Virtually everything Brym and Lie affirm regarding race, ethnicity, and varying perspectives on these elements, derives from a single platform; namely, that race and ethnicity are not factual components of humanity so much as they are conveniences by which societies differentiate between groups of people. Just as race is held by the authors to be far less of a biological reality than its is, invariably, a perception permitting the dominance of one population over another, so too is ethnicity not directly responsible for why some cultures succeed and others fail. When the misguided perspectives are maintained, nonetheless, inequality serving the interests of a certain group is enhanced. The authors ask, given the minimal evidence of identifying race and ethnicity genetically: “Why, in other words, does race matter?” (Brym, Lie, 2008, p. 137). The answer is that it matters to those who wish it to matter. sociological definition of race, racism cycles, ethnicities, and symbolic interactionist ideas regarding race are then explored from this point of departure. What ultimately emerges is that Brym and Lie, citing multiple evidences of how race and ethnicity historically meet agendas of dominant groups, make a powerful argument that race, if once potentially credible, continues to have impact because it continues to support those in authority seeking justification for inequality.
Analysis
To begin with, Brym and Lie define race sociologically because no other form of definition is valid. While race has always powerfully impacted on social structures, it may not be rationally understood as a biological reality, as it is: “A socially defined category of people whose perceived physical markers are socially significant,” (p. 138), and the key words in this statement are “socially” and “perceived.” These variables having import, then, the authors support the subjectivity of them through several examples, in which the social perceptions lead to circumstances then affirming ideas of cultural and ethnic traits. Not surprisingly, the affirmed traits tend to reinforce the dominant groups’ belief s that the racially identified population is inferior in some way, thus promoting inequality. For example, Brym and Lie cite how, in slave labor societies, the only incentive for the slave to work was/is the fear of physical punishment; as minimal work performance safeguarded the slaves from abuse, they typically only worked to that extent, consequently enabling ideas of the slaves as inherently lazy. As race is a social construct, it then virtually perpetuates itself, because: “Social-structural differences frequently underlie cultural differences” (p. 138). All the evidence then reinforces race and ethnicity as essentially formulaic, and mutually inclusive social forces maintaining the status quo.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Analyze Brym And Lie Views Concerning Race".
The above clarified, it then follows that race has a significant and consistent cyclical quality to it. This in itself fluctuates within societies. The authors note, for example, how Canadian society shifted from a racially structured form to one which, by the 1970s, confronted the reality that certain ethnic and racial minorities were less disadvantaged than in the past. As diversity in the population increased, the implication is that the larger numbers of “minorities” rendered ethnic barriers to educational and economic opportunity less impactful. Then, with the challenges within the economy developed: “Canada experienced an unusually high rate of unemployment in the 1990s, hovering around 10 percent until late in the decade” (p. 140). This reestablished cycles of inequality, in that lessened employment opportunity translated to increased discretionary practices among employers. The indication is then that race and ethnicity are cyclical in terms of how the society varies in need. More exactly, the ability to discriminate by virtue of ethnicity is promoted when the opportunity to advance is restricted. That race exists as a cycle of bias potentials is supported by how all within a society allow economic basics to influence their thinking, as it is inevitable that those “races” in power will, in difficult times, emphasize the cultural perceptions of ethnic inferiority that serve their interests.
Turning to Symbolic Interactionist Theory, Brym and Lie emphasize, and necessarily so, the fluid nature of how racial perceptions evolve. The theory relates to how varying populations or cultures determine their places in the society through negotiation and, as circumstances change, ethnic status may dramatically change as well: “If the social context changes, the negotiation process begins anew” (p. 141). The authors also note how negotiation varies within the ethnic group itself, as when Italian immigrants in Canada, previously defining themselves only by region of Italy, confronted and gradually accepted the new designation of “Italian.” This alone reinforces the important reality of how negotiation, when the defined ethnic group is a minority, remains chiefly in the control of the dominant race/culture. The theory is as well not all that distinct from conflict theories, in that conflict typically generates the need for negotiation between ethnicities. As the authors note, negotiation has often been more a case of outright suppression or subjugation. This was the case of the Aboriginal Beothuk peoples of Canada, who were perceived as a nuisance by the European settlers and ultimately forced into extinction. Internal colonialism was responsible, as these tribes were denied access to survival needs. An equally overt instance of internal colonialism, and conflict as based on a greater power’s ability to control a lesser, occurred with the Quebecois. Unlike the Aborigines, these French populations were subject to stratification by the English authorities in place. The British did anticipate conflict in rebellion form, and allowed for some negotiation: “They tried to accommodate farmers and the Catholic clergy by reinforcing their rights” (p. 146). Nonetheless, big business remained in British hands. Conflict Theory also categorizes how the Black and Asian Canadians existed in the Canadian past. More exactly, conflict of ideology was so extreme, the former were largely forced into slavery, and: “Black slaves were bought and sold in Canada until at least the 1820s” (p. 147). With Asians, conflict was synonymous with European resentment. Again, economics fueled the conflict; fearful of losing jobs, white Canadians: “Formed ‘exclusion leagues’ to pressure the government to restrict Asian immigration” (p. 150), just as Asian Canadians typically received far lower pay. Each instance of conflict between the ethnicities in Canada, then, and no matter the degree of severity, reveals how invariably a dominant population, in this case the European and white, exerts the ultimate authority over how the other races or ethnicities are permitted to live within the society. In each case, race is turned to as validating what is inevitably gross injustice.
Conclusion
Ultimately, Brym and Lie lay out a credible and highly convincing trajectory of how perceptions of race generate injustice, as has happened repeatedly in Canada, among many other nations. Negotiation occurs at times, but the more consistent reality is that those wielding governmental and economic power have the veto as to ethnic status and opportunity. Speaking personally, I feel that their work here is important, if not vital, in understanding that colonialism exists in various forms within societies, and today as well. It very much seems that human history, apart from the Canadian, profoundly reinforces how privilege alone defines racial being. Moreover, the authors lead me to wonder how, in each case of ongoing injustice, resistance existed, either from the oppressed cultures or Europeans unwilling to dominate. Brym and Lie then motivate me to explore deeper dimensions of how race has so vastly impacted on Canadian history, and the society’s evolving to a more just state.
- Brym, R. J., & Lie, J. (2008). Sociology: Your Compass for a New World, 3rd Edition. Toronto: Nelson Education.
