Post: #26

(10-28-2015 02:10 PM)EL CHAPO Wrote:  Its not widely known in Mexico though (cinco de mayo).

Americans celebrating cinco de mayo, would be the equivalent of Mexico celebrating the Battle of Yorktown and eating hotdogs, and cheeseburgers. Totally odd and weird.

Mexicans still find it odd that Americans celebrate cinco de mayo. The only Mexicans who would know or celebrate this holiday would be Mexican-Americans or Mexicans who have been in the U.S. for a while.

"Americans" only celebrate Cinco de Mayo because Mexican-Americans do and everybody loves a good celebration. Bad analogy.

Post: #27

I thought this thread was going to be about a cookbook authored by Jeffery Dahmer.

Post: #28

I thought this thread was going to be about making hispanic babies. Very dissapointed.

Post: #29

(11-04-2015 09:14 PM)forever_beta Wrote:  I thought this thread was going to be about making hispanic babies. Very dissapointed.

I thought the same.

Post: #30

The term "Latin America" is about as accurate as if we were to call the USA and Canada "Celtic America".

A Latino is someone from the Roman Empire who spoke Latin. A Hispanic is someone who hails from Hispania, another term for Iberia (Spain and Portugal).

The problem is, we have this region stretching from the Rio Grande to Terra del Fuego that is a super mixed up combination of whites, blacks, mestizos, mullatos, and indios. There are so many variances of phenotype even in the Euro-Indio mestizo spectrum: castizo, balanced mestizo, indomestizo...

The common denominator is that most of these countries south of the border speak Spanish, were colonized by Spaniards, and nearly all of them have at least some traces of Spanish influence. Hence, the sweeping terms Latin America, and Latino or Hispanic peoples.

It would be more accurate for the USA to just adopt the old colonial terms: white, mestizo, indio, mullato, etc, but that would not be politically cool.

Post: #31

Well, Mexicans do celebrate Cinco de Mayo, but it is pretty much contained to the town of Pueblo. Definitely nothing national.

However, the whole point about "hispanic civil rights groups" not wanting to mix with / be identified as minorities is somewhat true but as a white (indistinguishable from a crowd of "whites") Mexican is that it's most likely fueled not by not wanting to be a minority but by the racial hierarchy within Mexican and most South American culture of the darker you are the lower you are.

Post: #32

Spaniard/Latin American (and also a citizen of another EU member-state by descent meaning I'm not a 'pure' criollo) reporting for duty. This thread should be interesting. Only you 'Muricans would group such a diverse bunch and give them a different box on the census.

(11-05-2015 01:17 AM)blacknwhitespade Wrote:  The term "Latin America" is about as accurate as if we were to call the USA and Canada "Celtic America".

A Latino is someone from the Roman Empire who spoke Latin. A Hispanic is someone who hails from Hispania, another term for Iberia (Spain and Portugal).

The problem is, we have this region stretching from the Rio Grande to Terra del Fuego that is a super mixed up combination of whites, blacks, mestizos, mullatos, and indios. There are so many variances of phenotype even in the Euro-Indio mestizo spectrum: castizo, balanced mestizo, indomestizo...

The common denominator is that most of these countries south of the border speak Spanish, were colonized by Spaniards, and nearly all of them have at least some traces of Spanish influence. Hence, the sweeping terms Latin America, and Latino or Hispanic peoples.

It would be more accurate for the USA to just adopt the old colonial terms: white, mestizo, indio, mullato, etc, but that would not be politically cool.

Spanish-America (Spanish: Hispanoamérica or América española) is the term used to describe the portions of the Americas 'that have at least some traces of Spanish influence'. Latin America is simply used to describe the parts of the Americas that were conquered by Latin colonial empires (that is, the French, Portuguese and Spanish) although Québec isn't typically counted as part of Latin America. Furthermore, Ibero-America (Spanish: Iberoamérica; Portuguese: Ibero-América) is the term used for those Latin American states which specifically came under the control and influence of Iberian nations (Portugal and Spain since Andorra never obtained a colony of any sort).

I'm also noticing a confusion of sorts with regards to Latino and Latin; latino does mean Latin (as an adjective) in several Romance languages (including Spanish) but in English, Latino is strictly used in the North American sense.





I agree with you on the reintroduction of colonial terms.

(10-28-2015 10:20 AM)Brian Shima Wrote:  

That's ... well, wrong. Latinity isn't limited to Italians and I do not understand why Italians and Spaniards are described as 'Anglo-Europeans'. 'European' would suffice in this case; also, Spaniards and Italians aren't English or even British unless the Celtiberians make us Britons for some reason! The 'indigenous pride' stuff in that poster make me uncomfortable in a comical way but that's a topic for another time. Anyway, I'll let the Oxford Dictionary explain these things for me.

Oxford Dictionary Wrote:Hispanic
/hɪˈspanɪk/
Relating to Spain or to Spanish-speaking countries, especially those of Central and South America

Oxford Dictionary Wrote:Latin
/ˈlatɪn/
Relating to the countries using languages, such as French and Spanish, that developed from Latin

(10-28-2015 10:35 AM)godzilla Wrote:  

(10-28-2015 09:15 AM)offthereservation Wrote:  

Very true. Most Cubans self identify as white

Yes, the same applies for some Argentines who closely identify with the colonial Spanish heritage as opposed to the 19th-/20th-century immigration wave to Argentina, for example. It's also visible in Costa Rica amongst other countries.

(10-28-2015 01:48 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(10-28-2015 01:22 PM)Brian Shima Wrote:  It is common knowledge that Cinco De Mayo is an American thing.

It's Mexican as well, but Diez y Seis Septiembe (Sept 16) is way more important and celebrated.

WIA

It's mostly limited to Puebla as opposed to the 16 September (Grito de Dolores) which is celebrated as their independence day and is consequently of greater importance. As others have said, marketing bears most of the responsibility for all this mess!

Oh yes, I'm so privileged you literally can't even.
Interested in joining the FFL? I tried (and failed).

Post: #33

Two things contributed to 'Hispanic' culture

1. Common Language
2. Outsider Status

Same thing happened in Australia with 'Wogs'.

Do you think there are strong ties between Lebanon, Greece, Yugoslavia and Tunisia? There is not. But they all kind of moved to the same communities and grew up around each other as outsiders within a wider majority.

Seems like in America they went the next step and monetised it.

Post: #34

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mexi...eddf57f3e2

Quote:For the first time in Mexico's national history 1.38 million Afro-Mexicans are being recognized for their Afro-ancestry by the government.

Mexico is home to a diverse population, but national censuses have excluded documentation of African lineage since the Mexican Revolution of 1910. For 95 years, the national identity for Mexico was "mestizaje," a term that only acknowledges interracial descendants of colonizers and indigenous communities, and ignores the role of African slaves in Mexican ancestry.

Latin America's past of slavery and colonization is linked to anti-black racism, which some countries have tried to fight with anti-discrimination and affirmative action policies. Denying the existence of the black population by not counting them in the national census is one major way structural racism plays out in Latin American countries although anti-blackness is a pervasive issue in other issues, as well. According to Remezcla, Afro-Mexican activitsts have fought for more than 15 years for formal recognition in the Mexican constitution.

A pro-black-Mexican activist group, Mexico Negro, successfully campaigned for Afro-Mexicans to be included on the national census on Dec. 8. According to Quartz, the national survey found that 1.2 percent of Mexicans, 1.38 million people, are of African descent. After this historic moment for Mexico, Afro-Mexicans can finally identify themselves in a census report correctly.

This is profoundly significant for all Mexicans as the country moves toward full equality.

Post: #35

Interesting. I have a members of my family who were Mexican immigrants in the 1920's. An uncle served in the Pacific Theater of WWII. My father and I asked him this question once if he viewed himself as a minority. He was dismissive of that idea. I recall him saying, "no that's nonsense. The only people who were viewed as minorities were Filipinos and blacks". My uncle went on to talk about how there was no concept of Hispanic. He spoke of the Chicano movement, the guys with zuit suits. But that he and anyone else with a Latino last name, whether light or darker skinned were viewed as equal with the whites in the military and in society.

Even by military casualties records, what we now call Hispanics were grouped in with whites.

From Wikipedia

"Hispanic Americans, also referred to as Latinos, served in all elements of the American armed forces in the war. They fought in every major American battle in the war. Between 250,000 and 500,000 Hispanic Americans served in the U.S. Armed Forces during World War II, out of a total of 12,000,000,[1][2] constituting 2.3% to 4.7% of the U.S. Armed Forces. The exact number is unknown as, at the time, Hispanics were not tabulated separately, but were generally included in the general white population census count. Separate statistics were kept for African Americans and Asian Americans.[2]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_A...rld_War_II


From some website about Vietnam.

"The DoD database contains no info on Hispanic-Amer casualties."

http://www.americanwarlibrary.com/vietnam/vwc10.htm

Just more leftist created horseshit to cause social chaos and distrust.