The Right Opinion
When 'Minority' Is a Trick of Definition
When the Census Bureau this month issued a press release headlined "Most Children Younger Than Age 1 are Minorities," the media snapped to attention. News outlets nationwide covered the announcement, hailing it as a "historic demographic milestone" (CNN), as the "dawn of an era in which whites no longer will be in the majority" (Washington Post), and as an "important turning point for the nation" (McClatchy) that would "starkly ... change the face of America's next generations" (Time).
None of that was true.
None of that was new, either. The Census Bureau keeps dangling commonplace demographic data as if they were a dramatic racial revelation, and the press keeps taking the bait. The stories this month about minority births becoming the majority could have been recycled from a year ago, when the same thing was being reported -- and with the same air of history in the making. "For the first time," an AP story declared in June 2011, "minorities make up a majority of babies in the US, part of a sweeping race change ... that could reshape government policies." Three months earlier, The New York Times had told its readers that babies born to minorities were "on the verge" of becoming the majority of all US births.
For years Americans have been hearing about the coming nonwhite majority. With every fresh tranche of census data, the issue is raised anew. "Minorities, now roughly one-third of the U.S. population, are expected to become the majority in 2042," the Census Bureau forecast in 2008, "with the nation projected to be 54 percent minority in 2050." Savor the absurdity of the phrase "54 percent minority." It isn't the only thing about this issue that is irrational.
To begin with, all the ballyhoo about America's impending metamorphosis from white to nonwhite makes sense only if white Hispanics aren't what they say they are. Census Bureau guidelines specify that "Hispanics may be of any race" and that "The federal government treats Hispanic origin and race as separate and distinct concepts." In the 2010 US Census, 50.5 million Americans identified themselves as ethnically Hispanic; of those, more than half -- 26.7 million -- were white. The only way to conjure up a looming nonwhite majority is to arbitrarily subtract whites of Hispanic origin from the nation's overall white population.
That "sweeping race change," in other words, is a trick of definition. Maybe you relish the prospect of whites becoming a minority of the American population or maybe you dread it -- or maybe, in an era when more newlyweds than ever are marrying across racial lines, you wonder why anyone is still obsessed with race and color.
But whatever your attitude, there is no point waiting up for The End of White America. It isn't coming. Drill down into the Census Bureau's latest population estimates, for example, and it turns out that of the 3,996,537 babies younger than age 1, nearly 72 percent are white. The only way to shrink that very hefty majority to less than half is to exclude the nearly 900,000 white babies whose ethnic background is Hispanic.
The same is true of the "54 percent minority" scheduled to arrive by 2050. What the data in the bureau's spreadsheets actually project is that white Americans, who now constitute nearly 80 percent of the population, will make up 74 percent by midcentury. Only if tens of millions of white Hispanics aren't counted as white will America in 2050 be anything other than a majority-white nation.
There may be those who simply refuse to regard Hispanics as white, perhaps because of bigotry or ignorance or because they never saw Rita Hayworth, Martin Sheen, Raquel Welch, or Andy Garcia. But then, there have always been Americans with curious ideas of who could and couldn't be "white." Benjamin Franklin was sure that German immigrants were not only non-white but unassimilable; Henry Cabot Lodge said the same thing about Russians, Poles, and Greeks. There was a time when US immigration policy classified Irish, Italians, and Jews as non-white, and when state laws required any resident with "one drop of Negro blood" to be listed as black.
To us, looking back, all those distinctions today seem ludicrous. A generation or two down the road, it will doubtless seem just as ludicrous that anyone would ever have thought of Hispanics as anything other than part of the broad, "white," American mainstream. Perhaps by then the very idea of race -- white, black, or anything else -- will finally have been discarded, and children will marvel at the idea that color of skin or shape of eye could ever have mattered so much.
(Jeff Jacoby is a columnist for The Boston Globe. His website is www.JeffJacoby.com).

5 Comments
Jim
Monday, May 28, 2012 at 9:49 AM
We are never going to stop making everything about race until we stop making everything about race.
sunforester
Monday, May 28, 2012 at 12:57 PM
"Minority" is a trick of patronage, as if some of us Americans are not really Americans because of our demographics, and therefore need our political elite to dispense patronage accordingly to make this loudly touted disparity right.As long as our political elite convince us that they are the only ones who can save us by selectively handing out privileges to those who are easily corrupted and misled into casting their appreciative votes, then we will believe that being a "minority" actually matters.The minute that we start believing that we are all Americans and that we rise and fall on our own merits, then being a "minority" no longer has the ability to hand power to those who wave around that artificial distinction to take away the freedom that our Founders died fighting for.
Howard Last
Monday, May 28, 2012 at 7:28 PM
Barry's mother was white and his father is 1/4 black, the remaining 3/4 being Arab/Muslim. Maybe the people who refer to him as being Black failed math or logic or both. And as far as his ancestors being slaves, there is a good chance they were slave traders. Check who ran the slave trade, imagine that they were Arab/Muslims.
David Nash
Tuesday, May 29, 2012 at 11:26 AM
When gender is used as a category associated with allegedly inappropriate discrimination, women are often included with minorities, implying that there are fewer women than men. Census figures contradict this.
Holly Helmstetter in Antwerp NY
Thursday, November 15, 2012 at 12:27 AM
If "white" is AT ALL based on skin tone, then the Latinos I know are not white, except for one, who is albino and utterly colorless. I'm white (German, French, and Polish descent.) I have grandchildren who are light-skinned, are part Latino, and also have some black blood. Are they "white"?
It used to be that if anyone had slightly olive skin, white people would not let them get by with calling themselves white. Now that the white-only "race" is a diminishing percent of Americans, it seems like white people will welcome LOTS of darker people, to keep "whites" officially in the majority. I'll be glad, personally, when the white-only population is smaller, proportionately, than the combination of all not-white-only groups of Americans. We (white-only) people have been selfish, arrogant, and destructive to the peace as long as we've been in the majority. Seeing the discrimination against people who have some other racial-ethnic blood, I've been embarrassed. Same goes for situations where I've been given preferential treatment right in front of people who thereby were treated unfairly. I don't WANT unearned privilege. I want to know that if I achieved something, it was not due to having subtle-to-flagrant levels of opportunity that would not have come my way if I my skin and eyes had been darker.