«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

Primary Sources: The 1940 Census on "White"

From AP comes the news that by 2042 whites will no longer be the majority ethnic group in the United States:

By 2050, whites will make up 46 percent of the population and blacks will make up 15 percent, a relatively small increase from today. Hispanics, who make up about 15 percent of the population today, will account for 30 percent in 2050, according to the new projections. Asians, which make up about 5 percent of the population, are projected to increase to 9 percent by 2050.

What does this mean? Historically, not a damn thing.

According to the current census a white person is:

A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

This means that someone whose parents were born in Morocco, who looks like this, would be white. Someone with parents from Argentina, who might look like this, would not be.

But it hasn't always been that way. Race is an arbitrary classification. The first census, in 1790, broke the population into exactly three racial groups: "free whites," "other persons," and "slaves."

By the 1910 census Americans were instructed to:

Write "W" for white; "B" for black; "Mu" for mulatto; "Ch" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese; "In" for Indian. For all persons not falling within one of these classes, write "Ot" (for other), and write on the left-hand margin of the schedule the race of the person so indicated. For census purposes, the term "black" (B) includes all persons who are evidently full-blooded negroes, while the term "mulatto" (Mu) includes all other persons having some proportion or perceptible trace of negro blood.

The 1940 census demanded that Americans sort their identity according to the following Byzantine racial classification system:

Write "W" for white; "Neg" for Negro; "In" for Indian; "Chi" for Chinese; "Jp" for Japanese; "Fil" for Filipino; "Hi" for Hindu; and "Kor" for Korean. For a person of any other race, write the race in full. Mexicans-Mexicans are to be regarded as white unless definitely of Indian or other nonwhite race. Negroes-A person of mixed white and Negro blood should be returned as Negro, no matter how small a percentage of Negro blood. Both black and mulatto persons are to be returned as Negroes, without distinction. A person of mixed Indian and Negro blood should be returned as a Negro, unless the Indian blood very definitely predominates and he is universally accepted in the community as an Indian. Indians-A person of mixed white and Indian blood should be returned as an Indian, if enrolled on an Indian agency or reservation roll, or if not so enrolled, if the proportion of Indian blood is one-fourth or more, or if the person is regarded as an Indian in the community where he lives. Mixed Races-Any mixture of white and nonwhite should be reported according to the nonwhite parent. Mixtures of nonwhite races should be reported according to the race of the father, except that Negro-Indian should be reported as Negro.

Further immigration made this sort of distinction complicated. The US never knows how to classify new immigrants. What race are Filipinos? How about people from the Dominican Republic? How about Barack Obama? At some points in American history the Germans, Greeks, Hispanics, Irish, Italians, Slavs, or Ashkenazi Jews were not considered white people.

With these definitions, only about half of my ancestors, for instance, were "white." Using the original census definitions and the assumptions underling them, whites haven't been the majority since the 19th century. Even if you're white now, your ancestors probably weren't.

The census is pretty open about this, too. The office explains that:

The Census Bureau complies with the Office of Management and Budget's standards for maintaining, collecting, and presenting data on race, which were revised in October 1997. They generally reflect a social definition of race recognized in this country. They do not conform to any biological, anthropological or genetic criteria.

So by 2050, we really have no idea how white the US population will be. It all depends on how we choose to define it.

—Daniel Luzer

Comments

Affirmative Action is institutionalized racism, as well as racial profiling.

Posted by: MaryLou on 08/18/08 at 6:20 PM Respond

MaryLou:

Since it was Richard Nixon who institutionalized affirmative action, I guess the rumors are true: Republicans *are* actually the cause of all institutionalized racism in America.

Anyway, to be on topic (and not crazy): Students of "nationalism" and international history love to study Census documents. The Nation -as an "imagined community" - uses the "print-vernaculars" of the Census, Map, and Museum to build the facade of cohesion.

See you have hit on something here: it's not the lunacy of the categories, its how they quantify 'em. That's really where the powerful rubber really meets the racists road. You will always notice a census-maker's love of unambiguity in a quest for thoroughness. That explains decrees like all "person[s] of mixed white and Negro blood should be returned as Negro, no matter how small a percentage of Negro blood" and the margins for "others" to write out races not included, perhaps, heretofore never even considered!

"The fiction of the census is that everyone is in it, and that everyone has one – and only one – extremely clear place. No fractions." - Benedict Anderson.

One nation, under God. No illegals.

Posted by: Plays in Peroria on 08/19/08 at 12:46 PM Respond

The author says: "So by 2050, we really have no idea how white the US population will be. It all depends on how we choose to define it."
I would add that it also depends on our immigration policies ... which currently are upside down.

Posted by: ed on 08/20/08 at 1:21 PM Respond

Hmmm...As a person having origins in any of the original peoples not only of Europe, but also (in part) of the Middle East, or North Africa, this definition of White puzzles me. I most definitely am not prejudiced against these my distant kin, but most of them don't fit the usual definition of White. And then you have other branches of our government singling out these people for investigation and suspecting them as possible terrorists.

Posted by: Anne on 08/20/08 at 1:47 PM Respond

I expect that it will come to everyone having to be genetically tested, and whoever the resulting "pure" Whites are will have special exalted status.
They will only breed with each other, and their limited gene pool will encourage the emergence of deadly recessive traits that result in their demise.
Then the next Whitest people will repeat the process until they die off too.
Then the next...

Posted by: Marymomgret on 08/20/08 at 3:09 PM Respond

My fair skin son self-identifies as Mexican-American. Though her complexion is olive, my daughter self-identifies as white.

Now I learn my immigrant grandparents weren't classified as white because they came from the wrong countries. I need to sit down. All this reclassification is getting me dizzy.

Posted by: offbeatjim on 08/20/08 at 5:26 PM Respond

Racial categories are necessary for Affirmative Action programs. Without them, the Affirmative Action programs could not function.

Posted by: AA on 08/20/08 at 6:56 PM Respond

Yet another reason, AA, why I think affirmative action needs to be made unnecessary through massive education reform. It'll take time and effort, though, unlike our approach so far of simply throwing cash at the problem.

But then, now that I think about it, maybe we should be getting rid of racial categories. Maybe we won't be able to convince people that everyone should get the same education (tailored at the classroom level by teachers with the right resources on hand, the training to use them, and small enough classes that it's feasible to do it) until they're truly blinded to race, at least at the bureaucratic level.

Posted by: Tim J. on 08/25/08 at 9:24 AM Respond

You environmentalists all miss the point. 450 million polluters in 2050. If you think life is unbearable now with only 300 million, wait until we add another 150 million to our crowded freeways and cities(they ain't going to the country to live). Whatever happened to being socially responsible with the population? I know that the San Francisco people are doing their part, but the folks in the red states are producing Bushes like rabbits. Fascism is around the corner.

Posted by: Todd on 08/25/08 at 1:49 PM Respond