Introduction
The United States government conducts its population census after every ten years. The exercise is conducted by the United States Census Bureau which makes use of enumerators in data collection. The data collected from the census deal with issues that relate to respondents’ race and ethnicity. From the era of civil war, such data has been used to appreciate the ethnic and racial diversity of the Americans rather than being used to instigate racial prejudice. The essay will look into the background information on the United States Censuses.
Racial reorganization and the United States Census 1850-1930: Mulattoes, Half-Breeds, Mixed Parentage, Hindus, and the Mexican Race.
The period between the civil war and World War II characterized an era of pronounced racial inclinations. Well-known races expanded and contracted. The census orchestrated the demarcation of social boundaries between different classes of people and the general population became obsessed with who and who belonged to which group. Racism became rife. The white race did not of course relinquish their position at the top of the social ladder but the question that people kept asking was who in particular occupied the topmost position in the social ladder (Hochschild, Jennifer and Brenna Marea Powell 1).
Blacks and the Chinese struggled for the lowest position in the social hierarchy with elevation greatly dependent on how the power brokers defined the group. Assimilation of Mexican Americans, South Asians and Pacific-rim Asians depended on whether their classification allowed them to be potential insiders or perennial non-Americans. Levels of governance were deeply engrossed in the racial reorganization issue wholesomely (2).
At the time of the 1902 US census, social and political order was greatly influenced by one’s racial inclination. The census impetus for racial classification was unrivaled as it touched exclusively on racial nitty gritty (3). Different groups of people were adequately illuminated: the mixture between blacks and other races, racial classification of Asians by nationality, classification of Latin Americans as whites, mulatto or as being racially distinct and finally whites were distinguished using their countries of birth, whether they had mixed parentage or their mother tongue. One episode of racializing religion was witnessed when south Asian immigrants were pooled as Hindoos (3).
Native Americans were given a wide berth as they were notably ignored by the census and classified as being black but with white blood. In the 1930 census, the racial reorganization was discarded and the American census bureau only recognized the white, the Negro, the Indians and five Asian nationalities. Racial mixtures, mixed parentage, the Hispanics, the Hindoos were given blackout. In 1940, the use of the word ‘colored’ in conjunction with the word race was totally disbanded (Hochschild, Jennifer and Brenna Marea Powell 4). The era of World War II was ushered in with an already established racial order and racial reorganization.
Scholars have continued to ask themselves why the United States government census bureau exhibited inconsistency and instability in the way they undertook to do their racial categorization. Moreover, other questions have been raised concerning why the bureau chose to undertake the reorganization of the racial order. The reasons as to why population censuses were loaded with ethno-racial order, and why they had racial inclinations, have always been raised from different quarters. Horschild et al (4) narrowing on the American perspective, posit that there was a hot contest between the Congress and bureaucracy over political control orchestrated by elected and appointed politicians.
These people had a passion for scientific integrity. Moreover, these individuals harbored diverse ideological beliefs on racial matters. Such beliefs had soft spot for the elevation of the status of the white race while subordinating the position of the nonwhites. Actual and potential Americans could be distinguished. The same applied to the people who were classified by the census bureau as perennial outsiders. However, confusion did arise about whoever nonwhites and perennial outsiders were. Hoschild et al (4) attempted to explain why the census at this point of time was so obsessed with creating racial order by saying that politics of population change infiltrated the bureau’s internal actions.
US Census Bureau. Questions and Answers for Census 2000 Data on Race
The 1990 US census allowed the respondents to register more than one race because they were many children who were born out of unions between people of mixed races. This was intended to help the government in knowing the diversity of cultures in the United States (US Census Bureau 1). The 2000 population census in America presented 63 racial categories. These are composed of Americans who originated from Africa, the white race; Alaska locals; Indians of American descent; Asians; residents of the pacific island; Hawaiians and the; additional races and a mixture of the above-named groups (1).
The data products could not reflect all the racial categories captured in the census therefore data was only shown for the six categories outlined. The category of two or more races was created in response to the possibility that a respondent could be having one or more races. Respondents who said that they were white but could trace their descent from African Americans; or whites of Asian descent; or white but of American Indian origin; or American with Indian ancestry and Alaskan natives were categorized as white or in a combination category (1). This brought about the amalgamation of white and a blend of African Americans; American Indian having blood relation of locals from Alaska or an assortment of the two; Asian or a combination; indigenous Hawaiian and resident of pacific island or a blend; and extra races or a combination.
Data users and ethnic advisory committees determined the census data products whose tabulation could or could not have racial bearings. This decision was arrived at with an intention to safeguard the privacy and confidentiality of the respondents (2). The 2000 census department endeavored to conform to instructions which were given by the management office on budget and social rights examining and enforcement (3).
The census bureau tackled issues touching on race and ethnicity by reflecting the social definition of race that is recognized in the United States of America. Data on anthropological, biological or genetic aspects were never delved into. The census bureau treated ethnicity as one’s heritage; his or her lineage; or a nationality group. The country of birth of a particular person was also be used in answering questions related to ethnicity. Ethnicity was also looked at from the perspective of one’s ancestry before one went to the United States of America. People who identified themselves as Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino were categorized to be belonging to any of the three categories aforementioned (3).
Conclusion
Issues related to ethnicity and race cannot be divorced from the population census at least for now because they offer insights into the centrality of racial and ethnic inclinations of the Americas political, social and economic setup. Capturing data on ethnicity and race enable people to appreciate the importance of diversity as well as enabling people to generate a feeling of self-worth.
Works cited
Hochschild, Jennifer and Brenna, Marea-Powell. Racial reorganization and the United States Census 1850-1930: Mullatoes, Half–Breeds, Mixed Parentage, Hindoos, and the Mexican Race. Studies in American Development. New York: HUP, 2008.
US Census Bureau. Questions and Answers for Census 2000 Data on Race. 2001. Web.