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.
<snip>
At the end of the day, I don't think any one of these areas is any more influenced by Mexico and the rest of Latin America more than the other. There isn't some decisive moment where either state is "ah hah! Now you're more Mexican!"
Even if California or Texas was more Hispanic, I don't associate that with anything bad. It just is what it is.
Very interesting post. I enjoyed reading it. And while I still stand by my basic points, I admit I didn't articulate them very well.
You are correct on lots of aspects (so it is not a matter of "not believing" you). Hell, during the Depression era, at least a dozen or so of my earlier family members were part of that "Okie, Arkie, Texas" migration to the "Golden State."
Perhaps my main point -- actually largely agreeing with you -- is that is that the Hispanic influence on either state is "different" from that upon the other. Certainly you are right in that there was no one pinacle point in history where it is, as you say a matter of "ah hah. Now you're more Mexican."
I've never been to Texas so I can't say. But if a whole STATE has 8 million Mexicans, I'm almost positive there is at least one place that has good Mexican food.
True authentic (yes, I know...an oxymoron!) Mexican food is not so easily found in Texas as one might think. One has to know where to find it. Tex-Mex? Which can best be described as a combo of Southern and Mexican (uniquely Texas! LOL). Yes, that is extensive. But many Mexicans and/or those from the true SW states do not consider such to be the real McCoy!
I have to disagree with you there, Reb. I think Authentic Mexican food, the real McCoy, is easily found in Texas outside of East Texas and maybe far North Texas.
Both of you are right. Authentic Mexican food is easier to find in parts of the state, but as for most of the state, even in much of Southern Texas, Tex-Mex is what is overwhelmingly found in "Mexican" restaurants.
I have to disagree with you there, Reb. I think Authentic Mexican food, the real McCoy, is easily found in Texas outside of East Texas and maybe far North Texas.
Spade, I agree with Nairobi that we are "both right". You are quite correct in that "authentic" Mexican food is available in Texas. And I am sure even more so in the major urban areas. At the same time though, as Nairobi says, the overwhelming majority of "Mexican restaurants" in Texas are those which feature "Tex-Mex". Hell, that, like beef BBQ and Chicken Fried Steak, is one of our "hit songs" LOL
But yes, again, it can be found, easily, sorta...but one has to know where to go. Most of the true Mexican food places are in out of the way areas, and don't have a lot in common with the "Texas Mexican" restaurants that come out with chips, salsa, and margaritas! LOL
Very interesting post. I enjoyed reading it. And while I still stand by my basic points, I admit I didn't articulate them very well.
You are correct on lots of aspects (so it is not a matter of "not believing" you). Hell, during the Depression era, at least a dozen or so of my earlier family members were part of that "Okie, Arkie, Texas" migration to the "Golden State."
Perhaps my main point -- actually largely agreeing with you -- is that is that the Hispanic influence on either state is "different" from that upon the other. Certainly you are right in that there was no one pinacle point in history where it is, as you say a matter of "ah hah. Now you're more Mexican."
I always enjoy reading your posts man! Sorry if it seemed like I came off stand-offish, as I did answer your post at 1:30 AM PST after going to a Halloween event. I think I've had my fill of screaming-in-horror girl right in my ear for a while.
I'm not going to be one of those Californians who is going to pretend that California was always some multicultural utopia where people held hands under the clouds and talked about their feelings while unicorns jumped over the rainbow. No, California was in fact one of the more racist states in the United States for most of its American history. It isn't, of course, as well documented as the Jim-Crow South because of the relative isolation of California and the numbers of people it affected (the Black population has always been above 9% of the US population, as opposed to the Asians and Hispanics in CA), but I'd argue that it was just as bad.
Yeah, I mean, I'll be the first to admit that at least in the prism of Texan history, much of the Mexican population (at least more as a percentage than CA) became more culturally Texan than culturally Mexican, which helped them acculturate to the larger general American culture, as opposed to California where even up until the 1960s, Mexicans, Asians, and most non-Whites were relegated to the status of personas non gratae.
However, I think another element that should also be looked at is the area of Latin America each state's Mexican population get most influenced by. The Mexican population of Texas seems to be more influenced more by the states adjacent to Texas (Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, and Tamalupas), forming more of a cultural continuum with Texas. These four border states contain some of Mexico's most populated cities and densely populated areas, and as influenced as Southern Texas is by these areas, these parts of Mexico are just as influenced by Texas. I'm sure that its different nowadays with people from all parts of Latin America going to Texas, but the effect it's had in the familiarity with a lot of tenets of Mexican culture to the non-Mexican population is palpable.
Contrast this with California where Baja California isn't nearly as populated, and before the 1970s, was sparsely populated. Much of the Mexican population comes from the Pacific Coast states further down (Michoacan, Jalisco, Sinaloa, Oaxaca) and the Central American population is obviously nowhere near California. There's not only a cultural disconnect between the non-Hispanics and Hispanics here, but also a relative isolation between the Hispanics here and their homeland. Of course, its difficult to think of it that way because Mexico is right next to us, but when it comes to considering where the bulk of the Mexican population lives, it becomes a very relevant consideration.
Even though globalization has taken much of that isolation away, California's Hispanics literally are a disconnected cultural island surrounded by basically nothing (geography is a ***** sometimes). There basically is no cultural continuum between here and there, meaning that on one hand you have VERY Americanized Hispanics here, but on the other hand the foreign born paisano type of Hispanics stick out that much more. The same can be said for a lot of Americans who transplant here, the Asian Americans vs. Asian FOB's, etc.
As I pointed out earlier in the thread, I can say with great certainty that the overwhelming majority of non-Hispanic Texans don't share any real familiarity or connection with Mexico, aside from the influence it's had on our cuisine.
I do think that Mexicans are absolutely a mostly welcome and integral part of what Texas is. HOWEVER, that doesn't necessarily mean that the influence of Mexico on Texas is any greater. I definitely see California, as a whole, as being more influenced by Mexico.
=Lifeshadower;26702196]I always enjoy reading your posts man! Sorry if it seemed like I came off stand-offish, as I did answer your post at 1:30 AM PST after going to a Halloween event. I think I've had my fill of screaming-in-horror girl right in my ear for a while.
Thanks for the courteous and, as always, intelligent reply, Lifeshadower. And no, I didn't take it as stand-offish at all. I always appreciate a worthy opponent (although in case, we really aren't at all)!
BTW...was the screaming girl you mentioned your wife, girlfriend, or daugher? I think lots of us men have "been there, done that".
Quote:
I'm not going to be one of those Californians who is going to pretend that California was always some multicultural utopia where people held hands under the clouds and talked about their feelings while unicorns jumped over the rainbow. No, California was in fact one of the more racist states in the United States for most of its American history. It isn't, of course, as well documented as the Jim-Crow South because of the relative isolation of California and the numbers of people it affected (the Black population has always been above 9% of the US population, as opposed to the Asians and Hispanics in CA), but I'd argue that it was just as bad.
I appreciate these points in particular. Many will not admit to this fact. Or, probably better put, are not even aware of it. I have always said, and still maintain, that the biggest difference between "Jim Crow" laws in the South, and "de-facto" in the North (and parts of the West), was that the South was just much less hypocritical about it. "We" --if such terms can be used -- were just what we were...and never pretended otherwise. For better or worse. For all the historical baggage it might entail today, it can be said on behalf of the American South, that there was no hypocisy in the mix...
Anyway, I want to take some time to carefully read over the rest of your information before replying. I am particularly interested in the "assimilation' factor. I will say, for the moment, (and I know I have said this before), that, paradoxically, in Texas, the historic duality of Southern black/white settlement and relationships, while ugly at times, actually lent to more interaction and understanding, in both the early days and the long run, than that of the Mexican/hispanic community with either one...
I do think that Mexicans are absolutely a mostly welcome and integral part of what Texas is. HOWEVER, that doesn't necessarily mean that the influence of Mexico on Texas is any greater. I definitely see California, as a whole, as being more influenced by Mexico.
But what in specific about California is more influenced by Mexico more so than Texas?
A lot of the Texans here have been repeating it, but haven't said anything specific.
I can say the exact same thing about California vis-a-vis Texas, especially considering that a huge chunk of the foreign born here barely know what's going on in the United States, never mind what's going on with Mexicans and Mexican-American culture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Thanks for the courteous and, as always, intelligent reply, Lifeshadower. And no, I didn't take it as stand-offish at all. I always appreciate a worthy opponent (although in case, we really aren't at all)!
Don't worry. I love history (double majored in it in college, but love reading about it on my own) so I always enjoy debates like these.
It's very rare that there's a poster on this particular subforum who's very well informed about the historical circumstances where they live. Seeing posters like you is a relief, as opposed to the brainless drivel that goes on most of the time.
Quote:
BTW...was the screaming girl you mentioned your wife, girlfriend, or daugher? I think lots of us men have "been there, done that".
Even worse...one of my best friend's sisters. Ironically, she's Hispanic, which made me think of this thread haha
Quote:
I appreciate these points in particular. Many will not admit to this fact. Or, probably better put, are not even aware of it. I have always said, and still maintain, that the biggest difference between "Jim Crow" laws in the South, and "de-facto" in the North (and parts of the West), was that the South was just much less hypocritical about it. "We" --if such terms can be used -- were just what we were...and never pretended otherwise. For better or worse. For all the historical baggage it might entail today, it can be said on behalf of the American South, that there was no hypocisy in the mix...
Well, to be frank, most people in California have only really shown up here in the past 3 decades. It's easy to forget the fact that most people in California aren't multigenerational residents, at least not as common as you may find in Texas, but rather more recent arrivals who want to make their lives here. There aren't very many people here who can remember living through what happened in California's past, so it adds an element of less people knowing about how California was before.
I don't think its out of malice that people don't know, but rather just assume (often wrongly) that how things are now is how it always was. I don't even think things now are that perfect, but in the past, it was even worse.
As for how I am personally, I like having a full picture of the past in front of me so I can appreciate the present that much more.
The West is best understood as a place in a constant flux, without some established identity simply because there hasn't been multiple generations of the majority of people actually being from here. In fact, it was not until 2010 that the majority of Californians were actually born in California, and most of that is because the kids of Asian, Middle Eastern, and Hispanic immigrants (like me) don't move out of California as much as White or Black Americans. For better and worse, this will have an indeliable effect on the future identity of California.
Quote:
Anyway, I want to take some time to carefully read over the rest of your information before replying. I am particularly interested in the "assimilation' factor. I will say, for the moment, (and I know I have said this before), that, paradoxically, in Texas, the historic duality of Southern black/white settlement and relationships, while ugly at times, actually lent to more interaction and understanding, in both the early days and the long run, than that of the Mexican/hispanic community with either one...
I look forward to reading your well thought out response I will respond in kind!
NOTE: IF ANYONE GETS BORED OF THIS, JUST DON'T RESPOND TO IT!
Last edited by Lifeshadower; 10-28-2012 at 01:44 PM..
Both of you are right. Authentic Mexican food is easier to find in parts of the state, but as for most of the state, even in much of Southern Texas, Tex-Mex is what is overwhelmingly found in "Mexican" restaurants.
Each Western/Southwestern state is gonna have an overwhelming amount of their own regional style of Mexican food. It's not just a Texas thing. But authentic Mexican can be found easily in any of these states. From Texas to CA. I've never had a hard time finding non-Tex Mex influenced Mexican food in Texas. I'm sure you can find some without difficulty from Houston to El Paso. Especially in a city like Dallas which has a larger population of recent Mexican migrants then it does Tejanos.
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.
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.
Sorry if it seemed like I came off stand-offish, as I did answer your post at 1:30 AM PST after going to a Halloween event. I think I've had my fill of screaming-in-horror girl right in my ear for a while.
