Barrack Obama is coloured but why is he labeled an African American?

Question

Barrack Obama has a black father from Kenya and an American caucasian mother, so in other words he is mixed and coloured, but why is it that he is labeled an African American or black by some people instead of calling him European-African American? He has European and African ancestors and heritage and he lives in America, hence Euro-Afro American.

Answer 1

.

Our society really needs to try to begin to understand that
the 'African-American' (AA) 'Ethnic' group is *not* the
same group as the’Black American' (BA) 'Race' group --
that the two (2) terms are *not* synonymous and that the
two (2) terms should *not* be used inter-changeably.

We are *not* speaking of ‘semantics’ here – but rather
– the BAs & AAs are two different groups of people.

The AAs are the (largely Mixed-Race) ETHNIC group.

The BAs are the (Mono-Raced) RACE group.

As confusing as it seems -- the U.S. government
[due to racism & wanting to stigmatize the part
of their lineage that was from Africa which, by
the way, is only one part of their lineage] ---

has labeled those individuals who are the known
"descendents of the survivors" of the system of
chattel-slavery found in the USA as being AAs
(the hyphen is used in reference to acknowledging
the fact that most of them are Mixed-Race,
with African & non-African blood lines)

AND

has labeled those people who are "volitional immigrants"
who are directly from places such as the continent of
African, the West Indies, etc. -- as being BAs
(with the word 'Black' used in reference to acknowledging
the fact that they are of a Mono-racial full-Black lineage).

In addition, it should also be remembered that – although
some AAs adhere to a socio-political ‘identity’ that is
often described by the slang term of “black”—the AAs
are actually *not* a "Race" group at all -- but rather
they *are* a largely Mixed-Race 'Ethnic' group
(and the socio-political ‘identity’ that a person chooses
*does not* change their racially-mixed ancestral lineage).

Most (+70%) of the people born to two (2) parents who
are of the AA ‘Ethnic’ group are are of a Multi-Racially
‘Mixed’ (MGM) lineage – while the people to two (2)
parents who are of the BA ‘Racial’ group – on the
other hand – are of a Mono-Racially ‘Black’ lineage.

There is a big difference between a largely Multi-racial
'Ethnic' group and between a Mono-racial 'Race group.

In addition, there is also a big difference between
one's socio-political 'identity' (ex. "black") and
one's ancestral racial 'lineage' (ex. 'Mixed').

Just because a person adheres to a given
socio-political 'identity' does *not* change
the composition of their ancestral 'lineage'.

Also -- the 'One-Drop' Rule (the false teaching that
'any amount' of Black ancestral lineage make a
person "full black") is nothing more than pure-racism.

The racist 'One-Drop Rule' (used only by the United
States government, by the way) was created during
the antebellum, chattel-slavery era by White racial
supremacist in order to get people to believe the
false racist myth that the so-called White "race"
was "pure" and to falsely view the Black "racial"
admixture (even the slightest amount) within
someone's ancestral lineage as being "tainted".

To embrace the 'One-Drop Rule' is the equivalent
of BOTH embracing "racism" and embracing
the false teaching that a Mixed-Race
person's Black lineage is "tainted".

My advice is that a non-Racist should *not*
embrace the concept of the 'One-Drop Rule'
-- as "Black blood" is *not* "tainted" -- and
should never be perceived or embraced
as being so (not even in the name
of so-called "pride" and "unity").

In addition, legally-speaking, attempted forcible
application of the racist 'One-Drop Rule' -- against
any individual or group -- was made illegal and ruled
as unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court
in 1967 via the case of 'Loving vs. The State of Virginia'.

Through the 'Loving vs. Virginia' case, the U.S.
Supreme Court, ruled against both all of the laws
banning Interracial marriage -- and -- also ruled
that any so-called law which forcibly applied the
'One Drop Rule' -- was racist, discriminatory,
illegal, unconstitutional, and non-enforcible.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1402

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1400

Related Links:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MGM-Mixed
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FGM-Mixed

------------------------PLEASE NOTE---------------------

--- Dr. Luigi Caveli-Sforza, who is the Executive
Director of the Human Genome Project and the
world's foremost authority on human genetics
has both tested and proven that more that 70%
of all AAs have a full ancestral lineage which
consists of +20-30% White / European and
more than +25% Amerindian bloodlines.

--- That means that the 'average' (+70%) person
born to two (2) parents who are both members
of the AA Ethnic group actually has slightly
less than 50% Black / African blood lineage
found in his or her full-ancestral lineage.

For more information -- see supporting links listed below:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1399
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1032
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1034
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/991
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1570
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/1573

--------------------------- ADDED NOTE ---------------------

It should also be noted that -- contrary to popular belief and
myth spread among many groups who are not educated or
informed on the whole topic -- it was not the group that is
currently being referred to as being the African-Americans
(AAs) -- who chose this term for them -- but rather --
like so many of the other terms used to describe
them -- this term was also implemented by
the United States federal government
(starting with the 1990 United
States 'Census Bureau' Forms).

If a person insists on spreading the 'myth' that it was the
AAs who chose this term for themselves -- it is clearly
indicative of the fact that they have never even once
actually studied the entire topic and are simply basing
their comments on assumption-based ignorance --
rather than objective facts and empirical evidence.

.

Answer 2

my little cousin is half white half black.... and others think of him as African American.... that's actually a really good question I didn't think about til now. I would assume it's because of his color tone ismore closely matched to his african american father so people automatically label as such, though his mother is very much white, he will never be called caucasion. It's a matter of skin tone color in which people decide to label the person, and automatically match that skin tone to the closest ethnic background in their family roots. Though I must wonder... I've seen white people from Africa but people don't call them african americans....hmmm

Answer 3

Good point! African American, implies that "American" means of European descent. That's pretty darn ethnocentric!

To complicate this issue, Jesse Jackson, a prominent black spokesperson, suggested the label "African American" be substituted in place of the term "black".

Answer 4

Because it's too complicated. If we played by those rules, I could insist that no, that isn't good enough and want to be known as a German-Dutch-English-Welsh-American Indian-American.

We aren't insulting him when we say he is a man African-American. We are just making it easier to identify him when a stranger has to meet him at the airport. If we called him just as American, he wouldn't be recognizable by that description. I would hope that anyone of African blood would be so proud of their ancestry that it wouldn't bother them to be identified as such. There's a lot to take pride in afterall.

EDIT: I disagree with those who say there's no need to define race. It isn't a racist thing. It's a convenience thing. For instance, I have American Indian blood but if I were to describe myself that way, no one would recognize me when looking for me in a crowd. The only thing that attaches racism to a description of skin color is the biases associated with those descriptions and it is those biases that need to be altered. Until that time, no word attached to a particular race will be adequate. To say that there is no race but the human race is to deny national, cultural and ethnic pride - something we are all entitled to. There is no need to erase our entitlement to self pride. Just the need to eradicate the negativity directed toward each individual race and encourage the fact that we all have a right to be proud of our ancestry. This is one of the things that has recently become my pet peeve. - All us Americans insisting Iraqi lives have no value in comparison to our own. A death perpetrated upon one race is no better and no worse than that imposed upon another. Rather it is my neighbor down the street or, an innocent Iraqi civilian, makes no difference to me. All bloodshed is equally unacceptable. Until we accept this notion into our hearts, there will always be racism regardless of the words we use to describe ourselves or, others. And it is when we reach that level of consciousness regarding all of humanity that racism will end.

Answer 5

Maybe we should make a name for mixed races other than simply "mixed?" Centuries from now, due to multi-culturalism, we're all going to be mixed anyway - and no one will be able to tell if anyone has any specific racial roots. It might as well have a name other than the generic "mixed." Such a generic term is what drives people to label themselves, and others, into a pre-established racial definition.

Answer 6

He loves the idea of being called an african american so that he can get easy votes.

Answer 7

Same way Tiger Woods is labeled African American but he does not describe himself that way. Its the Media. They deny their other origins in Woods case his mother I believe is Thai.

Answer 8

It's the one drop rule. A Black person could have a white mother, but other people will always see that person as Black.

It's funny how we can't see the person as white if they are mixed, but nope it's always that one drop rule.

Sadly, our minds are still influenced by racist men many years ago.

The concept of race is retarded. It has been scientifically disproved. It is nothing but a social concept and we don't have to differentiate human beings into different races, because we are one race!

Answer 9

He's a black person, and he's an American citizen. That's why. There is no other theories, explanations, or answers. He's black, and an American citizen. Even Jamaican/Americans are called African-American! I'll bet you all the money I've got they don't like that!

Answer 10

Foo-foo semantics, at its root. It's all about political correctness, to identify one by an ethnic classification -- with the exception of whites.

I'm white; my ancestors came from Ireland, but no one could possibly classify me as anything but white.

Answer 11

well, labeled by who? It is not an official kind of thing. Any person including hinself is free to call him what ever you want. So it really does not matter. All people should just check "other" anyway