Mixedness in an American context Sample Clauses

Mixedness in an American context. The notion of ‘race’ mixing can be traced back to the plantations of the southern states of the USA29 when forced sex between white male owners and black slave labourers produced black/white offspring (Ifekwunigwe, 1999). In order to ensure that the ‘mixed race’ offspring became slave labourers, the ‘one drop rule’ was instigated. This meant that any known African ancestor made a person black so the offspring could be economically and sexually exploited by the white male owners (Xxxxxx and Phoenix, 2002). The one-drop rule, which literally means one known drop of African blood,30 has been an ‘efficient tool for racial clarity and racial domination’31 (Spickard, 2001, p. 77). In order to prevent racial mixing in the United States, interracial marriages were xxxxxxx00 in many states which included marriages between Europeans and ‘Mongolians’ (Xxxxxxxx, 1994 in Xxxxxxxx, 1996, p. 197). In 1913 the Alien Land Law was passed which prevented Japanese nationals from purchasing land in California (Xxxxxxxx, 1996). During this period Xxxxx Xxxxxx, a white minister was quoted as saying: Near my home is an eighty-acre tract of as fine land as there is in California. On that tract lives a Japanese. With that Japanese lives a white woman. In that woman’s arms is a baby. What is that baby? It isn’t white. It isn’t Japanese. It is a germ of the mightiest problem that ever faced this state; a problem that will make the black problem in the South look white (Spickard, 1989 p. 25, in Xxxxxxxx, 1996, p. 198}. 29 ‘Mixed race’ is linked to the notion of ‘race’, which was reified by the European scientific theories of race. Such theories were introduced in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in order to justify economic and social policies such as plantation slavery and colonisation (Xxxxxx and Phoenix, 2002). They were based on biology and they maintained that black and white people belonged to different species (Xxxxxx and Xxxxxxx, 0000; Banton, 2009). There was also a racial hierarchy, at the top of which were ‘White’ Europeans because it was the White Europeans who had created such theories (Xxxxxx and Phoenix, 2002). Non-whites were positioned on ‘intermediate rungs of this evolutionary ladder’ (Ifekwunigwe, 2004 9). In other words, whites were considered superior and blacks were considered inferior. The powerful black/white binary distinction was a commonsense way to easily distinguish between inferior blacks and superior whites.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Mixedness in an American context

  • DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES In connection with the performance of this Agreement, the Municipality/Sponsor shall cause its contractors to cooperate with the State in meeting its commitments and goals with regard to the utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs) and will use its best efforts to ensure that DBEs will have opportunity to compete for subcontract work under this Agreement. Also, in this connection the Municipality or Municipality/Sponsor shall cause its contractors to undertake such actions as may be necessary to comply with 49 CFR Part 26. As a sub-recipient under 49 CFR Part 26.13, the Municipality/Sponsor hereby makes the following assurance. The Municipality/Sponsor shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of any United States Department of Transportation (USDOT)-assisted contract or in the administration of its Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program or the requirements of 49 CFR Part 26. The Municipality/Sponsor shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of the United States Department of Transportation-assisted contracts. The New York State Department of Transportation’s DBE program, as required by 49 CFR Part 26 and as approved by the United States Department of Transportation, is incorporated by reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement. Upon notification to the recipient of its failure to carry out its approved program, the USDOT may impose sanctions as provided for under part 26 and may, in appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.).

  • Illness in the Immediate Family ‌ An employee may use up to one-half of his or her annual sick leave allocation in any calendar year in the event of illness or a spouse, child, parent, or domestic partner. At the City's request the employee will provide satisfactory evidence of the facts justifying such absence.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.