Growth in the "hipster tribe"

Here's an image from Adrienne Keene of the Native Appropriations blog. She tweets:I made this today in response to @freshest33 making a reference to the "hipster tribe." Graph jokes? New high in nerdy. http://pic.twitter.com/tDIgxYyg

Good one! We can apply this to recent postings on the Census:

Natives aren't vanishing in Census
2010 Census brief on Natives

And on hipster headdresses:

Drew Barrymore in a headdress
Stereotypical "Run Wild" fashion shoot

Natives aren't vanishing in Census

Adrienne Keene writes about the 2010 Census brief on Natives in her Native Appropriations blog:

Complicating the 2010 US Census Native DataThe lead headline for the census press release is "2010 Census Shows Nearly Half of American Indians and Alaska Natives Report Multiple Races." I already, right there, see that as problematic, wrought with assumptions, and loaded with colonial underpinnings. But we all know I think that about most things. Ha.

To "over-sensitive" and "easily offended" me, the headline is a commentary on the "realness" of the American Indian population, loaded with western/colonial conceptions of blood quantum and racial purity as markers for belonging and identity. This, to me, screams "Real Indians are disappearing!!!" But since we have been "disappearing" for 500 years, despite our growing population numbers, I guess I shouldn't be surprised. The real number is 44% identify as more than one race, which is different to me than "nearly half." They could have just as easily said "56% of AI/AN population identifies solely as Native!" which tells a very different story. The majority of our peeps still identify as only AI or AN. We are not disappearing.

Reading the report (which is available in PDF and I highly recommend flipping through), there are many, many things they could have focused on, like the fact the Native population has increased at a rate much greater than the overall population, or that the ability to self-designate tribal group for the first time created new tribal categories (like "Hopi" being counted outside of "Pueblo"), but they instead focused in on the racial categories.Adrienne also notes something I've noticed before: the use of "tribal groupings" such as Cherokee, Choctaw, and Mexican American Indian. She writes:I also have some problems with the groupings erasing individual tribal identities--"Chippewa" is both an antiquated term as well as not a tribe, same with "Iroquois" or "Sioux."Comment:  As I said before, I agree that the headline and focus on the multiple-race issue is a little weird. I'm still not sure what the message is, although "Real Indians are disappearing!!!" could be it. "The percentage of people who checked more than one race is intermediate, about what you'd expect," isn't much of a hook.

For more on the 2010 Census, see and States with Most, Fewest Indians and Oklahoma's 2010 Census Numbers.

2010 Census brief on Natives

2010 Census Shows Nearly Half of American Indians and Alaska Natives Report Multiple RacesThe U.S. Census Bureau today released a 2010 Census brief, The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2010, [PDF] that shows almost half (44 percent) of this population, or 2.3 million people, reported being American Indian and Alaska Native in combination with one or more other races. This multiracial group grew by 39 percent from 2000 to 2010.

Overall, 5.2 million people, or 1.7 percent of all people in the United States, identified as American Indian and Alaska Native, either alone or in combination with one or more races. This population grew by 27 percent from 2000 to 2010. Those who reported being American Indian and Alaska Native alone totaled 2.9 million, an increase of 18 percent from 2000 to 2010. The multiple race American Indian and Alaska Native population, as well as both the alone and alone-or-in-combination populations, all grew at a faster rate than the total U.S. population, which increased by 9.7 percent from 2000 to 2010.

More Than Three-Fourths Live Outside Tribal Areas

A majority of the American Indian and Alaska Native alone-or-in-combination population (78 percent) lived outside of American Indian and Alaska Native areas. At the same time, most counties with relatively higher proportions of American Indians and Alaska Natives tended to be in close proximity to reservations, trust lands or Oklahoma tribal statistical areas. This was especially evident in counties throughout the West and in Oklahoma.

Majority Live in 10 States

The 10 states with the largest American Indian and Alaska Native alone-or-in-combination population in 2010 were California, Oklahoma, Arizona, Texas, New York, New Mexico, Washington, North Carolina, Florida and Michigan. Among these states, Texas, North Carolina and Florida experienced substantial rates of growth in this population at 46 percent, 40 percent and 38 percent, respectively. The American Indian and Alaska Native alone population experienced growth of at least 20 percent in Texas, North Carolina, Florida and New York.

The multiple-race American Indian and Alaska Native population increased by more than 50 percent in 18 states. North Carolina, Delaware and South Dakota experienced the most rapid growth in this population at more than 70 percent. In all but three states, the multiple-race proportion of the American Indian and Alaska Native alone-or-in-combination population increased from 2000 to 2010.

Tribal Groupings

The largest number of people who identified with an American Indian tribal grouping, either alone or in combination, identified as Cherokee (819,000). The Navajo tribal grouping had the largest number of individuals who identified with one tribal grouping and no other race (287,000).

Among the largest American Indian tribal groupings, Blackfeet had the highest proportion who reported more than one tribal grouping or race. Seventy-four percent of Blackfeet individuals reported an additional race and/or tribal grouping.

The largest Alaska Native tribal grouping, either alone or in combination, was Yup'ik (34,000), followed by Inupiat (33,000). Yup'ik also had the greatest number of people who identified with one tribal grouping and no other race (29,000).

Among all Alaska Native tribal groupings, Tlingit-Haida had the highest proportion who reported more than one tribal grouping or race. Forty-two percent of Tlingit-Haida individuals reported an additional race and/or tribal grouping.Comment:  Media reports about this release keyed on the multiple-race finding. But I'm not sure why everyone's treating it as big news. I think it came out in the initial reports last year: 5.2 Million Indians in 2010 Census. And a partial explanation, too: More Latinos Identify as Native.

There are no revelations in this data, but the "where they live" figure is interesting. For years I've been saying the proportion of Indians living off-rez was around two-thirds or 70%. The 78% figure tells us how well-integrated Indians are into society. All the ancient stereotypes--e.g., that they live in tipis--and modern stereotypes--e.g., that they're poor welfare recipients--are that much less true.

Americans imagine Indians living out in the wilderness somewhere, usually in a desert with buttes and mesas. But reservation Indians are the exception, not the rule. While people are daydreaming about buckskin-wearing savages, real Indians are right next to them--at the office, at school, or at Starbucks.

For more on the 2010 Census, see and States with Most, Fewest Indians and Oklahoma's 2010 Census Numbers.

More Latinos identify as Native

More Latinos identify as Native American, census shows

By Laurie GuthmannWhen Ana María Tekina-eirú Maynard filled out her census form last year, she checked the box for Latino, and for the first time, she also checked the box for Native American.

It had taken her more than 30 years--plus research and genetic testing--to discover her ties to the indigenous Taínos of Puerto Rico, to claim her identity and re-learn what she thought she knew of her history.

She's not the only one. Since 2000, the number of Hispanics who identified themselves as Native American grew from 407,073 to 685,150, according to the 2010 census.

Some attribute the increase to immigration from parts of North and South America where there are large indigenous populations. In some cases, it's because of recently discovered ties to native cultures.Comment:  This article confirms what I've been saying. Namely, that "who's an Indian?" is a political and cultural question, not a biological one. That Latinos are basically mixed-blood Indians who have chosen, for the most part, not to identify with their Native ancestry.

If the huge mass of Latinos in the US started identifying as Natives, we'd really see the depth and breadth of America's indigenous roots. It would make our history of conquest and colonization that much clearer.

And that's why the white Euro-American mainstream fears and hates immigration. It's a stark reminder of our historical crimes. And a stark reminder that it's not too late to redress those crimes--to establish a more fair and just America where white people don't rule (as much).

For more on the subject, see What's the Difference Between Indian and Latino? and "Most Mexicans Are Indians."

Below:  "Ana María Tekina-eirú Maynard, right, dances at the 2010 Taíno Day ceremony in Puerto Rico."

(Asian) Indians get TV roles

A recent posting on the NativeCelebs page in Facebook:Parks and Recreation, The Office, The Big Bang Theory, The Good Wife, Community, Sanctuary, Covert Affairs. What do these have in common? An Indian on the core cast. No, not a Native American, but someone with ancestry from India. Native Americans? If you don't count APTN and [Canadian shows such as] Blackstone--are there any right now?Not to mention Outsourced, House, The Human Target, Heroes, Lost, Numb3rs, and ER in recent years. For more on the subject, see:

Beyond Apu

Why are there suddenly so many Indians on television?

By Nina Shen RastogiWhy are there so many Indians on TV all of a sudden?

In part, it's a simple matter of demographics. Immigration from the subcontinent didn't begin in earnest until the late 1960s. So it's only now that U.S.-born Indians—who make up about half of the current crop of South Asian performers—are starting to gain a critical mass both in front of and behind the camera.And:Why are Indians suddenly the "it ethnicity," as Ravi Patel put it to me?

This, too, is at least partially a function of changing demographics. More Indians in the fabric of American life means we're more likely to be a source of inspiration for non-Indian writers, like the two Jewish guys from suburban New Jersey who wrote Harold and Kumar—the title characters are based on their friends.

But according to Karen Narasaki, who heads the Asian Pacific American Media Coalition, the rise in primetime Asians is also the result of advocacy. Her organization and its partners have been working with the networks to develop diversity initiatives for the past decade, ever since 1999's infamously "whitewashed" primetime season, in which not a single freshman show had a leading minority character.Checking the numbers

All that talk of demographics is nice, but let's see what the actual numbers are:

Indian American--DemographicsAccording to the results of the 2010 U.S. Census released by the U.S. Census Bureau, the Asian Indian population in the United States grew from almost 1,678,765 in 2000 to 2,843,391 in 2010: a growth rate of 69.37%, the highest for any Asian American community, and among the fastest growing ethnic groups in the United States.Meanwhile, as I reported before, there are 5.2 million Native Americans and Alaska Natives in the 2010 Census.

It should be obvious where I'm going with this. Natives have been here for, well, forever, not just 50 years. They outnumber Indian Americans by roughly 2-1. At least a dozen TV shows have featured Indian Americans in supporting roles in recent years. But with a few minor exceptions, none have featured Natives.

Since the US Indian and "Indian" populations are similar, there's no good reason to have a dozen Indian Americans but no American Indians. I'd say it's happening because studio executives know the former group but not the latter. They're prejudiced for the people they're familiar with.

Indeed, executives are so comfortable with Asian Indians that they're casting them as American Indians. Tinsel Korey, for instance. Better a "nice" Asian Indian than an American Indian who may be drunk or violent or a troublemaker, right? Who knows whether a Native actor will show up with a head shot or a tomahawk?

Network TV sends message

All these TV shows are worth mentioning, but the network shows are especially telling. They have bigger audiences because they're universally available. And because they're advertiser-supported, they can't take as many risks. With casting or anything else. They're the best example of what Americans as a whole will accept as mass culture.

And what we're seeing is that Asian Indians are becoming acceptable. Perhaps on the way to becoming another "model minority." Which is odd because blacks are possibly the only minority that has reached parity in Hollywood. Latinos, Asians, and American Indians still are underrepresented.

I don't begrudge Asian Indians their success. I've seen a lot of Bollywood stars who seem more attractive, appealing, and charismatic than most Hollywood stars. I'd build some shows around them if I were an executive.

But I'm sure there are just as many American Indian actors who could carry a movie or TV show. Hollywood just has to give them a chance.

For more on the subject, see Asian Indians Slurred as American Indians and Minorities Aren't Quite American.

Census, comics, and documentaries

Indian Comics Irregular #204:  Native Population Holds Steady

States with most, fewest Indians

Some info from the 2010 Census:

Race and Hispanic or Latino:  2010--United States--States; and Puerto Rico

Here are the states with the most and fewest people who defined themselves as "American Indian or Alaska Native" only:

California:  362,801
Oklahoma:  321,687
Arizona:  296,529
New Mexico:  193,222
Texas:  170,972

Delaware:  4,181
Hawaii:  4,164
West Virginia:  3,787
New Hampshire:  3,150
Vermont:  2,207

District of Columbia:  2,079

For more on the subject, see Oklahoma's 2010 Census Numbers and 5.2 Million Indians in 2010 Census.

Oklahoma's 2010 Census numbers

In the comments to Oklahoma = Most Culturally Diverse State? Jana wrote:You're wrong when you say Oklahoma has lots of whites and Indians and less of others. As of 2010 Hispanics officially outnumber Indians in Oklahoma.I wrote this before the Census released the 2010 data for Oklahoma, Jana. But below are the state's 2010 numbers. Let's take a look:

Race and Hispanic or Latino: 2010--State--Place

White: 2,706,845
Black: 277,644
American Indian: 321,687
Asian: 65,076
Pacific Islander: 4,369
Other race: 154,409
Two or more races: 221,321

As I noted earlier, Hispanics can be of any race. The number of Oklahomans who identified themselves as Hispanic is 332,007.

True, this number is more than the number of American Indians or Alaska Natives. A mere 10,320 more. But that obscures some important qualifications.

1) People who listed themselves as American Indian may have checked the Hispanic box also.

2) Those who checked "other race" may be American Indian, Hispanic, or both.

3) Those who checked "two or more races" may be American Indian, Hispanic, or both. In fact, according to one Census table, 29.2% of them are part American Indian or Alaska Native.

In short, there's no way to distinguish Indians who counted themselves as part Hispanic or Hispanics who counted themselves as part Indian. Therefore, I don't think we can conclude that Oklahoma's Hispanic population is larger than its Native population. We can say they're close now.

We also can say that Oklahoma remains about 77% white despite its significant Indian and Hispanic minorities. In terms of racial or ethnic diversity, I doubt the state is even in the top 10. In other words, the person who challenged my posting was wrong.

For more on the subject, see 5.2 Million Indians in 2010 Census and Indian Identity Matters to Indians.

Oklahoma = most culturally diverse state?

A Facebook friend challenged my recent posting about New Mexico's being the most racially diverse state in the contiguous US. Here's how it went:

Indians make NM most diverse state except Hawaii.Are you sure? Oklahoma is home to 39 tribes and tribal governments within their borders--from the northeast woodlands, southeast woodlands, great plains and the southwest. Plus all the other immigrants that came in the land runs and later--relatively concentrated. They also still have the highest number of Natives per capita. Check it out.I'm just reporting what I read. But I don't think the Census Bureau counts Indian tribes from different parts of the country as "diverse." They've been in Oklahoma for a century or more, intermarrying with the locals, so counting them as "immigrants" would be questionable.

The standard seems to be the state with the highest percentage of minorities. Something like 60% of New Mexicans are non-whites. Oklahoma undoubtedly has a higher percentage of Indians, but it's still more than 50% white.

The key difference is that New Mexico is 46.3% Hispanic. That outweighs Oklahoma's large Indian population and makes New Mexico more diverse.I assumed you meant diverse culturally. I think that OK would take that prize, since the diversity of tribes from the cultural areas mentioned are marked by any standard. I believe there are possibly close to as many Hispanics as white in OK these days. It does not matter that the tribes have been there since the 1830s, they are still diverse from each other and proud of it. How could NM claim diversity if they are 60% non-white? Interesting take on diversity.

As far as I know, there are only four race categories, so how are they slicing what they consider to be diverse races, total numbers of non-whites? By the way, Hispanic is still considered Caucasian and not black, yellow or red.

Also, I meant immigrants to Oklahoma, not from the eastern hemisphere.Yes, I meant racially diverse. I try to keep my headlines short, but the article explains what I meant.

If we're talking about cultural diversity, locations such as metropolitan New York or New Jersey probably have people from thousands of cultures around the world. Even in Native terms, Alaska has more than 250 tribes and villages, and California has 109 tribes and rancherias. Even if you group tribes with related cultures, I think either state would far out-diversify Oklahoma culturally.

In racial terms, New Mexico has large numbers of whites, Hispanics, and Indians and smaller numbers of blacks and Asians. Oklahoma has large numbers of whites and Indians and smaller numbers of everything else. New Mexico "wins" because of its Hispanics.

Rob's facts are in question?I think we will have to agree to disagree, since the "racial" term has muddied the specifics and seems to equate "diversity" in the article that started our conversation. I think her article is poorly researched and too vague--and, in my opinion, would fit perfectly in your stereotype of the month. I would come close to nominating some of the "facts" you put on the table in the same category, i.e. blood quantum diluting Indianness (for lack of a better word.) You would evidently be surprised at how many full bloods there still are in Oklahoma and how healthy the language is in most tribal pockets--still spoken exclusively at ceremonial grounds and, until only recently, in Indian churches. The languages are still taught in public and tribal schools, as well as in colleges and universities. While there is a lot of intermarriage (with other groups as well as intertribally), and some full bloods are mixed tribes, tribal enrollment usually dictate how we identify ourselves. I happen to be Scottish (on three sides) than Creek by blood, but I know nothing about my Scottish heritage since my father died when I was a baby and my maternal grandmother married into a Creek family where her in-laws spoke no English, so she became fluent in understanding the language. Your position on this surprises me, Rob, but you are entitled to select where you are on this question. The muddled research/conclusions by the author of the article are intellectually problematic and misleading to me.My point about "dilution" is that Oklahoma's tribes are less genetically diverse than they were when they lived in 39 separate parts of the country. This is entirely relevant when we're talking about racial diversity, the subject of this posting. However, it says nothing about the tribes' "Indianness," which is a political and cultural issue not defined by "purity." I know that and nothing I've said above contradicts that.

The article refers to "racial/ethnic minorities," so I think it's covered its bases regarding Latinos. Latinos may belong to any race: white, Indian, black, or other. They aren't all Caucasians by any means. But whatever they are, I believe the Census tracks them as a separate ethnic group.

You can read about it here:

Race and ethnicity in the United States Census

but I think it's standard practice to treat Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites as two racial/ethnic groups, not one. I suspect every Census article will do what this one has done: break down the population into non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics, non-Hispanic blacks, and so forth. And keep them separate when discussing America's minorities.

Let's note that Latinos come from seven countries in Central America, 15 in South America, 13 in the Caribbean, and Puerto Rico. A state such as New Mexico with a large Latino population is ethnically and culturally diverse. Especially since Latinos are a complex blend of European, African, and indigenous strands, as I said. Add to that the 24 Indian tribes located in New Mexico and you have an incredible amount of both kinds of diversity.

You're welcome to defend Oklahoma all you want, but you really haven't addressed my points. Any state where the majority belongs to a single racial or ethnic group isn't racially diverse by definition. If the number of Indian tribes defines racial or cultural diversity, Alaska and California are much more diverse than Oklahoma. There's no definition of diversity in which Oklahoma is the clearcut winner.

Feel free to discuss the Alaska and California cases. And to define diversity any way you'd like. I'd love to hear how Oklahoma's 39 tribes are more diverse than Alaska's 250+ or California's 109.It still seems like apples and oranges to me, but I am not trying to win an argument at all. I like intellectual discussions where ideas are presented and considered and given time to mature into a position or better understanding on issues that matter. It is clear to me that we use the words racial, diversity, and ethnic in different ways. That is just a semantic problem. You yourself made my point when you mentioned Alaska, California, New York and New Jersey in the discussion because they are more diverse than New Mexico--clearly challenging the article's main premise.The subject of this article was the major ethnic groups: whites, Latinos (Hispanics), blacks, Asians, and American Indians and Alaska Natives. In terms of these "minorities," Hawaii is the most diverse and New Mexico is second. If you count individual Indian tribes, rancherias, and villages as separate ethnic groups, Alaska is the most diverse and California is second. I remain confident that Oklahoma is not first under either standard.

For more on the subject, see 5.2 Million Indians in 2010 Census and Indian Identity Matters to Indians.

5.2 million Indians in 2010 Census

Steady Population:  5.2 Million Indians Counted

By Rob CapricciosoAfter a major push to have more American Indians counted in 2010, a final tally has been released by the U.S. Census Bureau: 5,220,579 people reported being a combination of races, one of which included American Indian and/or Alaska Native. Of those, 2,932,248 reported being American Indian and/or Alaska Native alone. On top of that, about a half a million Americans reported being “Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander.”

The numbers mean that approximately 1.7 percent of the United States’ population reported being American Indian and/or Alaska Native in 2010, of which 0.95 percent reported being Indian and/or Alaska Native only. Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders represented an additional 0.2 percent of the entire population.

There was an 18 percent growth in the American Indian and Alaska Native alone population between 2000 and 2010, which means that Indians stayed the same in their proportion of the total population in that time period. In 2000, 2.5 million had reported being American Indian and Alaska Native alone.

That fact is disappointing to some Indian analysts who had hoped that the Native population numbers would equate to a larger percentage of the population in 2010. While the growth in overall Native numbers is appreciated, a greater share of the population would have also been desirable. Many tribes and Indian organizations had worked to increase the Native numbers, and the Census Bureau itself had worked to improve outreach to Indians for the 2010 count.Comment:  Someone asked "And how many of those are wannabes?" My response:

Well, 2.9 million claimed to be Native only, so the max number should be 2.3 million. I'd hope that most of those 2.3 million checked "American Indian or Alaska Native" only if it was a significant part of their makeup. Like maybe a quarter or more. But I don't think there's any way of knowing.

To sum it up, 2.9 million Americans were Native only and 5.2 million were all or part Native in 2010. That's up from 2.5 and 4.5 million in 2000.

For more on the Census, see Indian Identity Matters to Indians and Hawaii, New Mexico Are Most Diverse.

Indian identity matters to Indians

Educator Debbie Reese discusses the 2010 Census data and what it tells us:

"Multiracial" identity and American IndiansA few months ago, the Times ran another article in which college students reported being mixed, some of them with Native heritage, but that none of those distinct identities mattered.

Identity matters for those of us who are raised Indian. We work very hard at maintaining our nationhood and our sovereignty, and, we work to protect the integrity of our traditions from being exploited by people who don't understand them....

The students interviewed for that Times article mean no harm when they say their Indian identity doesn't matter. It doesn't matter--to them. But it does to me, and it does to Native Nations. The students' well-meaning embrace of a mixed identity, in effect, obscures a lot, and in that obscurity, it does do harm. It contributes to the lack of understanding of who American Indians are....And it takes the US down a merry melting pod road where we all hold hands and smile in ignorance.

Ignorance is not bliss. It is ignorance.(Excerpted from Debbie Reese's American Indians in Children's Literature, 3/30/11.)

Comment:  For more on Indian identity, see Oprah Winfrey the Indian? and Black/Red: Related Through History.

Hawaii, New Mexico are most diverse

The Census Bureau has begun releasing data from the 2010 Census. Except for Hawaii, New Mexico is now the most multiethnic and multicultural state, largely because of its Indian population.

Diversity sets NM apart

By Alysa LandryNew Mexico is the most racially diverse state in the continental United States, according to Census Bureau figures.

The state's population grew 13.2 percent since the 2000 census, with the number of residents topping 2 million. American Indians make up 9.4 percent of the population and Hispanics make up 46.3 percent, which means that only four of 10 New Mexico residents are non-Hispanic Anglos.

New Mexico was the first of the lower 48 states to reach minority-majority status, said Mark Mather, a demographer at the Population Reference Bureau, a Washington-based nonprofit that tracks international demographics.And:The numbers are even more striking in terms of all racial/ethnic minorities in the state, Mather said. In the 2010 census, nearly three-fourths of people in New Mexico claimed they were minorities, more than any state except Hawaii.

How is that possible?

The Census Bureau 10 years ago changed the way questions were asked on census surveys. That census was the first that allowed people to mark more than one race.

"We saw a huge portion of people who were American Indian, but some combination of American Indian and another race," he said. "There is a huge increase in minority populations when you factor in those combinations."Comment:  For more on the subject, see 2010 Election Doesn't Matter and Hispanics Have Native Roots.

2010 election doesn't matter

An Open Letter to the White Right, On the Occasion of Your Recent, Successful Temper Tantrum[I]n the pantheon of American history, old white people have always been the bad guys, the keepers of the hegemonic and reactionary flame, the folks unwilling to share the category of American with others on equal terms.

Fine, so screw you then.

Because you’re a dying breed.

On the endangered list.

And unlike say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving.

In forty years or so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more white people around who actually remember that Leave it to Beaver, Father Knows Best, Opie-Taylor-Down-at-the-Fishing Hole cornpone bullshit that you hold so near and dear to your heart.

There won’t be any more white folks around who think the 1950s were the good old days, because there won’t be any more white folks around who actually remember them, and so therefore, we’ll be able to teach about them accurately and honestly, without hurting your precious feelings, or those of the so-called “greatest generation”—a bunch of miscreants who saved the world from fascism only to return home and oppose the ending of it here, by doing nothing to lift a finger on behalf of the civil rights struggle.

So frankly, to hell with you and all who revere you.

By then, half the country will be black or brown. And there is nothing you can do about it.Plus my snarky comments during and after the election:Judging by the election results, the rally to restore sanity didn't work. :-(

At least Christine O'Donnell is gone. Bye-bye, nutcase!

I'm not too worried by the election. Once the recession ends and the Tea Party of No proves it has nothing, the voters will toss it out.

Election summary:  Fear restored. Sanity nowhere in sight.

I guess Obama should've let General Motors go bankrupt. Millions of people unemployed: That would've proved he was serious about fixing the economy. Yeah, right!

The Grand Old Party of No plans massive new giveaways to wealthy taxpayers and corporations. Call it teabagonomics.

"First they Trickle down on ya, then they Tea-bag ya. It's like some sick, raunchy Republiporn nightmare!" --Rob Fife

Teabagonomics:  "Let's give the country back to the people who created this mess. Maybe they'll do the opposite of what they did last time."

A news program just reported on moms turning to prostitution because of the economy. That's the power of free markets for you.

See, we don't need any of that welfare spending. Anyone who really wants to work can find a job!Comment:  Fortunately, as the headline says, this election doesn't matter in the long run. America's changing demographics will transform our white-ruled country into a multicultural one. The only question is how long it'll take. I'm guessing 20-30 years.

All the trendlines are pointing in the right direction. Youngsters who can't imagine how racist and sexist the country was will never return to their forefathers' ways. So we'll never go back to slavery or Jim Crow laws. We'll never reinstate discrimination against Catholics or Jews. Once we establish them, we'll never eliminate gay rights to serve in the military or marry.

For more on the subject, see:

Tea Party Guide to American History
Gray vs. brown Americans
What "I want my country back" means
Culture war over who's an American
Why we believe in Columbus

2010 Census art competition winners

Here are the results of the 2010 Census Art Competition:

NCAI Announces Winners of Census Art Competition: Native Youth Show Tribal PrideJulius Badoni, a senior at Arizona State University, says he’s been drawing since the day he was born. But his artwork is more than a passion. The 25-year-old Navajo art and business major says he wants to use his work to convey important messages in hopes that people will take action. His latest piece incorporates symbols of perseverance, tribal pride, and strength, while encouraging Native Americans to participate in the Census.

“Even at the lowest point in the 1900s, Native Americans endured,” says Badoni about his piece titled Resurgence, a colorful abstract showing the plight of Native people since 1492. “There will be a continued endurance and resurgence of Native Americans.”

Badoni is among 15 winners of the National Congress of American Indians’ (NCAI) Indian Country Counts national art competition for pre-kindergarten to post-secondary Native students. NCAI created the Indian Country Counts campaign in partnership with the U.S. Census Bureau to aid tribes with the count and ensure an accurate enumeration of all Native people. Historically, American Indians and Alaska Natives are among the nation’s hardest populations to count because of a mistrust of the federal government, as well as linguistic, geographical, and cultural challenges. American Indians were severely undercounted in past Censuses. The Census Bureau estimates that over 12 percent of Native people on reservations were missed in the 1990 census and over 4 percent in 2000.Here's the gallery of the winning entries and some of the best ones:

2010 Art Competition Gallery






For more on the 2010 Census, see Native Census Ad on Gossip Girl and Video of "First to Be Counted."

Native Census ad on Gossip Girl

I was watching this week's Gossip Girl (airdate: 3/15/10) on TiVo when I saw the strangest thing: Native faces on TV. Replaying it, I realized it was a Native-themed 2010 Census ad. It occurred during the commercial break in the middle of the hour.

The ad starts stereotypically with a solitary Indian in Monument Valley. He's beating a drum to the accompaniment of flute music. The narrator says, "The voice of the drum calls. It sings a song of those who came before us. And those to come."

The voice sounds familiar. I can't quite place it, but I believe it's a Native actor. Not Gil Birmingham, I think, but someone in his age range.

An Inuit woman in a snowscape and an Indian man on an urban rooftop are also beating drums. Answering the "call," several Indians hurry forward in ones and twos. The final shot shows 13 of them together, smiling and holding Census forms, with the slogan "It's in Our Hands."

One of them is actor Saginaw Grant. The others are men, women, and children of various ages, all dressed in regular clothes. Only Grant with his braids looks slightly like a (stereo)typical Indian.

Not bad. Other than the occasional gaming-related advertisement, this is the most Indians I've seen on network TV since 2008's Comanche Moon. I wasn't crazy about the drumbeat theme, but the images of Indians were decent.

Some thoughts

I presume this was an ad intended for Indians nationwide. It wasn't one of the California PSAs I've been posting on Facebook. A few thoughts on it:

1) I think this is the first Census ad I've seen on TV. Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but what about an ad featuring blacks, Latinos, or Asians? The Latino population must be 20 times bigger than the Indian population, so shouldn't there be 20 Latino commercials for each Indian commercial?

2) I don't know if the ad ran nationwide or only in Southern California. If it was a national ad, it was suitably generic, with the emphasis rightly on urban settings. If it was a Southern California ad, it missed the mark by showing Navajoland rather than anything specific to the region. The urban scenes could've been filmed in Los Angeles, but it's impossible to tell.

3) A Native ad in the middle of Gossip Girl...really? I don't know the show's demographics, but I'd guess they mirror the show's rich elitist characters. I.e., young, upscale, and blindingly white.

I don't know which shows Natives watch most: American Idol or NCIS, just like everyone else? But Gossip Girl could easily be the show they watch least.

I can only imagine the ad ran as some sort of quid pro quo. I believe networks have to run a certain number of public service announcements. The government is pushing Census ads this month. The CW may have said, "We still have a open spot in the middle of Gossip Girl. We'll stick your Census ad there even though it has nothing in common with the show or its audience."

Oh, well. For more on the subject, see Video of "First to Be Counted" and Census Info Not Reaching Natives.

Below:  The perfect demographics for a Native Census ad?

Video of "First to Be Counted"

A video of the Census event noted in Pix of "First to Be Counted" and Indian Counted First in Southern California:



Comment:  At 45:14, this video is too long for the average viewer. For the first two minutes, for instance, you don't see anything but words on a black screen.

But it's worth glancing at for at look at the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. I believe this tribe is the only federally recognized one in the greater Los Angeles area.

Even though San Manual's casino has made it one of the nation's richest tribes, you can see these are still semi-traditional Indians. They aren't a bunch of tanned white people pretending to be Indians.

For more on that subject, see The Facts About Indian Gaming.

Below:  The San Manuel Indian Bingo & Casino.

Pix of "First to Be Counted"

As noted in Indian Counted First in Southern California, Pauline Murillo of San Manuel was the first person the 2010 Census counted in the Los Angeles region. Here are some photos of the event:

2010 California Indian Census's Photos--First to Be Counted

For more on the subject, see Oneidas Undercounted in 2000 Census and Video of My Census Meeting.

Below:  Pauline "Dimples" Murillo says a few words.

Indian counted first in Southern California

Count begins at San Manuel

By Joe NelsonU.S. Census Regional Director James Christy on Friday enumerated San Manuel tribal elder Pauline Murillo, making her the first person counted in the Los Angeles region for the 2010 Census.

"We made history here today," Christy said during a special ceremony outside the San Manuel Tribal Community Center.

Tribal Chairman James Ramos stressed the significance of methodically and thoroughly counting American Indians in the census so that they be eligible for some of the $400 billion in federal funds earmarked for health care, education and other programs.

"This is a big statement. We want to make sure every Indian person is properly accounted for," Ramos said.San Manuel elder is first Southern Californian counted in 2010 Census

By David OlsonMost Americans will receive their census forms in the mail later this month, but James Christy, the regional director of the U.S. Census Bureau, went to Pauline Murillo's home to personally ask her the 10 questions on this year's survey.

Murillo, 76, is a beloved figure in the tribe, a leader in preserving the Cahuilla language and in educating people of the Serrano people's history and culture.

"We've been here forever, and it's about time we get counted," Murillo said after a census celebration held outside the tribal community center, on the San Manuel Reservation in the foothills above Highland.

Christy said the Census Bureau chose Murillo to honor American Indians and their status as the first inhabitants of what is now the United States.Confirming the event's importance is this item:

House Passes Baca Legislation Promoting Accurate Census Count in Indian Country

Legislation Calls for Tribal Elders to be Involved in Census Awareness ActivitiesToday, the House of Representatives passed legislation introduced by Congressman Joe Baca (D-Rialto) to promote a more accurate census count of our nation’s Native American Communities. H. Res. 1086, the Tribal Elders Key to Census Accuracy in Indian Country Resolution, recognizes the significance of the 2010 Census, and encourages tribal communities to have an elder serve as the first member of that community to answer the 2010 Census. The bill passed the House with a 415 to 1 vote.

“The 2010 Census will be used as the basis for future federal funding for Medicaid and over 1,400 other vital programs,” said Congressman Baca. “Full participation in the upcoming Census is essential to the well being of all our Native American communities. In the Inland area, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians has already proposed to name an elder as the first member of their community to answer the 2010 Census. By encouraging all our nation’s tribal communities to follow this same approach, my legislation will lead to a more accurate count and ensure that Native Americans receives the proper federal funding they are due.”

The 2010 Census is a massive undertaking that is of vital importance to all of America’s communities and families. The federal government uses census data to determine funding levels for localities for everything from education, public safety and judicial programs, public transportation, and nutrition and public health programs. In addition, census information is used to determine local representative boundaries for both state and federal elective offices. Elders are looked upon as trusted leaders in most Native American communities. With their strong levels of influence, they can help better carry the message of how important an accurate 2010 Census Count is to our future.

“The census provides information that is necessary to everyone from government to business,” added Rep. Baca. “I thank my colleagues in the House for acting quickly to pass this critical legislation, which respects the proud heritage of our Native Americans by involving tribal elders in the 2010 Census process. There is too much at stake--we can not afford an undercount in Indian Country, or for that matter, in any other community across the United States.”Comment:  I believe the only representative who voted no was Ron Paul, which tells you something.

The San Manuel event obviously got some media coverage, but I heard it was a mess. People didn't know who the first form filler would be. Film crews weren't there to record Murillo as she completed her form. Other tribes weren't invited, so many of the seats were empty. The Census staff ran out of bumper stickers and other handouts. Etc.

It seems like the people in charge are overworked, underqualified, or both. Which still amazes me. With 10 years to plan this Census, it should be running like clockwork. Instead, an outsider like me is proposing an Internet communications strategy with six weeks to go because no one's made it happen yet.

For more on the subject, see Oneidas Undercounted in 2000 Census and Video of My Census Meeting.

Below:  "Pauline Murillo, 76, an elder of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, is the first person in the Southern California region officially counted in the 2010 census. The U.S. Census Bureau is increasing efforts to accurately count American Indians in this decade's survey." (Silvia Flores/The Press-Enterprise)

Hispanics have Native roots

Masking Identities or Counting the Indigenous?

The Politics of the Census

By Roberto RodriguezUpon my return to the United States, I received a message from a colleague regarding the U.S. Census Bureau. My mouth soured; another decade and another story about how the bureau paradoxically insists that Mexicans are Caucasian. I will have to explain to them again that Mexicans are the descendants of those who built the pyramids at Teotihuacan and Chichen Itza–that it was not Caucasians who built them.

The genesis of this nonsensical “misconception” goes back to the era when the United States militarily took half of Mexico in 1848. At that time, the Mexican government attempted to protect its former citizens by insisting that the U.S. government treat them legally as “white,” so they would not be enslaved or subjected to legal segregation. That strategy only partially worked, because most Mexicans in this country have never been treated as “white,” or as full human beings with full human rights.

That era is long over, yet the fear, shame, denial, and semi-legal fiction of being “white” remains, perpetrated primarily by government bureaucrats.

Despite the bureau policy of racial categorization, the Indigenous Cultures Institute in Texas, a Census 2010 partner, has advanced an alternative: It asserts that Hispanics, Mexican Americans, and Indigenous people of Mexico are native or American Indian. After answering Question 8, regarding whether one is Hispanic or not, the institute suggests: “If you are a descendant of native people, you can identify yourself (in Question 9) as an American Indian in the 2010 Census… If you don’t know your tribe, enter “unknown” or “detribalized native.” If tribe or identity is known, fill it in, i.e., Macehual, Maya, Quechua, etc.Comment:  Officially, Latinos can be of any race, so "Latino" isn't a racial category. Unofficially, says Rodriguez, 75% of the people Mexican and Central American descent identify themselves as "mestizo," or part Native.

So yes, it isn't correct to automatically classify these people as brown-skinned Natives. But it also isn't correct to pretend they're equally likely to be of any race.

Census takers and everyone else should be aware of this. That's why I don't get too annoyed when Latinos get Native roles in movies and TV shows.

I gather many Latinos prefer to consider themselves "white" or "European" because it's more socially acceptable. If I were them, I'd embrace my Native roots.

For more on the subject, see Latinos Told to Anglicize Names and "Hate the Mexicans (and Indians)."

Below:  Robert Beltran as Chakotay.

Oneidas undercounted in 2000 Census

Oneidas embrace census:  Accurate count means more money for tribe

By Ledyard KingThe Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin is among Native American tribes across the country stepping up efforts to get their members counted in the 2010 census.

Native American leaders and Census Bureau officials have been working for months to promote the constitutionally required, once-every-decade tabulation of America's population, which begins in March with mailings of millions of census forms. The count determines how many seats in Congress each state gets and how billions in government money are doled out through formula-driven programs and services.

The Oneida tribe—whose members were undercounted in the 2000 census—is emphasizing the importance of filling out the census forms correctly, identifying the specific name of the tribe.

Only about 900 members of the tribe were counted in the country, a far cry from the about 14,500 people who were enrolled members at the time, because many were lumped in with members of the Oneida Nation in New York. The undercounting was only discovered after the forms were returned.

Education efforts already have begun to get tribal members to write "Oneida Tribe of WI" on their forms after checking off the section on race identifying American Indian or Alaska Native.Comment:  Wow. Only 6% of the Wisconsin Oneidas were counted or counted correctly? It doesn't get much worse than that.

For more on the subject, see Video of My Census Meeting and Census Info Not Reaching Natives.