AHC/WI/PC: African Americans 25% of US Population

Hate to say it, but you have to define it...

Today, "African American" is a census category that is, essentially, self-selected...

As has been said, the only things the US goverment continues to define by blood are horses, dogs, and Native Americans/Indians.

The last is for reasons that have as much to deal with internal tribal politics as national, of course, so as odd as it sounds today, it will presumably remain a matter of public policy.

And given the increasing levels of emigration from post-colonial Africa to the US, there's an inherent question.

Best,

Yeah, the whole identification as Native American includes actively practicing tribal rituals/culture and stuff like that. My son is adopted from Guatemala and any idiot can clearly tell from looking at him that his ethnic makeup is more Mayan Indian than anything else but ethnically he is considered Latino, not Native American.
 

TinyTartar

Banned
There's literally dozens of these terms. Not to pick on the Spanish, but look up the cast a lists...

Quadroon, octoroon, zombo, high yellow, etc..

Like I said - rabbit holes.

Best,

Seeing as almost none of these groups had the social power of the Peninsulares and Creoles, it almost became redundant at times how many terms they had. The differences in the groups I think may have been important from the standpoint of who was at one point eligible for slavery and who wasn't, but over time, it just became a confusing amalgamation of disenfranchised and discriminated groups.

Its kind of like the difference between a pansexual genderfluid person and a genderqueer non-binary bisexual. I have no idea what either of these terms mean or if they are even real but to somebody somewhere, it is important.
 

Driftless

Donor
To be sure, the definitions change based on who is using them, the intent of usage, and the situation as well. It's very easy for those definitions to get emotionally charged very quickly, whether intended or not.
 
To be sure, the definitions change based on who is using them, the intent of usage, and the situation as well. It's very easy for those definitions to get emotionally charged very quickly, whether intended or not.
Yeah, 'black' or 'african american' can both be said with enough hatred by racists to make them as nasty as anything labelled a slur.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
True ... and given that about the only thing that

Yeah, the whole identification as Native American includes actively practicing tribal rituals/culture and stuff like that. My son is adopted from Guatemala and any idiot can clearly tell from looking at him that his ethnic makeup is more Mayan Indian than anything else but ethnically he is considered Latino, not Native American.

True ... and given that about the only thing that those who fall under the "Hispanic/Latino" criteria may have in common is a remote ancestor who wandered through the Iberian Peninsula at some point - and maybe some passing grasp of something resembling Spanish - that one is pretty damn elastic as well.

Best,
 

TFSmith121

Banned
True - hence my question to the OP, what

Seeing as almost none of these groups had the social power of the Peninsulares and Creoles, it almost became redundant at times how many terms they had. The differences in the groups I think may have been important from the standpoint of who was at one point eligible for slavery and who wasn't, but over time, it just became a confusing amalgamation of disenfranchised and discriminated groups.

True - hence my question to the OP, what would be a definition for AA.

Best,
 
"Mestizo" is really not the historical term of art you're looking for...

Not to go down the rabbit hole, but historically, it means something else entirely...;)

Best,

Ooh, well, I sort of got use to calling anyone with mixed race origin ( especially Hispanic Mestizos ) as Mestizo. It sort of stuck. Mestizo is my version of « coloured » if identifying coloured people (za).

But the one percent rule in America allows anyone darker than tan to be considered black which is weird because other parts of the world would identify the person as coloured (za).

Simply have a lot of interracial marriage and you have a lot more people identifying African-American on the census.
 

Benevolent

Banned
Honestly you don't need to increase children born or even take over other lands just utilize black americans as a viable workforce and lower the amount of immigrants coming in to fill those now mostly taken jobs.

It's really just that simple.

Ooh, well, I sort of got use to calling anyone with mixed race origin ( especially Hispanic Mestizos ) as Mestizo. It sort of stuck. Mestizo is my version of « coloured » if identifying coloured people (za).

But the one percent rule in America allows anyone darker than tan to be considered black which is weird because other parts of the world would identify the person as coloured (za).

Simply have a lot of interracial marriage and you have a lot more people identifying African-American on the census.

One Drop Rule was only enacted in the 20th century and even then outside of Louisiana never went past 1/8th-1/16th

To be black american is CULTURAL NOT BASED ON BLOOD QUANTUM.
 
Well... One obvious possibility would be for a different War of 1812 leading to New England secession. That would lower the number of whites without much affecting the number of blacks, so increase the percentage.

A REALLY different War of 1812 where the Brits/Canadians take and hold everything west of the Mississippi would keep the US penned in and provide for much less opportunity for white immigration to the US. If this were also coupled with a British/Canadian disdain for blacks, which is all too likely, sigh, so blacks escaping across the Mississippi are returned, this would keep white numbers down in the US and only marginally decrease black numbers, which would have the result desired by the OP.
 
Everything on here seems like it would work. And as has been said before, if you want the simplest way to go about it, just have less European immigration.
 
Top