants. These divisions are based on social constructions found in our laws and political system rather than cultural or biological distinctions.
The extension of the privileged status, white, involves political and economic shifts through out history. One example is the Irish. In the mid 19th century US in Northern states, they held the lowest social status and were given unskilled, low paid work. During the Abolition period Irish citizens were an important voting public and this led to their increased incorporation within the larger white population. A second example are Jews, who were constantly discriminated against throughout history. Originally they were discouraged from carrying on their old habits particularly language and diet. During WWII and right after political deals gave lower classes better housing, education, and benefits. Their increased wealth and sensitivity over Nazis allowed Jews to join the ranks of the suburban whites. The focus shifter to a discrimination against Southern blacks who were placed in poor housing in the North, exclusion for public programs, and general exclusion from the (white) middle class. Whitening is often associated with class ascendance. Such as with Asians, some have been allowed to move into the suburban areas but most still maintain to be negatively racialized.
Before 1930 Native Americans were pressured to move off their land. There was also a push for assimilation. People who resisted we just shuttled onto plots of land regardless of their tribal differences and conflicts. The New Deal wanted to have the groups split by their cultural and religious differences but instead the Indian leaders were unified through the program as they worked in Washington. This pan- Native American consciousness was strengthened through the Red Power movement in the 1960/1970s. In 1978 an effort to distinguish amongst the tribes according to historical documentation turned the groups on one another as they sought recognition by the state. Some groups like the Lumbee had a strong collective identity but lacked documentation and thus were denied rights of an “authentic” tribe.
Asian Americans as suffered a similar grouping issue. They people who come from diverse areas such as Vietnam or Korea are easily classified. But Southern Asians, like Indian or Pakistanis lack the “Asian” characteristics such as a similar language or religion. African pan-ethnicity is also very muddled. There are great differences between the Caribbean of African descent, African Americans, and Africa’s immigrants. Some of these people resist to the racialization as black. Some Caribbean blacks work to identify more with Hispanic islanders. Many of these pan movements are driven by political power, such as an enforced ethnicity or the need for unity in civil rights movements.
Ethnic groups are made not born. One example is the differences between Italian immigrants on the coasts. On the West Coast (California) the Italians worked hard to rise above the Asian and Mexican immigrants. From the 1860s onward they struggles to reach the middle class. In northern states and cities, such as Philadelphia they were discriminated against and put in lowly jobs, such as construction, and tenement housing. Post war many Italians were absorbed into the white societies and became small business owners and political leaders. South Philadelphia is often classified as “Italian” by the cities inhabitants even though the area was never demographically dominated by Italians, rather shared by blacks and Irish and now shifting towards a heavily Vietnamese influence. There was a more welcoming community post-WWII when Italians began to marry other white Catholics, however the spouses were typically shuttled into the pan-Italian identity. They maintained the ethnic foods as a way of carrying on tradition.
Polish origin people were studied in Philadelphia and Chicago. The early wave created the food symbols and music that to this day is associated with Polish culture. The new wave was university professor and skilled artisans who were used to an urban lifestyle. When they settled in the Polish American square in Philly they were put off by the agrarian dances and food.
Transnationalism is common in our current society. People remain in touch with their families and root form the “old” country. They also send new wealth back to help with political and economic projects creating a dual interest. Movements like this show that culture isn’t strictly defined by where you live and what food you eat, it is a matter of who you are and how your surroundings portray you.
