Dear Editor,
Reference is made to the column `Fetishizing of the Black mixed child’ by Akola Thompson (Feb 12). This “fetishizing” is not accompanied by appropriate political behaviour or family responsibility as the country remains as (if not more) divided today as it was in the 1950s and even two hundred years ago. Also, mixed children are placed in a distinct category, with Akola listing some classifications, and seen or treated differently from the dominant races of their ancestors. Regrettably, many of the children of this fetishizing are ‘abandoned’ (not adequately provided for by their fathers with child support). Nevertheless, Akola is applauded for the courage to write on an issue that politicians and scholars prefer to avoid even though our nation and politics are defined by racial identity and we have limited cross-ethnic social relations. Virtually no other writer from any ethnicity writes on the subject.
Fetishizing about Black Mixed offspring has not resulted in increased parental responsibility or eradicated our ethnic problem or healed our nation from ethnic recriminations; just last September, there was racial violence in West Berbice. Also, the attempted election rigging of last March was race related. Fetishizing did not lead to free and fair elections in 2020 or in elections between 1966 and 1992. And fetishizing did not change the public’s attitude towards people of ethnicities different from their own. Also, while it is noted that the mixed population has grown from 6% in the 1960s to 20% today, single parent (led mostly by female) families have also exploded in that category. What does that say about the ‘fetishizing’ in terms of family responsibility?
Mixed race identity and ethnic identity in general are very complex subjects that pose serious challenges in Sociology, Anthropology, and even in political science. One solution is not applicable to all challenges. Unlike during the colonial period, mixed race children are not easily defined today except in the US or UK where someone with even ‘a drop’ of “Black ancestry” is defined as Black. In Guyana or in the Caribbean, a mixed race child (Black and White) was/is classified as ‘Coloured’, not Black, and at one time enjoyed rare privileges in the society. But in America, he or she is ‘Black’ based on “the one drop principle”. Thus, Barack Obama (Irish American mother and Black Kenyan father) or Meghan Markle (White father and Mixed Black American mother) or Kamala Harris (Indian, Black, White ancestry) is not defined as ‘Mixed’ or ‘Coloured’ or ‘biracial’ or ‘triracial’ but as Black American. Kamala Harris is also at times referred to as Asian American or Indian American depending on which group embraces her or where she speaks and what aspect of her identity is emphasized for political advantage. Obama’s half sister (from an Indonesian father) is labeled as Asian American.
In Guyana and throughout the Caribbean, mixed race kids have been caught in the middle in social relations with other groups depending on which of the race (s) accept or reject them. The time period also defined their acceptance or rejection in the Caribbean. During colonial rule in Guyana, for example, though rejected by their White ancestors, the Coloureds (White-African Mixed) were embraced by the Africans. In today’s Guyana, not much has changed in spite of fetishizing. Also, defining the mixed person is increasingly becoming difficult because of several ancestral roots – English, Scottish, Portuguese, Chinese, Indian, Black, Amerindian, and even others. The dominant family may embrace the child but the community may not or the entire family may be ostracized. For most of our history, as eminent scholar David Lowenthal penned, Colour (or Black-White Mixed) defined us. During colonial rule, ‘Whiteness’ was preferred. Parents (Indians and Blacks) wanted to have children with ‘White’ features or nice, fair complexion.
The writings by social scientists the world over reveal there is increasing cross ethnic hybridization but they also note that ethnic disharmony is also growing. People are more divided today and continue to show or express dislike for others not of their ethnicity.
The anecdotal and empirical evidence for Guyana has shown that some 200 years of ‘hybrid mixing’ of races or fetishizing, to use Akola’s term, has not reduced ethnic conflict in Guyana or in any other multi-ethnic country. Politicians and the public at large should confront the issue of ethnic identity to make every group comfortable so that everyone can maximize their contributions to national development.
Yours truly,
Dr. Vishnu Bisram
