WHO JOINS THE MILITARY? A LOOK AT RACE, CLASS, AND IMMIGRATION STATUS1

Journal of Political and Military Sociology, Winter 2008 by Lutz, Amy

This article discusses the history of participation of the three largest racial-ethnic groups in the military: whites, blacks, and Latinos. It empirically examines the likelihood of ever having served in the military across a variety of criteria including race-ethnicity, immigrant generation, and socioeconomic status, concluding that significant disparities exist only by socioeconomic status. Finally, the article offers an in-depth look at Latinos in the military, a group whose levels of participation in the armed services have not been thoroughly investigated heretofore. The findings reveal that, among Latinos, those who identify as "Other Hispanic" are more likely to have served in the military than Mexicans, while Puerto Ricans are not significantly different from Mexicans in their service. An important finding of this study is that a large percentage of Latinos who have served in the armed forces are children of immigrants. Thus, even among Latinos, immigrants are not significantly less likely to have served in the military than those with two U.S.-born parents.

To what extent are the poor and minorities disproportionately selected into the military? Relatively little research has examined this question empirically, although the Department of Defense keeps annual records on the race and gender of military personnel. Fligstein (1980) found that from 1940 to 1973 blacks were less likely to join the military than whites. Kane (2006), on the other hand, concluded that blacks are overrepresented in the military. In terms of social class, Kane (2006) found that people who serve in the military come from more well-off neighborhoods than those who have not joined the military although the economic elite are underrepresented in armed service. Little is known about Latino participation in the armed services.2 Farnsworth Riche and Quester (2004) note that Latinos are somewhat underrepresented. To what extent do Latinos vary in their participation by ethnicity? Finally, to what extent do children of immigrants participate in the military? This article seeks to answer these questions.

Discussing the history of participation of the three largest racial-ethnic groups in the military (whites, blacks, and Latinos), this article examines empirically the likelihood of ever having served in the military across a variety of criteria, including race-ethnicity, immigrant generation, and socioeconomic status. It concludes that significant disparities exist only by socioeconomic status. Finally, the article offers an in-depth look at Latinos in the military, a group whose levels of participation in the armed services have not been thoroughly investigated. The findings reveal that among Latinos, tiiose who identify as "Other Hispanic" are more likely to have served in the military than Mexicans, while Puerto Ricans are not significantly different from Mexicans in their service. An important finding of this study is that a large percentage of Latinos who have served in the armed forces are children of immigrants. Thus, even among Latinos, immigrants are not significantly less likely to have served in the military than tiiose with two U.S.-born parents.

A BRIEF RACIAL-ETHNIC HISTORY OF THE MILITARY

WHITE ETHNICS IN THE MILITARY

Immigrants and their children have a long history of participation in the United States military. From the Revolutionary War to World War II, a large portion of the immigrants and children of immigrants in the military were white ethnics. In the Revolutionary War, many Irish and German immigrants and their children fought with the colonists, although some fought on the side of the British. Particularly in the Mid-Atlantic States, Irish and Germans comprised a large percentage of recruits to the American forces and, in some cases, participated in all-Irish and all-German battalions. Neimeyer estimates that "roughly one out of every four continental soldiers was of Irish descent," noting that the colonists drew parallels between Irish and American revolutionary ideals to recruit the Irish to their cause (1996:37). Germans, who settled in large numbers in the state of Pennsylvania, comprised, on average, 13% of Pennsylvania's regiments (Neimeyer 1996:51). Likewise, Irish and German Americans fought in the Civil War. Both the North and the South recruited immigrants to serve in the military, although Irish and German immigrants had a tendency to fight on the Union side due to their settlement patterns. Although most fought in regular military units, there were also regiments that were predominantly Irish or German (Burton 1988).

By the turn of the 20th century, immigration trends had shifted and new immigrants to the United States tended to come from Southern and Eastern Europe. Many of these newcomers fought in World War I. Although only those immigrants who had applied for citizenship were eligible for the draft, the majority of immigrants who had not applied for citizenship registered and served (Sterba 2003). Noncitizens who fought were able to acquire their citizenship while in service (Mangione and Morreale 1992). Given that the U.S. fought on the same side as Italy, Italians made up a large number of the recruits, in total comprising nearly 12% of the Army (Mangione and Morreale 1992:340). Another important immigrant group that fought in World War I was Eastern European Jews. Sterba estimates that about 200,000 Jews served in World War I, the vast majority of Eastern European origin (2003:29). Indeed, at the end of World War I, the American Jewish Committee Survey found that among the Jewish soldiers who served in the war, 97% were immigrants or children of immigrants and three-quarters had originated from the Russian Pale (Sterba 2003:80). Despite such immigrant participation in World War I, however, antiimmigrant sentiment was growing in the United States and, shortly after the war, the National Origins Quotas severely curtailed migration from Southern and Eastern Europe.