Newly published Army regulation says racially loaded word totally ok to use?

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

Photo by John Moore/Getty Images

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A newly published U.S. Army regulation says a service member can be referred to as a “Negro” when describing “black or African American” personnel. The Army confirmed the language is contained in the October 22 “Army Command Policy,” known as regulation AR 600-20. The regulation is periodically updated but the Army could not say how recently the word was added to the document.

In a lengthy section of the document describing “race and ethnic code definitions,” the regulation states under the category “Black or African American” that would include, “A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. Terms such as “Haitian” or “Negro” can be used in addition to “Black” or “African American”.

The Army, along with the rest of the military, collects extensive demographic data on the makeup of the military force for issues such as equal opportunity and ensuring discrimination does not take place.

One Army official familiar with the document said it’s possible the word was added so when forms are filled out, a black or African-American person could “self report” and choose to identify themselves as a Negro. But a military officer specializing in personnel issues for the Defense Department called that “the dumbest thing I have ever heard,” noting the Pentagon does not use the word in any of its extensive collection of demographic data.

Lt. Col. S. Justin Platt, an Army spokesman, said the use of the word comes from an outdated section.

“The racial definitions in AR600-20 para. 6-2 are outdated, currently under review, and will be updated shortly,” he said. “The Army takes pride in sustaining a culture where all personnel are treated with dignity and respect and not discriminated against based on race, color, religion, gender and national origin.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

3 comments

  • DuhNigreus

    We’re held hostage in this country by blacks. What we say, what we wear, what we do – must all meet their approval. There must be a hundred words that Whites aren’t allowed to say, while blacks can spew the most vile and vulgar things imaginable, including threats to other citizens (see story on Ferguson). You can’t even wrinkle your nose at a black without it being a “hate crime.”

  • Shannon L. Blackley

    I don’t know what to tell them since the term in it’s origin wasn’t even meant to be a racial slur but is in fact ‘a Spanish term’ simply meaning the base color Black and referring to how the people themselves termed themselves long ago in Central, South America, and on the Atlantic Islands. It was of course only ‘one’ of the terms they gave their people.

  • jeff

    Those who are offended by this term should tell all the Spanish speaking Latinos to stop using the term as well to describe black.