Where is this expressed, in which things? Curious.
It's expressed in the whole debate about white Hispanics. In the US racial census, there is a separate category for races (black, white, East Asian, etc.) and a separate one for ethnicity (whether you are Hispanic). This is done because Latin Americans often cannot correctly identify their race, which is a perhaps a consequence of very confused early 20th century integrationist efforts in their states (e.g.,
Mexican census). For example, here is the rather
moderate correlation between self-identified race and actual genetic make-up in Brazil (red = European, blue = African, green = native). It's even more jumbled in Mexico, and the people only get more native as you go south of it. By contrast, the correlation between actual genetic origins and self-identified race in the US is quite reasonable, at least among whites.
Take a look at Mexican genetics - in the admixture bar plots below, each little narrow line is a person. You can see that in a sample of random Mexicans, pretty much no one is without significant native admixtures, and most are about 30-50% European:
The left likes to take the 'white Hispanic' designation at face value and claim that the narrative about whites becoming a minority is hysteria because the new Mexican, Honduran, Salvadorean, etc. immigrants are white (and Spanish). It's a pretty big movement that draws its strength on the whole race is a social construct narrative. Here is a discussion of this:
[link]
