so, while this doesn't make nate silver any less one of my imaginary boyfriends, i though it worthwhile to point out how even the smartest analysts are at the mercy of the problematic "hispanic" fallacy.
i was reading some fivethirtyeight posts about sotomayor's nomination, and i came across this post, where nate debunks the idea that "non-white hispanic" voters are more opposed to marriage equality than white voters.
so, although i really like the point silver's making, and wouldn't be able to question his actual math even if i wanted to, i (legitimately or not) decided to cherry pick this to bring up a major issue in the way we think about voting blocs and race as a whole. maybe this is just my inherent qualitative (anthropological) bent, but isn't a far more interesting and telling question the ways that opinions among "hispanics" differ? the category "non-white hispanic" is almost useless, really, for predictive purposes. there is such a world of difference among the experience and political calculus of, say, a first generation chicano voter in southern california, a second generation voter of cuban descent in miami, and a self-identified newyorican whose grandparents moved to the states 60 years ago, that it seems pretty inadequate to talk about some mythical category of "non-white hispanics" as a coherent voting bloc.
to be fair, it isn't like it's silver's fault. it's what he's got to work with. race in the united states is a deeply-ingrained, all-encompassing, and oversimplified category-creating discourse perpetuated by everything from talking heads on CNN to the way we apply for our driver's licenses. it just seems that in a nation where, for instance, the "non-white hispanic" population is increasing in size and diversity, that we can't rely on these overly broad categories to accurately tell us anything important about the way we and our fellow citizens actually behave. or perhaps more to the point, our continued reliance on these categories of understanding tells us a lot, and none of it comforting, about the way we continue to behave towards our fellow citizens.
Showing posts with label imaginary boyfriends. Show all posts
Showing posts with label imaginary boyfriends. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Saturday, April 18, 2009
your new imaginary boyfriend
if he's not already.
junot diaz, author of the INCOMPARABLE "brief and wondrous life of oscar wao", is charming and witty and insightful and, well, wonderful. this should be required listening.
Labels:
books,
imaginary boyfriends,
shameless love letters
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
