Dallas Morning News
September 22, 2002
 
 

By BOB BUZZANCO

Speaking out against the Vietnam War in 1967, the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. observed that "we were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them 8,000 miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem." By linking the war to the civil rights struggle in the United States, Dr. King offered a comprehensive critique of American society and foreign wars.

Recently, U.S. Senate candidate Ron Kirk, like Dr. King, linked the issue of war with the issues of race and class, and he has been attacked for it. The former Dallas mayor has expressed regret over injecting "racial overtones" into the Senate contest, but, like Dr. King, he makes valid points. While the U.S. military has been one of the more successful institutions with regard to racial integration, there is no denying that the armed forces remain a difficult place for racial and ethnic minorities.

Since the development of a volunteer force in the 1970s, the poor, blacks and Hispanics have disproportionately enlisted, leading critics to describe the system as an "economic draft" – those with education or money can go to college or seek a career, while those outside the economic mainstream see enlistment as their best chance for a paycheck.

Racial disparities have been common throughout the past century. In World War I, though nearly 20 percent of American troops were black, they had to serve under white officers and were given menial tasks with almost no chance of promotion. Worse, they were subjected to the same discrimination that was common throughout the United States in those days. In the aftermath of World War II, President Harry Truman desegregated the armed forces by executive order, but the reality of racial division in the military wasn't erased.

In the Vietnam era, as Dr. King pointed out, racial and class disparities were pronounced. Casualty rates for black and Hispanic soldiers were higher than their percentage of the population. Minorities usually were placed in combat rather than rear-echelon positions. Soldiers who hadn't graduated from high school had casualty rates three times higher than those who had diplomas, while young men from families with incomes in the range of $4,000 to $7,000 were three times as likely to die or be wounded than those with incomes more than $17,000.

During the Gulf War, such distinctions remained, with a Defense Department report issued after that conflict indicating that blacks still made up a "substantially larger proportion" of the military than their civilian population.

Those trends continue today. The military continues to attract high numbers of minorities. As of 2000, Pentagon statistics showed that blacks made up more than 20 percent of the military, compared to about 12 percent of the population. Hispanics, Asians and other ethnic minorities accounted for nearly 15 percent more. In the Army, blacks were almost 30 percent of the enlisted men.

So, while opponents attempt to paint Mr. Kirk as an extremist, he spoke a simple truth. Those young men who would be put in harm's way if the United States invades Iraq will be disproportionately poor, less educated, black or Hispanic. The children of corporate leaders and politicians won't be expected to serve in the military, and few will do so.

Ron Kirk, like Dr. King, has uttered something that makes many Americans uncomfortable. But there are class and racial divisions in our society, and sweeping them under the rug will do nothing to make the United States a more just or equitable society. It only will stifle the kind of debate on issues of war and peace that our democracy requires.

Bob Buzzanco is an associate professor of history at the University of Houston.