A Question of Faith: An Investigation of Suggested Racial Ethnonyms for Enumerating US American Residents of Muslim, Middle Eastern, and/or Arab Descent on the US Census

Abstract

In 1790, the American government ratified the first official census of the nation’s population. Since then, the US Census has been taken continuously every ten years and has become indispensable for the equitable distribution of rights and resources. Nevertheless, the Census has not escaped criticism. In particular, its system of ethnoracial nomenclature is regularly attacked for failing to adequately reflect the nation’s changing demography and linguistic sensibilities. Consequently, many critics have called for the introduction of new terminology. The present investigation examines some of the most popular names suggested for one group in particular: US American Residents of Muslim, Middle Eastern and/or Arab descent (AROMMEA). The four racial ethnonyms examined are Arab-American; Middle Easterner/Middle-East American; Muslim-American; and White. As this investigation demonstrates, each of these names comes with its own unique set of linguistic, social, and political advantages and disadvantages.

Keywords:

• ethnonymy
• race
• Census
• Muslim
• Middle Easterner
• Arab

Notes

1 In this paper, cursive lettering (e.g. White) is used to indicate a Census name and small capitals (e.g., white) is used to refer to a category.

2 See ‘General Principles for the Review of the Racial and Ethnic Categories’ in Federal Register, 1995 (<(http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/fedreg_race-ethnicity>).

3 The National Center for Education Statistics uses the following definition for Asian: ‘a persona having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent […]’ (<www. http://nces.ed.gov/statprog/2002/std1_5.asp>). Similar suggestions have been put before the US Census. On July 18 1994, the National Association of Muslim West Asian Americans wrote: ‘We reject the name ‘Middle East’ which it was given by the European colonial powers, to separate the West Asians from the rest of Asia. We would like to be called ‘West Asians’ rather than ‘Middle Easterners’.’

4 There was much support for re-classifying AROMMEA as african-american. In a letter dated August 10 1994, the Black Health Education and Welfare Task Force of Southern California wrote: ‘As I am sure you are aware there are white supremacist Europeans and Arabians who would like to call the entire Northern quarter of AFRICA ‘Middle East’ […] the TASK FORCE opposes the inclusion of any part of Africa in the rubric ‘THE MIDDLE EAST’. They are North Africans.’

5 Teheranian contends it is far more likely that it ‘emerged in the 1850s from Britain’s India Office’ (2008: 1211).

6 During World War II, the Bureau also released sensitive information on millions of Japanese Americans who were subsequently interned under Executive Order 9066. According to Congresswoman C. Maloney, former Member of the House Census Subcommittee, the scandal continues: ‘[The] Census Bureau’s mission is to provide our country with statistics, not to assist in law enforcement […] Don’t be fooled, the Census Bureau hasn’t halted this practice, they’ve merely added a bureaucratic speed bump […]’ (<http://maloney.house.gov/press-release>).

7 As Seltzer and Anderson (2001) state: ‘The ultimate safeguard is not to gather or save data that permits associating an individual with a potentially vulnerable group’ (495).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

I M Nick

I. M. Nick is a sociolinguist and English lecturer at Cologne University. Her specializations include onomastics and language policy. She holds degrees in Clinical and Social Psychology, German, and English Linguistics. She is presently the Second Vice President of the ANS and is currently writing a book on the Deaf in the Holocaust. Correspondence to: Dr I. M. Laversuch Nick, English Department, Cologne University, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923 Köln, Germany. Email: [email protected].