Interesting multicultural statistics (living in, adult, America)

[NearWestSider]

Originally Posted by David Hammond

In reality, only the Italians are "Latin" as descendants from the orginial Latin speakers. It's a misnomer when applied to Mexicans and Central Americans and South Americans that are mostly mestizo, mulatto, and amerindian.

Only the "Italians" are Latin? That's the first I've ever heard that. I suppose the Spaniards, Catalans, Portugese, and Romanians are just a bunch of posers.

But don't be offended. I once had a Bulgarian woman tell me that Poles and Czechs were not Slavs because they use the wrong alphabet.

But since we are on the subject of Italians, are you aware that Italy is itself is nothing more than a conglomeration of cultures and languages created at the end of the 19th century? Did you know that the indigenous dialects of northern Italy are linguistically from the same group as Catalan, not the Florentine dialect, aka modern "Italian"?

[neonwattagelimit]

Originally Posted by NearWestSider

Since there is no such thing as a "Latino" community, that's pretty darned amazing.

Did they include Italians, Spaniards, Portugese, and Romanians, or are they part of our "Latin" community, not to be confused with our "Latino" one?

And since we are throwing meaningless conglomerations of cultures around, I'm sure Chicago's "Slavic" community is the biggest in the U.S., our "Celtic" community is up there with the big boys, and our "Anglo", "Asian", "Middle Eastern" and "Oriental" communities are nothing to sneeze at,either.

"Latino" is just a word. It means "people from South and Central America." Yes, it's not technically Latin, but, uh....so what? It's also true that thare are major differences between, say, a Mexican and an Argentinian (actually, are Argentinians considered Latino? They may not be), but...it describes a certain cultural group, influenced heavily by Spanish and Native American cultures, among others. I don't see what the problem is here.

[neonwattagelimit]

Originally Posted by David Hammond

The amerindians walked over the land bridge from Siberia. Contrary to what's said and implied, amerindians still have vast, vast parts of this hemisphere to themselves. Guatemala, Peru, southern Mexico, Yucatan, Brazil & Columbia (parts), etc. are almost exclusively Indian to this day.

There are many vast open stretches of land in this hemisphere that one could inhabit, should someone want to return to the indigenous Amerindian lifestyle. Not many choose to do that however. Many Indians choose to come live in United States' cities instead.

Actually, the majority of the population of all the countries you mentioned is mestizo, which is mixed Spanish and Amerindian. They are absolutely not "exclusively Indian."

[NearWestSider]

Originally Posted by neonwattagelimit

"Latino" is just a word. It means "people from South and Central America."

Close, but no cigar.

"Latino" means from "Latino America" ("Latin America" in English), which includes a vast array of cultures, nationalities, and races. It is more than a continent, which is why saying we have a large "Latino community" is about as meaningful as saying we have a large "European + Middle Eastern community".

I don't know why Americans struggle so much with this, nor do I understand why they feel the need to catagorize people as if every superculture a subspecies of homo sapien, but hey, this is America, and it is what it is.

One last thing about the word "Latino": Puerto Ricans and Cubans (who have ZERO Indian component to their culture) tend to embrace it, as do people from the smaller countries of Latin America, but a significant number of people from Mexico find it demeaning and some are downright insulted by it. Your best bet with Mexicans is to call them "Mexican" or "Mexicano", and leave it at that.

Of course, I wouldn't necessarily expect a "Tica" to know that.

[neonwattagelimit]

Originally Posted by NearWestSider

Close, but no cigar.

"Latino" means from "Latino America" ("Latin America" in English), which includes a vast array of cultures, nationalities, and races. It is more than a continent, which is why saying we have a large "Latino community" is about as meaningful as saying we have a large "European + Middle Eastern community".

I don't know why Americans struggle so much with this, nor do I understand why they feel the need to catagorize people as if every superculture a subspecies of homo sapien, but hey, this is America, and it is what it is.

One last thing about the word "Latino": Puerto Ricans and Cubans (who have ZERO Indian component to their culture) tend to embrace it, as do people from the smaller countries of Latin America, but a significant number of people from Mexico find it demeaning and some are downright insulted by it. Your best bet with Mexicans is to call them "Mexican" or "Mexicano", and leave it at that.

Of course, I wouldn't necessarily expect a "Tica" to know that.

OK - point taken .

I usually use the word "Hispanic" as opposed to "Latino," personally. But you're right, either one does lump together lots of different cultures with different influences.

[Lookout Kid]

The interesting thing about constructing a race called "Hispanic" is that many Hispanics in Chicago identify themselves as "White" on census forms. Now they have the census cateogory of "White Non-Hispanic" to get a better handle on the Hispanic population, but it really doesn't tell us anything. Is someone who's ancestors are 100% Spanish somehow a different rance from someone who's ancestors are Italian? That's ridiculous if you ask me. What about an Argentinian with Italian ancestry?

If you count "White" Hispanics, the City of Chicago is 41.97% White according U.S. Census figures, but is only 31.32% White Non-Hispanic. I think it's unfair to ask Hispanic residents to categorize themselves this way when their ancestry can be anything from European to Native-American to African. I think most identify with the Spanish language and their country of origin more than any Pan-Latin "Hispanic" race.

Italians moved to the U.S., lived in ethnic enclaves, held on to many Italian traditions, spoke their old language for decades, and still became a part of American culture. When will we accept Hispanic-Americans the same way? Are Italians in Elmwood Park who still keep Italian traditions somehow less American for it? I don't think so.

[David Hammond]

Originally Posted by neonwattagelimit

Actually, the majority of the population of all the countries you mentioned is mestizo, which is mixed Spanish and Amerindian. They are absolutely not "exclusively Indian."

Bull. Mexico is mestizo, but vast parts of Central and South America have literally no White/European blood whatsover, that goes for Brazilian blacks, Carribbean blacks and other amerindians like those in Peru, Guatemala, Columbia and so many, many other locales.

Latin really means, technically, Italian, not anyone of this hemisphere. Spaniards are also misnomer when it comes to being "Latin" although they are like the Italians, Old Europe Whites.

[Drover]

I give this guy about another two weeks.

[chicagocubs]

Originally Posted by lincolnparker

I thought we all came from other countries except native americans. some came a lil earlier than others. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

I was referring to those who actually came to this country from somewhere else. However, in a broad sense (and, excluding the amerindians theory which was explained in other posts), you are correct. All of us are immigrants by ancestry from elsewhere. That is a very hard concept to make understood here in Charlotte for some reason.

[skyeINIL]

Originally Posted by Drover

I give this guy about another two weeks.

Oh God, I hope it's not that long.

Also, in your dreams, Drover.