U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-25-2019, 10:10 AM
 
142 posts, read 34,153 times
Reputation: 82

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 80skeys View Post
And that's on the east coast - nowhere near New Mexico. At that time the majority of Hispanics on the East Coast were probably Puerto Rican, Cuban, etc which shows independent use of the term - ie. Puerto Ricans were using the term independently of Mexicans/New Mexicans, both groups using it with the same meaning.
Exacly, the Hispanic American Society was founded in Washington heights NYC in 1904.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-25-2019, 01:30 PM
 
108 posts, read 38,228 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshoot View Post
the southwest was full of signs in restaurant saying "NO SPANISH/NO MEXICANS ALLOWED" so how white were the Spanish?
… and in the Northeast, it was the Irish who "were not white" (according to your logic): The Flophouse: Irish Didn't Exploit Their Persecuted Minority Status.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2019, 02:01 PM
 
142 posts, read 34,153 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartzmann View Post
… and in the Northeast, it was the Irish who "were not white" (according to your logic): The Flophouse: Irish Didn't Exploit Their Persecuted Minority Status.
Irish, italians, german catholics, polish people were not considered white at some point in history.
whiteness was not defined by race only (who can claim the Irish are not white?). White in early america meant "English protestant" or at least "white protestant". the Irish, Italians, German Catholics, Jews, and the polish did not fit that definition.

The Spanish Fell in the same category of the rest, and even worst as the English speaking world had strong cultural/religious animosity due to the counter-reformation lead by Spain.


thats not what what is being argued here.

Last edited by Snapshoot; 02-25-2019 at 02:10 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2019, 02:14 PM
 
108 posts, read 38,228 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshoot View Post
Irish, italians, german catholics, polish people were not considered white at some point in history.
whiteness was not defined by race only (who can claim the Irish are not white?). White in early america meant "English protestant" or at least "white protestant". the Irish, Italians, German Catholics, Jews, and the polish did not fit that definition.

thats not what what is being argued here.
My guess is, too, if you were "English Protestant", but didn't own land, at one point in U.S. history, it could be argued that you are not "white".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2019, 02:19 PM
 
142 posts, read 34,153 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartzmann View Post
My guess is, too, if you were "English Protestant", but didn't own land, at one point in U.S. history, it could be argued that you are not "white".
True, it could be argued that "white" also had a "property ownership" aspect as most states allowed only white male adult property owners to vote.

so basically "white" was any white, protestant, male, with land. everybody else did not have full citizenship rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2019, 05:28 PM
 
24,244 posts, read 17,624,924 times
Reputation: 9170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartzmann View Post
My guess is, too, if you were "English Protestant", but didn't own land, at one point in U.S. history, it could be argued that you are not "white".
Absolutely not true. You still had all the rights that other English Protestant males had, and it was very possible for you to buy land.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2019, 05:30 PM
 
24,244 posts, read 17,624,924 times
Reputation: 9170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshoot View Post
Irish, italians, german catholics, polish people were not considered white at some point in history.
whiteness was not defined by race only (who can claim the Irish are not white?). White in early america meant "English protestant" or at least "white protestant". the Irish, Italians, German Catholics, Jews, and the polish did not fit that definition.

The Spanish Fell in the same category of the rest, and even worst as the English speaking world had strong cultural/religious animosity due to the counter-reformation lead by Spain.


thats not what what is being argued here.
I've read the US census categories till 1790. The designated racial categories where White, Black, Mulatto, and Indian.

There were no separate Catholic categories. In short, other European people would have been considered WHITE..............

The above nonsense is not put out for later immigrants to the US to distance themselves from the actions of EARLIER European immigrants to the US, You know, the SLAVE owning ones. Not all slaveowners were Protestant. Some where Catholic and some where Jewish.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2019, 04:49 AM
 
142 posts, read 34,153 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
Absolutely not true. You still had all the rights that other English Protestant males had, and it was very possible for you to buy land.
you didnt have the right to vote, at least in the early days, only white protestant males (with land) could vote.
so you didnt have all the rights.

Last edited by Snapshoot; 02-26-2019 at 05:10 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2019, 05:00 AM
 
142 posts, read 34,153 times
Reputation: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by NyWriterdude View Post
I've read the US census categories till 1790. The designated racial categories where White, Black, Mulatto, and Indian.

There were no separate Catholic categories. In short, other European people would have been considered WHITE..............

The above nonsense is not put out for later immigrants to the US to distance themselves from the actions of EARLIER European immigrants to the US, You know, the SLAVE owning ones. Not all slaveowners were Protestant. Some where Catholic and some where Jewish.
who is even talking about slaves here?

slavery was not the defining issue separating whites from not whites, some free black men owned slaves, also did jews, catholics ect, thats not what its being arguing here, those people owned slaves and where not considered white.

Until de 1970 Italians americans where considered a separate ethnicity from whites in all federal documents.

slavery is not the line that separated whites from the rest.

how ignorant of you:

Colonial charters and laws contained specific proscriptions against Roman Catholics having any political power.

In 1642, the Colony of Virginia enacted a law prohibiting Catholic settlers. Five years later, a similar statute was enacted by the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

In 1719, Rhode Island imposed civil restrictions on Catholics, such as denial of suffrage.

Anti-Catholicism was widespread in the 1920s; anti-Catholics, including the Ku Klux Klan, believed that Catholicism was incompatible with democracy and that parochial schools encouraged separatism and kept Catholics from becoming loyal Americans.

there where very vocal pleas urging Protestants to exclude Catholics from western settlements. The Catholic Church's official silence on the subject of slavery also garnered the enmity of northern Protestants.

Intolerance became more than an attitude on August 11, 1834, when a mob set fire to an Ursuline convent in Charlestown, Massachusetts.

there is a long long list of examples
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-27-2019, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
5,858 posts, read 9,490,621 times
Reputation: 2996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapshoot View Post
thats not what what is being argued here.
Yeah, I'd like to keep this on a historical linguistic level rather than a racial thing. For the purposes of this thread I don't care about whether things were labelled white or not.
Let's get back to discussing and showing examples of the history of the term "hispanic", "hispano", "hispano-americano."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top