George Rebane
Why is someone designated ‘black’ when they clearly are not completely of African descent – e.g. they obviously have caucasian or oriental ancestors? Assigning the black label to everyone with even a tinge of Negroid heritage makes it seem as if such ancestry is a blight. A condition that once you have even a smidgen of it, you’re tainted or glorified in its completeness forever.
And why is it asymmetric? Why is not a mostly Negro person with some white or Asian ancestry not then labeled ‘European-American’ or ‘Asian-American’, or simply ‘white’ or ‘Asian’? Why does every mixed-race person’s identity have to immediately revert to ‘black’ or ‘African-American’ when they are visibly a mulatto or of some other mixed-race ancestry?
The best I can tell is that this kind of labeling is entirely political. Collecting such people under the ‘black’ and ‘African-American’ label somehow forces on them an identity that induces them to adopt the politically assigned pejoratives of victimhood, and immediately makes them to then be beholden to the benefactors of the plantation on which they see themselves unjustly interned.
I also wonder how long such mixed-race Americans will let themselves be treated as second class citizens by their self-proclaimed benefactors – politicians and ideology-agendaed ‘activists’ who must retain their purloined powers only by fooling all the so-labeled African-Americans all the time. These unasked questions are the rhetorical gorillas studiously ignored today in America’s tense and stressed public forum. It reminds me of the real-life version of 'The Emperor's New Clothes'.
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment