A MAJORITY-MINORITY NATION: RACING THE POPULATION IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

INTRODUCTION The media has devoted considerable attention to recent Census projections that predict a minority-majority nation by 2060. (1) Such projections presume that racial and ethnic categories will remain stable in the twenty-first century. Historically, however, this has not been the case. The Census has racially and ethnically classified different segments of the population based on the social, economic, and political climate of the time. This article examines the forces that impact the creation of racial categories and how these forces are reflected in Census classification. This article particularly explores the instability of the Hispanic category and how Hispanics might be ordered within the white/non-white racial structure in the future. Public discourse has also questioned how a minority-majority population might impact the nation's political power structures. This article asserts increased racial populations will not alone destabilize white racial domination. Racist policies and practices will persist, preventing minorities from turning numbers into political capital, unless minorities organize to dismantle racially oppressive structures. I. 2000 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS AND PUBLIC/MEDIA PERCEPTIONS A. Increasing Hispanic Population and Decreasing White Population in Cities A recent New York Times editorial, "Whites in Minority in Largest Cities, The Census Shows," (2) describes some of the dramatic demographic shifts, particularly within the Hispanic Census category, that have fueled the debate on the likelihood of a minority-majority nation. The racial distribution data that has riled the nation is summarized in Table 1. (3) The media has focused considerable attention on the increases in the Latina/o population. Between 1990 and 2000, the top 100 cities gained 3.8 million new Hispanic residents--an increase of 43% over 1990 levels. (4) Hispanic populations in thirty-two cities more than doubled in size. Furthermore, several cities in the South had exceptionally high growth, including Charlotte, North Carolina at 614% and Nashville-Davidson, Tennessee at 456%. (5) At the same time, many cities lost a significant number of whites. In 1990, non-Hispanic whites accounted for 52% of residents in the 100 largest cities. In 2000, they accounted only for 44% of such residents. The top 100 cities experienced a net reduction in the non-Hispanic white population of 2.3 million people, and the five largest cities lost nearly one million white residents. (6) While in 1990, whites represented more than 50% of the population in seventy of the 100 largest cities, in 2000, whites were a majority in only fifty-two of those cities. (7) B. The Census 1. A Subjective Measurement Tool These trends have contributed to the perception that minority populations are quickly overtaking the white majority. This fear is not new. After the 1990 Census, one Oregon newspaper poll reported citizens believed that 49.9% of the U.S population was white, when it was really 74%. (8) Since the release of the 2000 demographic data, the media has reported extensively on minority growth, but the details are often lost. For example, at 69.1%, non-Hispanic whites are still a healthy majority in the U.S. The media discourse also misconstrues the nature of racial and ethnic categories in the Census. We often start from the assumption that measurement tools, like the Census, have a kind of apolitical and objective basis. For example, we assume that definable racial minority populations exist, and we debate over how to create the most objective techniques by which to measure them. When the media reports on the booming Hispanic population, it does so as if the Hispanic population has always existed. In this discourse on a minority-majority nation, our initial pre-sumptions are a primary concern. Should it be presumed that definable and distinguishable populations of color exist? …