After living and working in PR for some years, I am still always perplexed when a friendly Puerto Rican brings up the issue of racism and how it does not exist in PR. Perhaps this is an attempt to try to portray PR in its best light, or it could be wishful thinking. Whatever the case, it could not be further from the truth.
So what accounts for this disconnect of whether PR is racist or not? I believe most PR have an overly simplistic notion of what constitutes racism. Sure, the KKK does not exist in PR, there is no history of lynching, and the mixed population of people get along relatively peacefully.
But what the Puerto Rican misses is that its variant of anti-black racism is WORSE than that of the US mainland. How could I say that, you ask? Well, racial discrimination is an everyday phenomenon in PR. This finally was brought to light by Reggaeton star Tego Calderon who hails from Loiza, PR, the town most associated with black Puerto Ricans. Calderon wrote that racism is worse in PR because it is universally denied.
This denial comes in the form of Black Puerto Ricans claiming there is no racism, yet they consider themselves white on self-identification forms. It comes in the form of Black Puerto Ricans claiming there is no racism, yet they usually do not even consider attending university in PR as it "is just not for them." It comes in the form of Black Puerto Ricans claiming there is no racism, yet they know that the highest paying professions and most lucrative jobs are reserved for "Los Finos," or the white elite Puerto Ricans.
One other fallacy in Puerto Rico is the "We are all Puerto Ricans, whatever our color so we have not racism here." This may be true, but most Americans consider themselves "all Americans" regardless of color, but that does not preclude the existence of racism there. The family of all Puerto Ricans still has a color caste system that treats people differently according to color, regardless of their status as a Puerto Rican.
Yet another fallacy from the island is "Puerto Ricans are not racist because most of us have some level of black blood." How ridiculous is that notion? Adolf Hitler is said to have Jewish ancestors, yet he was more anti-Jewish than any other person in history. Further, many white Americans have native American and even African blood, but that never stopped them from killing natives or discriminating against blacks over the years.
From a personal standpoint, a friend of mine came to Puerto Rico as a manager of a pretty big organization. His status as an African American was a bone of contention when he began instituting changes in an under-performing institution. He was resisted tooth and nail, falsely accused of managerial misconduct, and even stereotyped as creating fear in the office. After a tumultuous year, my friend had enough documented evidence to begin firing people and replacing them with high performers with integrity. But his ordeal of insubordination from a few subordinates was based on his skin color as most whites in PR could not handle a black person in a position of authority over them.
Finally, when a PR gentleman proudly boasted to me how PR has no racism, I asked him, "Could a black Puerto Rican ever be elected Governor of PR?" He thought for a moment, and said, "Probably not, I see your point."
So for all of the racist history of the US mainland, African Americans are well represented in the middle and upper classes, attend university in the thousands and increasingly obtain advanced degrees. They have multi-millionaires who are not associated with sports or entertainment, and even the current President of the USA is African American. In contrast, black PR languish in isolation on the island and they are shunned from partaking in the means of social mobility reserved for non-blacks there.
There is indeed racism in Puerto Rico, and it is high time to stop the charade down there. Having said that, black Puerto Ricans themselves have the onus of stopping the denial and starting the move to educate themselves and build institutions that increase their progress. Until that happens, they will remain the ridiculed demographic group that does not realize that the joke is on them.
Americans tend to be masters of euphemism. This is especially true in regard to exploring issues of an ethnic or racial dimension. This blog seeks to nudge debate toward honesty and openness in a manner that is not intended to offend; but offend it likely will.
Showing posts with label affluence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label affluence. Show all posts
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
To Be Successful, Male, and Black: Common Perceptions.
In my estimation, roughly 50 to 80 percent of people anywhere in the world are neutral at the sight of a black man who appears polished and successful. However, the other 20 to 50 percent tend to fall into one or more of the following categories:The Inspired Onlooker: These will see you as an interesting person to get to know, or a paradigm to emulate. These people are well-intentioned and the females are most open to dating black men. Think of these as the "Wow, a successful black man, he must be a remarkably intelligent and charming individual to get where he is today" crowd.
The Validated Onlooker: These individuals may be very successful themselves or well on their way to being successful. They see the successful black man as a validation of their view that all people can make it given the right opportunities and life choices. Think of these as the "We are all the same given the right circumstances in which to thrive" crowd.
The Patronizing Onlooker: While not ill-intentioned, these individuals only see you through the lens of stereotype. This is the person that does not pick up on your behavior, dress, and mannerisms, but your skin color. These individuals may seek to develop rapport with you by uttering some hip hop slogan, or by abruptly patting you the back as if you are some athlete who just scored. This is the "I wonder which he is, an athlete or entertainer" crowd. In my experience, this type seems to be most prevalent in Asian and East European countries and those with high poverty rates.
The Resentful Onlooker: This is a person of which you should be wary. They may simply watch you with an expressionless demeanor, or they may actually engage you in conversation in an effort to discover what you are all about. Whatever the case, they do not like you as you remind them of their own failure and insecurity. They are the "How in the world can this black guy have his stuff together, and I can't?" They need to be let off the hook by learning that you are a cheat, a fraud, or a fool and that is what they seek to discover by interacting with you. They may try to provoke you with some verbal slight or insult to gauge your reaction, or they may simply watch your every move. They represent the disingenuous, smiling stranger that you know has an ulterior motive.
The Self-Preservationist Onlooker: This is the most dangerous of all. This is the person that seeks to destroy you or your well-being because his/her world view does not comport with what you represent when compared with what they represent. Your very presence is interpreted as a threat to their relevance. These individuals range from the unemployed, to the lonely skinhead who wants you out of his country because women pay more attention to you. But, more often, they are the black female co-workers who sees you as a challenge to their positions in the organization. Just as the skinhead seeks to destroy your physical being, the black female self-preservationist onlooker seeks to destroy your reputation, your respect in the eyes of others, and your place as a credible contributor in the organization. Whether it is by luring you into conflict or setting you up for termination, this person wants you demolished as a threat to her social position.
It takes experience to quickly determine if someone embodies one of the above profiles. Sometimes people exhibit elements of more than one profile, and yet others can drift from one into another with time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
