Vietnam Ethnicity

[Oldboy]

A genuine enquiry

From what I see in pictures on the internet, it looks as if African Americans fought in the same regiments alongside white troops and this is how I am depicting my Empress figures. I have seen reference to the contribution made by Native Americans and others during the war. Am I able to mix skin tones in regiments?
I would prefer to do this if accurate as it will give more personality to my figures. Also I have most of the Foundry skin tone paints and would like to use them.

[Cubs]

Yeah, in 1948 desegregation in the US military was introduced via executive order 9981. From then on, ethnic minorities were not organised into their own units.

[Oldboy]

Thank Cubs
I guessed as much but you know how anal painters can be regards accuracy
Frank

[carlos marighela]

The US Armed Forces were officially desegregated in 1948*. Afro Americans and Hispanic Americans were actually over-represented in the Army and Marines due to the vicissitudes of the US draft system. So yes you are free to mix skin tones within squads.

Think of Muhammed Ali’s famous refusal to serve in Vietnam.

”My conscience won't let me go shoot my brother, or some darker people, or some poor hungry people in the mud for big powerful America. And shoot them for what? They never called me Black, they never lynched me, they didn't put no dogs on me, they didn't rob me of my nationality, rape and kill my mother and father. ... Shoot them for what? How can I shoot them poor people? Just take me to jail.”


*Appalling and shameful how late this was. Even so, all black units lingered on in the Army until the end of the Korean War.

[huevans]

I would not bother with Native American troops, unless you specifically want to paint 1 or 2. They are simply not a large % of the US population.

Black troops - yes! And wildly over-represented in the army and even more so in front line infantry units.

[Arrigo]

Actually black troops were under-represented in the army as a whole.  Only 10.6 percent of the people actually serving in South East Asia were recorded as Black in official statistics, this compared on 13.5 percent of the whole population. Hardly an over-representation. On the other hand the casualties figures are higher, 12.1. Yet it is still not an over-representation. Also draftees represented less than 25% of the whopping 2,594,000 personnel that served in the border of the RVN (Republic of Vietnam). [Source: Gillmore and Giangreco from official DoD stats].

Basically you can simply mix troops in your units, but soldiers of african-american descent will be a small minority.

While I agree with Carlos about the fact that segregation was not a positive thing, I would not say that desegregation in the US military come appalling late compared to other countries or to the american society in general.

[Cat]

The percentage of blacks in combat varies tremendously by year.  The lower total average was brought about in response to protests at how disproportionate things were in the early years and then especially in '67 and '68.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War_casualties#Disproportion_of_African_American_casualties

Edit: the official percentage of draftees does not quite reflect the full reality of the draft.  One of my older brothers, along with others in his graduating high school class of '67, had a low draft number.  Consequently they 'volunteered' before being drafted, because word was out that the drill sergeants at boot camp came down hardest on the draftees.

[Arrigo]

of course wikipedia is actually reliable... I stand by Giangreco.

[commissarmoody]

Just do what I do, in 10-20% African American, 10-20% to represent Latinos, Pacific islanders...etc With darker completion then your avrage mid-west farm kid and your golden! And if you want to paint a few odd Native Americans and East Asians in the mix you won't be to far off.

[carlos marighela]

“Actually black troops were under-represented in the army as a whole.  Only 10.6 percent of the people actually serving in South East Asia were recorded as Black in official statistics, this compared on 13.5 percent of the whole population. Hardly an over-representation. On the other hand the casualties figures are higher, 12.1.”

The clue is in the casualty figures. Black troops may well have been under-represented in terms of over all numbers serving in Vietnam but you need to bear in mind that about a third of all US Forces deployed to Vietnam were in non-combat arms. African Americans were far more likely to be assigned a combat arm MOS. If you look at overall figures then, yes the number who served is roughly on par with the percentage rate of general US population according to census records*

The figures quoted above are misleading anyway African Americans represented 14.1% of enlisted combat deaths. If you throw in officer deaths the figure drops to 12.5% because black Americans were far less likely to achieve officer rank. At one point, circa 1965-66, the Afro-American enlisted death rate was around 20% or roughly double the rate of overall service participation. This caused such a hue and cry amongst civil rights leaders and the black population as a whole that President Johnson called on the military to lower black casualty rates.

Bottom line: black Americans were over-represented in combat units. Unless you are looking up a platoons worth of typists best to depict the racial mix.


*US census data would have the the black population for the period in question from between about ten and a half and a shade over eleven percent. We know this to be misleading as at least part were categorised as Hispanic and some as white.