“We’re going to be the new white [people]:” multiracial Americans envision the future

ABSTRACT

As the multiracial population continues to rise, research on this population has expanded. Although multiracial people are often referred to as the future face of America, there are no empirical studies that centre how multiracial individuals themselves envision the future of race relations, given their unique racial vantage point. I analyse how 23 multiracial people of different racialized ancestries, although all have white ancestry, envision the future of race relations in the United States. Most participants anticipated negative race relations due to the lack of current impactful institutional initiatives that would facilitate meaningful change. Many participants predicted a nuanced perspective, yet they echoed the significance of systemic shifts for real change to unfold. Fewer participants offered positive predictions that were rooted in individualism. I consider the implications of these findings in a society that often proclaims a positive racial future, in part, due to the multiracial population.

KEYWORDS:

• Multiracial
• United States
• race relations
• colourblind ideology
• white privilege
• qualitative methods

According to The Pew Center, 51 per cent of the American public thinks that race relations will improve by 2050 and 40 per cent think race relations will worsen (Parker, Morin, and Horowitz 2019). After George Floyd was murdered in 2020, a National Public Radio (NPR)/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll conducted in 2021 found that 42 per cent of Americans reported that race relations were worse than one year prior, 39 per cent said they were unchanged, and 17 per cent thought they had improved (Redd 2021). Although both surveys disaggregated the data by race, none of these reports included a percentage for – or any mention of – the multiracial¹ population. At the same time, the multiracial population is consistently cited as the future of race relations in the United States with an implied accomplishment of racial progress (Esposito and Finley 2009; strmic-pawl 2016). I argue that a reliable racial inventory of this nation cannot be taken without including a racialized group that is often indolently presumed to be “proof” of racial progress. The paradox of being ignored when it is convenient and being a proxy for racial progress when it is convenient, is an important intersection to empirically explore for several reasons. First, coming of age while America elects and celebrates its first Black biracial president and first Black biracial Vice President might inspire some racial reflection for multiracial people as well as thoughts on America’s racial future. Second, living with the daily processes and changing social meanings of racialized identity, categories, and norms (Törngren, Irastorza, and Rodríguez-García 2021) provides unique insights worthy of inquiry. Third, going beyond sound bite surveys will help us understand how institutional forces guide this population’s visions of the future. In this article, I ask how multiracial people envision race relations in the United States in the next few decades.

Society has moulded a self-serving narrative around the size and growth of the multiracial population. This population is the fastest growing population in the United States (Foster-Frau, Mellnick, and Blanco 2021) and has increased exponentially since 2000, the first year that the Census allowed United States residents to report multiple races.² In 2000, 2.4 per cent of the population marked more than one race (United States Census Bureau 2000). Ten years later, approximately 3 per cent reported more than one race, a 32 per cent increase (United States Census Bureau 2010). In 2020, 10.2 per cent of American residents marked more than one category, a 276 per cent increase (United States Census Bureau 2020). While this is a striking surge, it is imperative to keep in mind that scholars argue all forms of data collection are an undercount since there are multiracial people who identify monoracially (Jackson and Samuels 2019). The proliferation of the multiracial population is noteworthy because it is frequently framed as evidence of racial progress. Mitchell (2022, 3) argues, “The multiracial narrative expunges histories of slavery and colonization while also flattening differences in the experiences and treatment of racialized groups.” I extend this argument to include that the dominant discourse relies on the multiracial population to compress the reality of intergenerational racial trauma and how it shapes how people’s lives unfold. Extensive studies document the distinct adversity that multiracial people endure (Harris 2016; Johnston and Nadal 2010; Root 1992; Rockquemore and Brunsma 2008; Atkin and Jackson 2021; Waring and Bordoloi 2019). Furthermore, this convenient narrative does not recognize how different ancestries within the multiracial community inform treatment (i.e. anti-Blackness), how other identities impact multiracial people’s experiences (i.e. gender), or how multiracial whiteness loses leverage when traditional/monoracial whiteness is at play (Mitchell 2022). Consequently, such a myopic narrative is analytically negligent.

Critical scholars have examined how experiences in the multiracial population illuminate the perpetuation of white supremacy, such as the invisible extension of white privilege to those with white ancestry (Waring 2023) and the prevalence of colorism that creates a wedge between multiracial people and monoracial communities of colour (Harris 2016). Additionally, some studies show that multiracial people feel superior (Waring 2013) to monoracial individuals or inherently special (strmic-pawl 2016). This dynamic is tethered to whiteness as it often manifests as racial ambiguity (Waring 2013; strmic-pawl 2016), European ancestry and language proficiency (Funderburg 1994), and the ability to make white people feel comfortable (Waring 2017). Moreover, some multiracial people with white ancestry espouse “white-mixed superiority” over BIPOC multiracial individuals, which intensifies “ … the superiority of White monoraciality” (Gay, Farinu, and Issano Jackson 2022, 4). These studies complicate the prevailing ideology that the multiracial population generates exclusively positive race relations by easing racial tensions and accelerating racial harmony.

Influenced by critical race theory (CRT) (Delgado and Stefancic 2012) and multiracial critical theory (MultiCrit) (Harris 2016), I centre the voices of my participants as they offer their predictions for the future of race relations based on their lived experiences, including racism and monoracism. I contribute to critical mixed race studies by analysing how my participants’ responses are reflective of institutional forces, such as educational level and white privilege. I build on sociological literature by demonstrating how the type of privilege multiracial people experience influences whether they articulate a structural interpretation or individualistic interpretation of race relations. Moreover, a sociological analysis of multiracial people’s predictions provides a unique vantage point to explore race relations, given how this population is often celebrated as the quintessential symbol of racial progress.

Multiracial discourse and the prevalence of whiteness

Multiracial discourse began in the nineteenth century, during the “Age of Pathology,” (Ifekwunigwe 2009) which concentrated on a preoccupation with interracial sex as “moral degeneracy” due to an imaginary threat to white racial “purity.” The “Age of Celebration” (Ifekwunigwe 2009) emerged during the twentieth century, which consisted of an increase in studies, including nuanced testimonies of mixedness, perhaps due to multiracial people themselves conducting research (Funderburg 1994; Root 1992; Zack 1993). This era offered a more sophisticated, multi-disciplinary centreing of the tenuous nature of race by focusing on racial identity and identity politics. The twenty-first century, the “Age of Critique,” (Ifekwunigwe 2009) has grappled with the ever-evolving relationship between institutional practices and cultural shifts, such as evolving Census categories.

Different intellectual camps have emerged regarding multiracial discourse. Some scholars argue it perpetuates the racial hierarchy by relying on racial essentialism to create an “illusory” identity and imagined community for multiracial people (Spencer 2009, 223). Correspondingly, multiracial people are framed as “prime candidates for acceptance into the white majority” under the condition that they acknowledge white superiority (Phillips 2017, 17). Other scholars maintain that honouring a salient identity and establishing an affirming community for multiracial people disrupts the racial hierarchy (Root 1992) by challenging the “one drop rule” and the “binary racial project” (Daniel 2002, 3). By acknowledging the multiracial population, a meaningful identity can be validated (Rockquemore and Brunsma 2008), steps can be taken to reduce rampant multiracial microaggressions (Johnston and Nadal 2010) and a multiracial consciousness can emerge (strmic-pawl 2023). A growing number of scholars have simultaneously contested the racial hierarchy while centreing the unique experiences of multiracial people, due to a compulsory monoracial paradigm (Harris 2016; Jackson and Samuels 2019; Waring 2023). These studies highlight how the structural proclivity for contrived racial singularity serves white supremacy, despite presumed racial progress.

Whiteness is deeply embedded in the American public’s imagination regarding the multiracial population for several reasons. First, white middle-class mothers of multiracial children comprised the majority of the Multiracial Movement’s leaders, an act of “racial ventriloquism” (Phillips 2017, 6). Second, the term “biracial” or “multiracial” is often associated with people who are specifically Black and white (Carter 2013). Third, most research includes multiracial people with white ancestry (Rondilla et al. 2017), which reflects the pattern in the multiracial population and more importantly, the power of whiteness. Fourth, a growing multiracial population with white ancestry relieves white guilt (Mitchell 2022) and therefore, qualifies as “interest convergence,” a concept critical race scholars use to explain racial gains that only transpire when they also benefit whites (Delgado and Stefancic 2012). Without a critical lens, we are unable to grasp how the multiracial population is celebrated only when it aligns with the interest of whites (Harris 2016). This approach unveils the almost invisible ideological legacies lingering beneath seemingly enthusiastic support of the multiracial population.

Race relations and the privilege of whiteness

Race relations in the United States are, and have always been, a reflection of unequal power relations due to systemic racism and white privilege. Systemic racism includes “the racist framing, racist ideology, stereotypes, attitudes, racist emotions, discriminatory habits and actions, and extensive racist institutions developed over centuries by whites” (Feagin 2006, xii). Consequently, white privilege cascades through all institutions as undeserved benefits that provide white people with more resources (McIntosh 1988), more freedoms (Cooper 2015), more “psychological energy to devote to other [non-racial] issues” (DiAngelo 2020, 206) and ultimately, a more valued life (White, Stuart, and Morrissey 2021). White people enjoy undisputed racial belonging (DiAngelo 2020) because society was intentionally designed for them to succeed via institutional supports that are denied yet protected. Because institutions are interdependent, inequity is exacerbated (Egede and Walker 2020); therefore, white privilege accumulates across institutions just as oppression compounds across institutions for people of colour. Whiteness obstructs most white people from seeing their accrued, unearned privileges, as well as the stacked, undeserved disadvantages of their counterparts of colour. This lack of insight is shaped by white people being socialized to view themselves as individuals (DiAngelo 2020), not as undeserving members of a racialized group with a 400-year structural head start.

Unsurprisingly, white people and people of colour rarely agree on racial issues (Bonilla-Silva 2018) for several reasons. First, most white people view racism as prejudice, while most people of colour perceive racism as systemic (Bonilla-Silva 2018). Secondly, since the Civil Rights Movement, white people are more likely to adopt colourblind ideology, which removes racism from explanations of contemporary racial inequalities, justifies racial disparities, and emphasizes individualism (Bonilla-Silva 2018). White people are likely to condemn overt racism as the exclusive manifestation of racism (Bonilla-Silva 2018) without grasping that racism “ … is a shape-shifter that … thrives through its ability to take different forms as the need arrives” (Cazenave 2016, 80). Third, white people willingly identify historical examples of racism, yet they habitually dismiss current forms of racism (Wise 2008). These reasons are confirmed in the divergent survey responses among white people and people of colour. According to The Pew Center, 54 per cent of whites, 45 per cent of Hispanics, and 43 per cent of Black people think race relations will improve in the United States³ (Parker, Morin, and Horowitz 2019). Perhaps white people have a more optimistic view because they are less aware of white privilege and systemic racism, which resonates with my findings. In 2021, the NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll found that 57 per cent of Americans think race relations will improve in the future, 23 per cent say race relations will worsen, and 15 per cent believe race relations will not change⁴ (Redd 2021). These surveys are a starting point for understanding how Americans view the future of race relations. My article delves deeper by examining how multiracial people envision the future of race relations with a focus on how white privilege, systemic racism, and colourblind ideology factor into their predictions.

Methods

This study was drawn from a larger subset of data collected from 30 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with people who have parents of different racialized ancestries. Inspired by my eighth participant, I added a question to my interview protocol about the future of race relations. Therefore, this article is based on 23 interviews. Qualitative research is known for inviting nuance, complexity, and context (Beeson 1997), which is particularly important for this study, given my findings. In-depth interviews explore meanings, experiences, and processes (Sprague 2005) through storytelling and memory-sharing (Garcia 2010) that draw attention to the context in which such stories and memories emerged (Charmaz 2006).

Recruitment and reflexivity

Participants were recruited through a “call for participants” at two Midwestern universities as well as convenience and snowball sampling to enhance diversity regarding age, ancestries, region, and socio-economic statuses.⁵ Although the latter sampling methods create some limitations, they also facilitate advantages because an established rapport with participants can foster trust and connection. Additionally, multiracial people are not necessarily identifiable and do not tend to congregate in a specific area (Waring 2017), except for conferences, which would skew my findings. I shared my Black/White biracial background while recruiting to communicate my personal and professional connection to the multiracial population. Researchers argue that sharing a salient, marginalized identity during interviews can generate trust (Johnson-Bailey 2004) and validation, especially when participants’ perspectives defy social norms, (Ross 2017) as most of my participants do. Sharing a multiracial identity holds particular significance, given that the United States is a monoracist society (Johnston and Nadal 2010) that is built upon a monoracial paradigm (Harris 2016) that still constructs the multiracial population as outside of the norm (Waring and Bordoloi 2019). Consequently, multiracial insider status can facilitate honest testimonies as well as generate “knowledge that modernizes our racial understandings about this population” (Waring 2023, 60). Although I occupy “insider” status as a multiracial person, I did not share the same racialized backgrounds as my participants with different backgrounds. Also, I did not share other identities with some interviewees (i.e. socio-economic status, parental status, etc.), which situated me as an “outsider,” ultimately positioning me as a “semi-insider” (Gonzales 2020, 389).

Sample and data collection

I interviewed 23 participants from 18 to 37 years old. According to some qualitative scholars, 15 interviews are considered satisfactory (Green and Thorogood 2018). However, I interviewed more respondents to diversify my sample by interviewing older participants, people who were not in college, and individuals without a Black/White background because most of the people who contacted me were young, Black/White college students. See my table for information about participants’ racialized ancestries, ages, and genders (Table 1). Respondents’ ancestries included white and the following backgrounds: Asian, Black, Latinx or Indigenous (or a combination of three backgrounds).⁶ There were more Black/White participants than any other multiracial group, which might seem uneven. However, this cohort has been researched more than any other group, “most likely due to the strained and often fractious race relations” between white and Black people in the United States (Charmaraman et al. 2014, 340), which is relevant to this study.

I collected data from 2019–21 in the Midwest and on the East Coast at locations that were chosen by participants, mostly coffee shops. Once the pandemic began, I interviewed through Zoom, which enabled me to video record, and later document, important details such as hand gestures and facial expressions. With the verbal and written consent of every respondent, every interview was audio-recorded, transcribed, coded, and analysed. Participants and other identifying markers were replaced with pseudonyms. Interviews ranged from 46 minutes to three hours, and I asked a variety of questions. The exact question that informs this article is “Where do you see race relations going in the next 10, 15, 20 years in the United States?”

Table 1. Respondents’ demographic details^a.

Pseudonym	Age	Gender	Ancestries
Jasmine	18	Woman	Black/White
Daisy	19	Woman	Black/White
Lola	19	Woman	Latinx/White
Louis	20	Man	Black/White
Yanitza	20	Woman	Latinx/White
Vivian	20	Woman	Black/White
Khadijah	21	Woman	Black/White
Riley	21	Man	Black/White
Shade	21	Woman	Black/White
Casey	22	Man (Trans)	Indigenous/White
Andre	23	Man	Black/White
Ally	23	Woman	Asian/White
Serena	26	Woman	Black/White
Bianca	28	Woman	Latinx/White
Natalie	30	Woman	Black/White
Marisol	33	Woman	Latinx/White
Rich	34	Man	Latinx/White
Coral	35	Woman	Latinx/Indigenous/White
Nadia	35	Woman	Asian/White
Tatiana	35	Woman	Latinx/White
Dante	35	Man	Asian/White
Lyric	36	Woman	Asian/White
Ezra	37	Man	Black/White

^a This table was derived from a previous version (Waring 2023).

Coding and analysis

Inspired by Glaser and Strauss (1967), I used grounded theory to systematically code and analysed my data by identifying patterns that consistently emerged without the influence of existing coding systems or theoretical paradigms. I read and reread my transcriptions, identified recurring patterns, and organized these patterns into categories (Saldana 2009) based on how participants articulated their predictions. I then arranged these categories into themes by creating analytic memos (Saldana 2009), such a negative, positive, nuanced, and uncertain, yet negative. In re-reading transcriptions, I was able to detect distinctions between themes, thereby creating subthemes (Ryan and Bernard 2003), such as participants referencing ideologies or institutions to explain a negative future prediction. I also arranged “member checks” (Merriam 2009) to confirm validity by sharing my preliminary analysis with respondents and inviting their assessment to avoid misunderstandings and to enhance the rigour of my study (Shek et al. 2005). As my study continued, I ordered my themes into a typology (Lofland and Lofland 1995) of four predictions of the future of race relations, three of which are similar, but their subtleties are worth disentangling.

Findings

The majority of my participants contradicted mainstream assertions about the future of race relations in fundamental ways. Most participants envisioned negative race relations; less than one-fifth anticipated positive race relations. Out of 23 respondents, seven predicted a negative view of race relations. Six participants predicted a nuanced perspective, including positive and negative markers of future race relations. Four participants predicted positive race relations; this group was mostly men and either white presenting or less educated. Lastly, six participants initially expressed uncertainty; however, as they spoke, they expressed that society would stay the same as they outlined current negative examples of race relations. The racial uprising in 2020 was mentioned in two of the nine interviews that I conducted following George Floyd’s murder; one participant expressed a negative prediction of the future, the other provided a nuanced prediction.

Negative predictions of race relations: “fake change”

Thirty per cent of the participants predicted a negative view of race relations, despite anticipating an increase in the multiracial population, due to the current lack of impactful institutional initiatives that would generate racial equity. In this way, they are engaging in counter-storytelling (Delgado and Stefancic 2012) because their predictions are connected to how they interpret their own lived experiences, and their predictions centre a story that counters the dominant narrative regarding the future of race relations. Khadijah is 21 years old and has a white mother and a Black father. She identifies as biracial and was raised in the Midwest where she lived in a predominately Black community and attended a predominately Black school in a large city. Her perspective is reflective of the other participants with negative predictions:

It’s kind of hard [to say] because America is such a stuck society. I don’t think we can really like change. Or we like fake change. On paper, it’s like we’re [racially] progressing. But really, the underlying root of the problem remains. So you can never really progress. I do think that obviously, we’ve seen the multiracial community grow and more people have been comfortable, like, saying that they’re mixed. I definitely think that communities [of color] will continue to grow. But I … don’t know how optimistic I am that like racism is going to not be as big of a problem as it is. Just in the way our society is built, and what we value as a group of people … It’s hard to think that racism is going to change or how it’s viewed is going to change in the future.

Khadijah then referenced a course she was enrolled in and asserted how much racism is connected to “fighting for resources.” Khadijah’s articulation of “fake change” in the future of the United States is likely the result of a combination of her lived experiences as a biracial woman in a segregated Black community and school as well as her college education. She is clearly aware of the dominant, uncritical ideology that the United States is continuing to racially progress by stating “ … on paper, it’s like we’re progressing.” Simultaneously, she recognizes the paradoxical dynamic of perceived racial change and lack of systemic shifts. Her opinion aligns with scholars who acknowledge that “ … pining for multiraciality seemingly absolves the desire to dismantle structural racism” (Mitchell 2022, 2). In elucidating the role of systems (i.e. “the way our society is built”), Khadijah is calling attention to the need for impactful institutional changes for racism to end or change, which echoes racism scholars (Bonilla-Silva 2018; Feagin 2006).

Tatianna is 35 years old and has a white mother and a Puerto Rican father. She identifies with both of her racialized ancestries, although “it kind of irritates” her when she is asked how she identifies. Tatianna is from the East Coast and has resided in a racially “diverse, accepting and welcoming” community her entire life. She completed most of her schooling at a predominately white private school and attended a racially and ethnically heterogeneous high school where she felt more comfortable because she “never went to school with anybody who was Hispanic” until high school. The mother of two young children, Tatianna declares,

I mean, our current race relations as a society is abysmal. They’re awful. They’re worse now than they were … four, eight, 12 years ago. I really have hope, but I’m not hangin’ on it. I would obviously hope for a better future for my boys. I look at my parents, I look at me and [her Black husband]. I can’t imagine that only 50, almost 60 years ago, it was illegal for somebody like he and I to even be married. I feel like, I don’t know, I want to say we’ve made great strides, but I mean, we haven’t. Let’s be honest. We haven’t. I think maybe depending on where you live. I don’t know. I guess my hope is that we … You can’t get anywhere until you take the racism out of the system and we’re nowhere near getting rid of that anytime soon. I’m being honest. It’s scary.

Tatianna, a college graduate, begins her answer by unpacking the current racial climate, which she characterizes as worse than in years prior. Like Khadijah, her explanation disputes the popular discourse that American society is exclusively racially progressing without regressive steps. Tatianna’s understanding of racism as systemic reflects Khadijah’s reasoning as well as other participants who envisioned a negative future due to lack of institutional reform. Tatianna’s response is nuanced in that she recognizes some measures of progress, such as her ability to marry her Black husband. However, the general tone of her response is that substantial systemic work is required for considerable change to result. Notably, the Supreme Court case that ended anti-miscegenation laws could be considered an example of interest convergence because the couple consisted of a white man and a “colored” (Black and Native) woman. Hence, white people like Richard Loving benefited from this seemingly racially progressive institutional act.

Louis, another college student, has a Black father and a biracial Black/White mother.⁷ He identifies as “mixed” if he’s in an accepting environment and Black if he’s “in a room full of Black people.” He is 20 years old and grew up in a large racially and economically segregated Midwestern city. He begins by predicting an increase in the multiracial population, followed by how politics influences how he envisions the future.

I think that there will be a lot more mixed-race [people]. But I think that it will still be heavily separated, just because having people like Trump in office, it makes people feel … like … negative. He’s supporting negative … negative [snaps fingers to trigger a thought] motives, kind of, for another side. He promotes that. Then [his rhetoric] is being broadcasted, it’s not being shut down at all. So it’s making people feel more open to negatively supporting other beliefs, you know? I don’t really see more of everybody coming together. A lot of people like to say, “It’s getting better.” But it’s still bad.

Louis, like Khadijah and Tatianna, highlights institutions by explaining how former President Trump’s leadership position has far-reaching consequences. He also echoes their perspectives when he highlights the dominant ideology that society is purportedly perpetually improving, and how he disagrees with this claim based on his lived experience. His ability to detect ideologies as a function of racism indicates his understanding of racism as structural. Ideologies are the driving force behind institutional inequalities (Bonilla-Silva 2018; Feagin 2006). All participants who expressed negative predictions mentioned institutions, resources, and ideologies, not personal experiences. This was the case regardless of age, gender, racialized ancestries, racial identity, the racial composition of one’s community, and area of the country, which is significant, given the “historic, demographic, political or cultural variations” of different regions in the United States (Törngren, Irastorza, and Rodríguez-García 2021, 766). These participants came to the same critical conclusion regarding the future of race relations in the United States.

Nuanced predictions of race relations: “the new white [people]”

Twenty-six per cent of the participants anticipated a nuanced prediction of race relations that included positive and negative race relations outcomes. Andre is a 23-year-old gay man with a white mother and Black father. He identified as white as a child because his “world was white;” he identifies with both of his ancestries as an adult. Although Andre moved around, he spent most of his time in a large, racially heterogeneous Midwestern metropolitan area. A senior in college, he states:

It could go multiple directions. It could either go positively, where we get more mixed-race people. I believe this is what a lot of people think: that the more biracials we have, the less racism we will have. But I can also see the statistic[al] side. The more biracials we have – they are most likely going to be half white. We’re going to be the new white [people] someday. Someday you and I are going to be the new white [people]! It’d be insane if 30, 40 years from now, I’m now white. It’s going to be like, “Wow, 40 years ago, when I was 20, I was Black.”

Andre begins by explicitly acknowledging a nuanced approach to pondering the future before stating that the multiracial population might increase, which he describes as “positive” for society. This understanding aligns with the dominant narrative that this article discredits, which is the presumed synergy between the increasing multiracial population and reduced racism. However, Andre immediately decentres this narrative by offering another angle from which we can analyse the population. He notes the prevalence of white ancestry as an indication that multiracial people will become “the new white [people].” This is noteworthy for two reasons. First, he is aware of the racialized ancestries of most of the multiracial population and second, he is conscious of the implications of white ancestry as privilege-oriented. Phillips (2017) and Bonilla-Silva (2018) have argued that multiracial people will be considered white or “honorary whites,” respectively, in the future. Andre went on to say, “We’re going to end up having white privilege;” another study documented that this group already has “white privilege by proxy” or undeserved benefits via their white parent (Waring 2023). Although Andre was the only participant who thought multiracial people would be considered white, many participants anticipated multiracial people being treated better than people of colour, especially Black people. Andre concluded with, “You can’t change a cycle if somebody doesn’t interfere,” underscoring the need for addressing racism at the systemic level, which echoes participants who offered exclusively negative race relations predictions.

Dante, a college graduate with an advanced degree, is 35 years old with a Chinese mother and a white father. He has always identified with both of his backgrounds. He was born and raised on the East Coast in the same racially and ethnically diverse town as Tatianna. Dante’s multi-layered response is representative of other participants with nuanced predictions.

So short term, I would say I don’t think it’s going to change and it’s probably going to be as bad as it ever has been, for sure. I think as our parents age out and that Boomer population becomes less and less prevalent, I think it’ll get better, for sure. I think it’s just inherent that it has to get better, because you’re going to be dealing with a different set of individuals who grew up in a very, very different set of times. But the people who are going to be in power—millennials— they’re just exposed to [diversity] more because we are that multiracial generation. I don’t think earlier generations had that.

In Dante’s opinion, the immediate future of race relations will not only be negative, but it will decline. However, he predicts that as the older generation ages and occupies fewer positions of power, society will improve. He also attributes change to millennials, who he believes will set a different racial tone for society. Dante quite likely represents the “quintessential candidate” to have a positive prediction regarding race relations because he came of age in a diverse city, has friends of diverse backgrounds – including multiracial – and he is multiracial. However, he still had a partially negative view of the future of race relations. His response demonstrates an understanding of history, generational patterns, and power shifts, none of which include his own experience and all of which include the recognition of institutions and privilege, like those who anticipated a negative racial future.

Positive predictions of race relations: “if racism was as bad … ”

Seventeen per cent of the participants offered positive predictions of the future of race relations. Notably, these participants included three men and one woman. Two of the men were less educated than the other participants. Also, one man and one woman were white-passing. I argue that experiencing male privilege, being less educated and benefiting from white privilege increases the likelihood of adopting individualistic ideologies and decreases the likelihood of incorporating an institutional approach to racial progress. Ezra is 37 years old with a white mother and a Black father. He had completed an associate’s degree at the time of our interview and was planning to pursue a Bachelor’s after saving enough money. Ezra identified “as this country sees me and that’s as a Black American.” His hometown is a large Midwestern inner city that is infamously racially and economically segregated. A father of two, he explains:

I think you’re going to see more diversity, more racially, culturally mixed. Social media and the news blows a lot of racial stuff out of proportion. I mean, it is still current, but I worked at [an electronics store] for a year in Park City. There, you have a high volume of different [races], yet [pre]dominantly white people, from all [walks] of life from multiple careers. If racism was really as bad as social media made it look, I would have had some bad experiences there.

Ezra’s response begins with a prediction of growth in overall diversity and the multiracial population, which does not necessarily translate to racial progress since the size or growth of a group does not indicate resource attainment or opportunities in society (Törngren, Irastorza, and Rodríguez-García 2021). While Ezra acknowledges racism (“it is still current”), he holds the opinion that “racial stuff” is exaggerated due to social media and news media. Minimizing the magnitude of racism is one frame of colourblind racism (Bonilla-Silva 2018), the prevailing racial ideology in the United States. Ezra’s explanation for supporting his prediction is that he worked in a store with many white customers yet had not had any “bad experiences.” Ezra’s view is limited to an individualistic assessment of race relations; he assumes because he has not had any racist interactions with white customers over the course of one year, that the future of race relations will follow suit. He fails to recognize the systemic scope of racism. Research shows that multiracial people with white or Asian mothers, like Ezra, are more likely to adopt mainstream cultural values like individualism (Robinson-Wood et al. 2021). Furthermore, studies suggest that some multiracial people’s experiences align more with the dominant group than racially oppressed groups (Törngren, Irastorza, and Rodríguez-García 2021). Lastly, because Ezra was not afforded the educational opportunities as most of his counterparts, it is not surprising that his prediction is restricted to individuals and excludes institutions. A more advanced education might have equipped him with a more sophisticated, structural understanding of racism.

Lola is a 19-year-old student attending a prestigious university. She has a white mother and a Cuban father. She grew up in a wealthy, white suburb in the Midwest. She identified as “white for so long” because she is assumed to be white, although now, “I let myself accept the fact that I am biracial, and I can identify that way.”

I would be optimistic about going in a positive way and people being more open, more affirming and accepting of people of mixed race. There are a lot of things wrong in our country right now, but I just feel like we are actually in an age, especially young people, where so much social change is happening in such a positive way in terms of identity. So, I don’t see society going backwards … but it’s … it’s hard to say how things could progress really? How do you measure progression and then how do you understand what that even means? Does that mean more people not questioning me saying I’m biracial? It’s just hard because social change moves so slowly. And when you have a small percentage of people bringing it down, which can do so much damage.

Lola anticipates society being more open, affirming. and accepting of one racialized group, the multiracial population. She did not mention any other racially oppressed groups and she attributed these future markers of positive race relations to the younger population, as did other participants. She believes that young people will foster large-scale changes, although young people are not immune to perpetuating racist attitudes (see Ortiz 2020, 2021). She said it would be difficult to measure racial progress and her only potential example of racial progress is identity validation for multiracial people, or specifically, herself. While identity validation is deeply important for multiracial people (Lou and Lalonde 2015), identity validation does not demolish racist structures (Harris 2016). Also, it is noteworthy that Lola questions how to measure racial progress even though she was enrolled in a race-oriented course at the time of her interview. This individualistic approach is devoid of the structural nature of racism. At the same time, as a white-presenting person with white privilege, her desire to be accepted as multiracial might obscure or override her willingness to unpack the complexities of longstanding racial inequities, despite the education that her privilege has afforded her. Moreover, as a white-appearing person, she and her white-appearing male counterpart might have been socialized to think individualistically about racism, like most white people in the United States (Bonilla-Silva 2018).

Unsure means unchanged and unequal: “going in circles”

Twenty six per cent of the participants, all women, initially answered, “I don’t know” or “I can’t answer that.” However, as they proceeded to talk without being probed, it became evident that they did not think society would change. Furthermore, as they discussed current race relations, they exclusively discussed systemic racism, and it became clear that they anticipated systemic racism would continue. Although this theme resembles earlier themes in that it acknowledges racism as systemic, it is distinct in that participants expressed indecision at first, which could be connected to the lack of a national racial consciousness. Vivian is 20 years old with a white mother and a Black father. She was brought up in the same racially and economically segregated city as Ezra. She identified as Black when she was younger because she “felt like she had to prove” her Black “side.” She added, “Now I identify as biracial, I don’t want to choose one side over the other.” She explains:

I don’t know. I hope it’ll get better. Do I think it will? I’m not completely sure because I feel like we’re just going in circles, reinventing things. Black people have always been on the bottom. We continue to be on the bottom. In the prison system now, [prisoners] have to work for free. That’s basically slavery in the new age but they’re just calling it something else. I feel like I don’t know if it’ll get better.

Bianca is a 28-year-old woman with a Puerto Rican mother and a white father. She grew up on the East Coast in a predominately Latinx neighbourhood and moved to the Midwest, “the land of white people,” during high school. She identifies as “Now? Mixed. Before, just Latino. Now that I’ve lived in [the Midwest] for years, I feel more mixed. I feel a little bit more okay with my white side.”

Wow, what an impossible question to answer! Society has regressed, really. I think if you had asked someone during the Obama Administration, “Where is race relations going,” they would not have said where we are. Which is in the land of, “let’s build a wall with a moat and alligators in it, and an electrified fence.” I think the [Trump] Administration determines how race relations are going to go … I think it’ll be a great time for white women [laughs], you know? I keep seeing all those, “The future is female” shirts. White women are like, “We’re going to fucking have our day.” Of course, it will be their turn first.

Vivian and Bianca are different ages, grew up in different regions of the country, have different racialized ancestries and yet, came to the same conclusion after initially expressing reluctance: systemic racism will remain. The criminal justice system will remain racially unjust and white women will have more opportunities before racial equity is a societal priority. Vivian refers to the prison industrial complex, an institution, as a current example of systemic racism and in doing so, she echoes Cazenave’s (2016) “shapeshifting” observation of racism. Bianca also mentions an institution, politics, as she makes note of the haunting trend of supposed racial progress (i.e. Obama’s election), followed by unequivocal racial backlash (i.e. Trump’s election) and another entitled, privileged group (i.e. white woman) being accommodated. In other words, racial inequity ensues. In this way, both participants engage with and challenge the uncritical ideology that society is exclusively progressing. Their predictions are reflective of respondents who initially expressed uncertainty and then pivoted to systemic racism.

Discussion and conclusion

We are on the cusp of an iconic racial moment. Most people under the age of 18 in the United States are people of colour (Mather and Lee 2020). Four states (Hawaii, California, Texas, and New Mexico) and the District of Columbia have more residents of colour than white residents (Nittle 2021). Furthermore, the majority of the multiracial population is young (Jones et al. 2021). What kind of America will they inherit in the next 10, 20, 30 years? We have no way of knowing for sure; however, history and institutions indicate clear patterns. Without structural interventions that weaken white privilege by centreing racial equity, such as equitable access to education, housing, and healthcare, we will see more of the same: more systemic racism and justifiably deep racial tensions. Furthermore, the overzealous narrative that paints the multiracial population as a symbol of racial progress is dangerous because it allows leaders to eschew the institutional initiatives that racial progress would require by flaunting this narrative as fact. Given that mixed race studies is one of the fastest growing areas of inquiry in addition to one of the most controversial (Ifekwunigwe 2009), it is worth exploring how multiracial people’s lived experiences offer insights on the future of race relations in a nation with a notorious racist past and present.

My study suggests a different racial reality than the dominant narrative would have us believe. According to most of my participants, the future of race relations in the United States will be negative, and the patterns that emerged in their reasoning resonate with racism scholarship: inextricable from ideologies, institutions, and privilege (Bonilla-Silva 2018; Feagin 2006). My participants explained that American society wants to give the impression that it is racially progressive, although it makes little institutional effort to achieve such status. My findings implicate the structural conditions that positioned my participants to be aware of how ideologies, institutions, and privilege operate to perpetuate racial inequity and ensuing negative race relations. As all participants had white ancestry, their white privilege (personal, by proxy (Waring 2023) or both) shaped their educational access and outcomes. Additionally, as minorities in American society (Bonam and Shih 2009), their lived experiences, inextricably bound to racism and monoracism, inherently informed their predictions. Such a large percentage of participants with a negative view is likely a result of multiple recent racialized events: Trump’s overt racist rhetoric, the murder of George Floyd and increased attention to the Black Lives Matter Movement, and rampant anti-Asian hate since the beginning of the pandemic. Also, systemic racism has been acknowledged by mainstream society more so than in the past (Abdullah 2020).

Participants who envisioned a nuanced view discussed negative markers of race relations in ways that mirrored their aforementioned counterparts. Although these respondents anticipated racial gains, their structural analyses underscored the significance of power, systems, and society-wide patterns. Even participants who initially reported they were unsure about the future concluded that race relations would be negative, based on contemporary institutional inequities and subsequent racial disparities. Like the former group, these participants offered counterstories, a critical race theory tenet, that provide shared structural experiences and “disrupt normative cultural and personal narratives that reify the marginalization of people of color” (De La Garza and Ono 2016, 394). These participants also challenged the white supremacist cultural norm of “quantity over quality” (Jones and Okun 2001) by refusing to interpret the growth of the multiracial population as an indisputable indication of racial progress. Their racial framework rests upon an understanding that rising numbers alone do not signify racial progress because racialized experiences in the multiracial population tell a more complicated story.

The only participants who could foresee an exclusively positive future were mostly men and were either phenotypically white or less educated. This finding is interesting because it highlights how two layers of privilege (i.e. male and white) as well as structural disadvantage (i.e. less educated) facilitate an individualistic prediction of race relations. These factors are sociologically relevant because these experiences invite individualism based on a patriarchy that obscures structural conditions, white privilege that relies on individualism, and an educational system that generally excludes curriculum that debunks individualism as an ideology. Individualism lubricates a denial of racism as systemic and removes the series of socio-historical processes and institutional arrangements that cultivated the advancement of white people as a group (DiAngelo 2020), not as individuals. Therefore, it is not surprising that people with an individualistic perspective would view the future of the United States favourably because they fail to consider, or even notice, the larger social structure.

An increase in the multiracial population and a negative prediction of race relations by multiracial people is not mutually exclusive, as my study shows. What does it say when our supposedly most promising racial cohort foresees a future of systemic racism and white privilege, despite a more Black, Brown, and multiracial America? The way white supremacy has prevailed despite a declining monoracial white population requires a highly critical lens to detect its “shapeshifting” character (Cazenave 2016). The celebration of the multiracial population cleverly swivels attention away from white privilege and systemic racism to mythical notions of racial harmony and progress, perhaps in part because most are of white/non-white parentage. My research builds on other studies that destabilize the seemingly straightforward narrative that an expanding multiracial population approximates racial progress, eases racial tensions, and epitomizes racial harmony (Harris 2016; Joseph-Salisbury 2018; Mitchell 2022). Based on the lived experiences of my participants, it becomes clear that society uses the number of multiracial people to finesse seismic racial progress, which deepens white supremacy by creating a grandiose story that belies the incentive to transform institutions. We will continue to sabotage our success regarding racial progress and equity in the United States if we fail to listen to people who have a sophisticated understanding of how society is organized, how it changes, and how it manages to remain the same, despite seductive racial optical illusions.

Acknowledgements

I am beyond grateful to Yves Kalambayi, Cia Waring, Stephanie M. Ortiz, Kimani Brown, Susan Tripathy, Selena O’Connor, Olivia Castonguay, and my students for your meaningful support and recommendations. To my participants, I am indebted to you and I hope to make you proud.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 I use the term “multiracial” to refer to people who have two or more racialized ancestries.

2 The 1890 Census allowed people to choose “mulatto,” indicating Black/White ancestry; this designation disappeared in 1900 and re-appeared in 1910 and 1920 (Johnson 2003).

3 This article did not include statistics on Asian and Indigenous people.

4 This article did not disaggregate the data by race.

5 My research was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater (approval number: IRB-FY2017-18-29) and the University of Massachusetts-Lowell (approval number: 21-044).

6 Every participant had a white or half-white parent because of a larger study on whiteness. Although terminology such as “half-white” is not ideal, I reference this language to convey recent white ancestry and more importantly, to honour linguistic integrity (Johnson-Bailey 2004).

7 Louis is “second-generation” multiracial. Although “second-generation” multiracial often refers to people with one white parent and one multiracial parent (Pilgrim 2021), categorizing Louis as Black, especially given how he identifies, subscribes to the one-drop rule (Iverson et al. 2022).