Sociology

Andrew Rollings, Ph.D. Jun. 2006

MAJORITY AND MINORITY GROUP RELATIONS

Along with gender, race and ethnicity create majority/minority group relations in our society. Whites, especially whites with northern European background, and men are the majority groups in our society, with non-whites (African-Americans and some Hispanic and Asian-American groups), and women being the most important minority groups. As you can tell, sociology doesn't use the word "majority" and "minority" in the same way as everyday English. Sociology doesn't define majority and minority in terms of numbers or mathematical ratios. The majority isn't the group with the most people but the one with power and opportunity, although it also may, like white America, be the group that is numerically the majority. Minorities aren't groups with a small percentage of people but groups systematically excluded from power and the opportunity structure.

MAJORITY GROUP
The majority is the group, and usually there is only one majority group or very small number of majority groups, with the most power and control in the society. Control the major institutions (economy, government, education, science, medicine) Run important groups and organizations Own or control most of the important resources (money, information, media, formal social control) Members of the majority have better opportunities compared to minorities and usually enjoy better lifechances. They have the necessary resources to control their destiny, protect themselves and their loved ones from the capricious forces of nature and society, and achieve their dreams and goals. They have the power to shape social institutions to their advantage. Often members of the majority see themselves as superior to minorities and often that belief gets strong support by an ideology of superiority embedded deeply into the culture and social practices. Believe they have a proprietary claim to privilege, power, and prestige Label minorities as inferior; minority chars as inferior or deviant While not every member of the majority group sees themselves as superior to minorities or acts that way, majority superiority/minority inferiority is so deeply embedded in the culture and social structure that is operates as an unconscious, background assumption working behind the scenes, even if some majority persons don't acknowledge it or try to resist its influence. The majority has a primary interest in maintaining its control of institutions and resources. As a result, majority members often feel threatened by minorities, fearing the minority is trying to take away what they've got. The majority often responds defensively to situations, using violence if necessary to protect its property, power, position, advantages, and opportunities.

MINORITY GROUP
Minority groups lack access, resources, privileges, and opportunities; they are systematically excluded from positions of power and wealth or limited in what positions and power they can attain. Minorities have less power over their daily lives, often the victim of social forces and trends, lacking many of the resources needed to control their destiny. Rather than shaping social institutions, the lives of minorities get controlled by institutions that serve the interests of the majority.

Majority and Minority Group Relations

Minorities as a group systematically experience unequal treatment compared to the majority group. Minority group members often experience prejudice, discrimination, and oppression at the hands of majority group members or disadvantages and discrimination when dealing with the core institutions and organizations in the society.

EVIDENCE FOR MAJORITY/MINORITY RELATIONS

Key evidence for majority and minority groups and their effects on people's lives exists when there are systematic, long-term differences between the economic position and life chances of people categorized by ascribed status. 1. Gaps in income, wealth, education, occupation, life-style, power, and prestige 2. Differences in life chances (health, life expectancy, infant mortality, educational attainment, family stability, criminal prosecution, crime victimization, etc.) Other key indicators occur at the community and primary group level. 1. Minorities may be excluded from living in majority-dominated communities and neighborhoods by systematic barriers on home buying and housing. These exclusions may result in segregated neighborhoods and urban ghettos. 2. Restrictions on travel and everyday mobility backed up by law enforcement practices. 3. Low number of friendships between majority and minority group individuals and systematic exclusion of minorities from social clubs, country clubs, voluntary organizations, and other arenas for peer group relations. 4. Low rate of intermarriage between majority and minority groups. Also important would be a history of conflict between majority and minority groups, especially the majority group using violence and force to maintain its position and privileges. Such violence can be dramatic, such as lynchings, military operations, pogroms, race riots, holocaust, police crackdowns, etc., or it can be more routine, such as police repression, civil rights violations, institutionalization, denial of welfare, etc. Minorities may also initiate violence, such as open rebellion, race riots, crime waves, separationist movements, etc. Finally, an ideology of superiority would also be good evidence for a majority/minority structure. That ideology might be explicit, stated openly as a political doctrine (e.g., Apartheid in South Africa or the Nazi "Aryan race" doctrine). Usually such ideology exists more quietly as understood assumptions and ideas not spoken in "polite company."

PATTERNS OF MAJORITY/MINORITY GROUP RELATIONS

Majority-Minority group relations take on characteristic patterns. These patterns can be lumped into three categories: 1. Acceptance of minority groups by the majority group 2. 3. Rejection of minority groups by the majority group Minority group reactions

MAJORITY GROUP ACCEPTANCE - ITS FORMS

Majority groups "accept" minorities by giving minorities access to mainstream institutional power or allowing minorities to build a set of parallel institutions. Either way, majority acceptance gives minorities some degree of equality. Majorities can either voluntarily accept minorities or minorities can force the issue using pressure, protest, resistance, or other forms of political action. Voluntary acceptance is not necessarily benign or driven by high morals. Usually it is a pragmatic response based on necessity and core interests of the majority group.

Majority and Minority Group Relations

The main forms of majority group acceptance are: Fusion (sometimes called Amalgamation) Groups and subcultures blend together, forming a new group (e.g., interracial marriage in Brazil). This is the highest level of majority group acceptance, a true "melting pot." No strong evidence of a true melting pot in American society. Assimilation (sometimes referred to as Integration) Majority allows (even encourages) minority groups to adopt the dominant group's culture. Creates a "melting pot" heavily biased towards the majority (more accurately a "salad bowl" than a "melting pot"). There are three general levels of assimilation, each representing a deeper, more profound acceptance of minorities by majorities: Economic assimilation [Working together] This occurs when minorities can get jobs and establish careers in economic sectors with high wages and salaries and low unemployment. Within these sectors, it means minorities filling organizational positions with managerial authority, decision-making power, and influence over organizational policy. Social assimilation [Living together] A deeper level of assimilation occurring when minorities can move from ethnically and racially segregated neighborhoods and buy housing in communities with a high percentage of majority populations. Intimate assimilation [Marrying each other] A deep level of assimilation that occurs when majority and minority individuals intermarry and mix at primary group levels. In the United States the successful assimilation of white ethnics (e.g., Italians, Poles, Irish, etc.) into the majority WASP society has created an American culture based on "Anglo-conformity." White ethnics voluntarily gave up (even rejected) many of their distinctive cultural practices and eagerly adopted the ways of the Anglo/WASP majority. Examples English as the "unofficial" language used throughout the United States "Suburban lawn, white picket fence" ideal for housing Christmas trees (German practice) & Christmas cards (English custom) Altering surnames (Zimmermann becomes Carpenter; Rittinghuysen becomes Rittenhouse; Rivoire becomes Revere; Whittier was originally Feuillevert) Skinny, fair skinned standards of feminine beauty Coats and ties as the "official" business costume for men (and similar formal modes for women) Generally this assimilation followed a three step process: First economic assimilation created conditions for social assimilation, which opened up opportunities for intimate assimilation. Although Asian ethnic groups have not followed this pattern as strongly as white ethnics, the on-going assimilation of Hispanic populations is following this general pattern. Anglo-conformity has been enormously successful in maintaining peace and stability in our multiethnic society. Around the world and throughout history such a ethnic mixture, especially the astounding number of ethnic groups in America, tends to result in suppression, oppression, violence, and civil war. Not so in America, one of the truly significant facts about our society when compared to others.

Majority and Minority Group Relations

Still Anglo-conformity is controversial. Such assimilation required minorities to give up large parts of their ethnic identity and cultural ways and adopt majority practices. While this conformity was voluntary, with many white ethnics eager to become American, it still called for ethnics to reject their heritage (even be ashamed of that heritage), resulting in less diversity and tolerance in our society. Today a weakened form of Anglo-conformity still occurs. Assimilation across racial lines in America has been much less successful. While white ethnics successfully assimilated in the late 19th and early 20th century, assimilation for African-Americans shipwrecked on the racism of Jim Crow society and white immigrants. Some economic assimilation occurred as a result of the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Even that was been slow and largely resisted by white society and has not smoothly lead into social assimilation. African-Americans have enjoyed some degree of economic mobility and gained basic civil rights of political participation, access to public services and decreased discrimination in housing. To this day America has not really experienced any significant intimate assimilation between whites and blacks. Pluralism Majority group peaceful coexists with other racial and ethnic groups, each retaining its own subculture. (e.g., Germans, Italians and French co-exist relatively peacefully in Switzerland). While minorities can attempt to force any of these outcomes, the crucial factor is majority group reaction, whether or not the majority "allows" minorities to intermarry with them (fusion), adopt their ways (assimilation), or exist independently (pluralism). Almost by definition, the majority group has the power to dictate the outcome. Even in the case of assimilation, which is usually analyzed from the viewpoint of minorities, the majority has to allow assimilation, often controlling the extent and forms of assimilation.

FORMS OF MAJORITY GROUP REJECTION

Exclusion Expulsion Extermination [Genocide; Ethnic Cleansing] Segregation Majority reactions determine the outcomes majority/minority relations. Majorities don't have to accept minorities; they don't have to allow fusion, assimilation, or pluralism; they can resist minority equality. Majorities resist by physically distancing themselves from minorities or using social distance (group boundaries) that prevent minorities from entering and interacting in certain group settings. Majorities can react differently to different minority groups. They can accept some minorities, allowing them to assimilate or exist pluralistically, while at the same time rejecting other minorities. Both forms of majority group reactions often coexist in the same society. For instance: WASP America has largely assimilated other white European groups and some Asian groups, while also exterminating Native Americans, excluding many non-white foreigners, and resisting the assimilation of African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and many Asian groups. Exclusion The majority restricts entry of minorities into society, either by controlling access across national borders (e.g., US Customs and Borders Protection agency) or movement and mobility of minorities already living in the society (e.g., apartheid's "Homelands" policy). Expulsion (or Population Transfer) The majority forcibly removes minorities either totally from the society or moves them into reservations, camps, or ghettos. This was the reaction of white Americans to Native Americans, forcing them into reservations, especially the Cherokee Trail of Tears (1838-1839). Another example would be the interment of Japanese-Americans in "relocation" camps during WWII. Extermination (also know as Genocide or Ethnic Cleansing) The majority systematic annihilates or attempts to annihilation minorities.

Majority and Minority Group Relations

Historical Examples 97% annihilation of the Native American population by whites (18th and 19th centuries) Australian slaughter of aboriginal peoples (18th and 19th centuries) Turkish slaughter of over 2/3s of the Armenian population (1915-1916) Soviet Purges (1933-35) Hitler's Final Solution (1940s) Idi Amin's genocide in Uganda (1970s) Cambodia's "killing fields" (1975-79) Ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and other areas of the former Yugoslavia (1990s) Sadam Hussein's actions against Kurds (1990s) Segregation Minorities physically separated (spatial and social separation; residence, workplace and social functions) from the majority group, usually forced to live in inferior conditions. Can be de jure segregation mandated by law (e.g., Jim Crow period in the US; Apartheid in South Africa) or de facto segregation based on social customs or practices (e.g., not selling homes to minorities in majority neighborhoods, local school systems, refusal to admit minorities to social clubs, etc.) Segregation is the opposite of assimilation or integration. Where assimilation is allowed to occur, segregation is impossible to uphold. If integration becomes a strong social process and political policy, then segregation will eventually fade away. Like assimilation/integration, there are three levels of segregation, each one deeper and more serious than the ones before. Economic segregation: Labor markets and occupations segmented into majority jobs and occupations and minority jobs and occupations, with minority ones with lower wages and salaries, higher unemployment, and less power. Social segregation: Separate neighborhoods and living arrangements for majority and minority populations, with poorer housing in minority neighborhoods, higher crime rates, and lower-quality standard of living. Intimate segregation: No intermarriage (or low rates of intermarriage) between majority and minority individuals and little mixing of majority and minority populations at primary group levels.

MINORITY GROUP REACTIONS

Minorities can accept, reject, or submit to their position. Separation Minority group rejects their inferior label yet accepts segregation. (e.g., Black separatism in the 1960s) Integration Inferior status and segregation are rejected and minorities attempt to achieve of equality with the dominant group is attempted. (e.g., mainstream civil rights movement in the U.S.) Submission Members of a minority group accept both the inferior status and segregated role imposed by the dominant group. (e.g., Black slaves in the 19th century) Withdrawal

Majority and Minority Group Relations

Minority group members accept their inferior status, yet reject segregate themselves by withdrawing from their minority group (e.g., Black nationalism).