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.
Hah!!! You can hardly compare these ethnocentrists to the Japanese of anytime.The Japanese have proved themselves as a SELF SUFFICIENT group that didn't demand and expect undeserving handouts.
YOU FAILED,TRY AGAIN!!!!
How many Japanese Americans do you see in Welfare Lines,demanding imaginary rights,starting anti-US orginizations.
It is 2010 and how many Japanese ANCHOR BABIES do you know of and how many cities have they ruined with crime and graffitti?
Look at pictures of major Japanese cities and homes,what do you see?
It's amazing that they are CLEAN and not trash strewn with graffitti everywhere.Your Fake Indians can learn alot from them.
Lovely 1942 is a long time ago. Why is Mexico a FAILED State.
Because it's run by Mexicans that's why.
Oh. My mistake; I thought I was dealing with bigotry that was going to be at least partially concealed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antarez
It's really covenient for some to mention "Indian/Native American Ancestry". For some reason these ethnocentrists are only concered with "Indians" with Spanish surnames. Seldom do you see advocates for Sioux.Iroqouis,Seminole, etc....
Instead it's the Spanish speaking Indians that seem to come from the "Southern Tribes of Ramirez,Chavez,Gonzalez and Garcia.
Give me a break! The Hispanic Illegals with their predominantly White European religion and language and mixed ancestry have no valid claim on US territory as they do to the Medieval castles of Spain.
I never claimed otherwise, so you are simply contradicting a strawman. Are you implying that Indians with Castilian or other Spanish surnames are not Indians? Indians received colonial names throughout the historical Castilian empire:
You'd have to explain to numerous Indians in the U.S. Southeast and even more in the U.S. Southwest that they are "fake Indians" as a result of having Castilian surnames. Can I nominate you to visit the Tohono O'odham Nation to explain this concept to its inhabitants?
Also, the disingenuous nature of the label "Hispanic" aside, are you implying that most migrants, principally from the cultural region of Mesoamerica, are not Indians? I would estimate that on average, they possess higher levels of Indian admixture than the average U.S. Indian, as a result of having roots in a historical population hot spot where European admixture could not contribute as significantly because they were so heavily outnumbered even after the epidemics. That's true even of the so-called "mestizos" of Mexico City, as evidenced by Genetic admixture and diversity estimations in the Mexican Mestizo population from Mexico City using 15 STR polymorphic markers:
Quote:
The 15 AmpFlSTR Identifiler loci D8S1179, D21S11, D7S820, CSF1PO, D3S1358, TH01, D13S317, D16S539, D2S1338, D19S433, vWA, TPOX, D18S51, D5S818 and FGA were analyzed in a sample of 378 unrelated individuals from Mexico City, Mexico. Significant deviations from HW equilibrium in 14/15 STR loci alleles were not detected. The D18S51 locus had the highest power of discrimination (0.970). Genetic admixture estimations revealed a 69% of Amerindian, 26% of European and 5% of African contribution. Comparative analyses between Mexicans and other neighboring populations reveal significant differences in genetic diversity. Our results are important for future comparative genetic studies in different Latin American ethnic groups, particularly Mexican Mestizos and Amerindians. They should also be helpful in genetics, population evolution, forensic and paternity testing.
This study explores the genetic admixture of eight Mexican indigenous populations (Otomi-Ixmiquilpan, Otomi-Actopan, Tzeltales, Nahua-Milpa-Alta, Nahua-Xochimilco, Nahua-Zitlala, Nahua-Ixhuatlancillo, and Nahua-Coyolillo) on the basis of five PCR-based polymorphic DNA loci (LDLR, GYPA, HBGG, D7S8, GC), HLA_DQA1, and the blood groups ABO and Rh (CcDEe). Among the indigenous populations, the highest gene frequencies for O and D were 0.9703 and 1.000 for Zitlala (State of Guerrero) and 0.9955 and 0.9414 for Tzeltales (State of Chiapas), respectively. Maximum likelihood estimates of admixture components yield a trihybrid model with Amerindian (assuming that Nahua-Zitlala is the most representative indigenous population), Spanish, and African ancestry with the admixture proportions: 93.03, 6.03, and 0.94 for Tzeltales, and 28.99, 44.03, and 26.98 for Coyolillo. A contribution of the ancestral populations of Ixhuatlancillo, Actopan, Ixmiquilpan, Milpa-Alta, and Xochimilco were found with the following average of admixture proportions: 75.84, 22.50, and 1.66. The findings herein demonstrate that the genetic admixture of the Mexican indigenous populations who at present speak the same Amer-Indian language can be differentiated and that the majority of them have less ancestral indigenous contribution than those considered as Mestizo populations.
Tell me, does this apply to the Zapotec and Mixtec migrants from Oaxaca that have retained their language? What of Q'iche-speaking immigrants from Guatemala, ostensibly populated by a majority of "pure-blooded" Indians?
Quote:
Originally Posted by antarez
Revisionist History seems to forget that when Spain conquered Aztec lands in Mexico they were aided by other Nahautl speaking peoples.
It's a good thing to know that you're not referring to me, then. As I commented to a white supremacist just the other day:
Quote:
The administrator of this endeavor was Hernan Cortes, who set sail for the Mexican coast from Cuba against orders from the rivalrous governor, Diego Velasquez, with approximately six to seven hundred expeditionaries (not military soldiers, incidentally), most Castilians and a few other Spaniards, but a minority being Berbers or black Africans. Accompanying them was a force of approximately two hundred native Cubans. The first major conscription of note took place at the city of Cempoala, where the natives were compelled to join this expedition. The most significant conscription was to follow, and was the conquest of the independent empire of Tlaxcala, and the subordination of the Tlaxcalans to Cortes's authority, providing him with thousands of shock troops. Along the way, the expedition picked up Cholultecas after the city of Cholula was sacked, as well as Huetjozincas. More than that, one political faction of Aztecs aided Cortes against the Aztecs proper, the Mexica. A body of warriors was contributed by Ixtlilxochitl of the Acolhua people, who was the governor of the city of Texcoco after having deposed his pro-Mexica brother. This was closer to internal defection than the activities of the Nahua but non-Aztec Tlaxcalans. The point is that the "whites" in the expedition were outnumbered by thousands of indigenous allies, perhaps as many as 200,000 in the final attack on Tenochtitlan. Even when part of Cortes's expedition captured another landing force that had been sent from Cuba to arrest him and commanded their loyalties, they remained greatly outnumbered by natives.
During "La Noche Triste," when the expedition was driven from Tenochtitlan, the casualties of Cortes's native allies outnumbered dead Castilians many times over, and it was only because they found refuge in Tlaxcala that they survived. The final siege of Tenochtitlan, apart from having been made possible by thousands of natives and the canal-navigating canoes that they provided, was punctuated by a smallpox epidemic that ravaged the population of the besieged city, in which close confinement facilitated disease spread. Even the author Frederick Starr, who considered the Aztecs to be barbarians, admitted that, "Cortes found a country occupied by already warring and hostile tribes (sic); if there had been a bond of union between the Mexican Indians, and they had made common cause against the Spaniards, of course the invaders would have stood no chance of victory." Ergo, your silly little fantasy of some sort of "race war" wherein the brave and fierce Castilians miraculously slew that evil and seemingly powerful Goliath is idiotic and ahistorical.
I suppose the only claim I'd take issue with in your post is the idea that "Spain" was responsible when Spain was scarcely a unified nation at that point, with Castile and Leon only recently fused with Aragon and regional and provincial autonomy still a factor, in addition to the fact that the predominantly Castilian expeditionaries under Cortes were not professional soldiers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antarez
The wrongs of the past(xenophobia) against other nationalities in 1940's America have nothing to do with Illegal Aliens from Mexico who refuse to follow US Laws.
This is an assertion that contains no counterarguments, nor even the pretensions of one. As I said, "I certainly see many of the same tendencies, such as association of negative stereotypes with a given ethnic group (especially dual or foreign loyalties), imputation of those stereotypes to even U.S.-born citizens ("anchor babies"), and dire warnings that their language and culture is a fifth column element that threatens to erode "American" values." Where is your refutation of this comment? Also, it's good to know that non-Mexicans are exempt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by antarez
I've seen your other posts on other forums and as a self described Anarchist it's easy to see where you stand in regards to these issues.
"Seen" or "went looking for as soon as I encountered you on here"? Regardless, always good to meet fans!
The application of the label "Hispanic" to a group that has the phrase "Not Hispanic!" in large bold letters at the top of their website is mind-boggling, as is the white populist statement of the "anti-white" nature of a "Hispanic" group when Hispanic language and culture is derived from the European nation of Spain, principally the region of Castile. It's also amusing considering the fact that the majority of urbanized Indians are mixed-blooded to some degree, though still predominantly Indian. Other than that, the rhetoric in this thread echoes that historically preached by WWII-era "patriot" groups about Japanese, by Father Charles Coughlin about Ashkenazi Jews, and by the John Birch Society and the Liberty Lobby about many minority groups, in that a given ethnic group is associated with a race-based conspiracy theory about a fifth column with dual or foreign loyalties seeking to undermine the U.S. from within. That should give its proponents pause; when has that sort of scapegoating ever ended well?
Very cute.
Except, um, that in this case, the "fifth column with dual or foreign loyalties seeking to undermine the U.S. from within...".... um..... actually has a website, exists in the form of student groups on college campuses, and actually protests in the street shouting slogans and advertising their agenda on painted large signs that even Helen Keller could understand. Proving they, um, exist.
Really guy, it must physically hurt the way you bend and twist in an attempt to avoid and ignore the obvious.
"This is an assertion that contains no counterarguments, nor even the pretensions of one. As I said, "I certainly see many of the same tendencies, such as association of negative stereotypes with a given ethnic group (especially dual or foreign loyalties), imputation of those stereotypes to even U.S.-born citizens ("anchor babies"), and dire warnings that their language and culture is a fifth column element that threatens to erode "American" values." Where is your refutation of this comment? Also, it's good to know that non-Mexicans are exempt".
I don't believe in dual citizenship regardless of where someone is from. Anchor babies are all babies born on our soil from illegal parents, not just Mexicans. Stating that a certain culture based on ethnocentricism and non-assimilation is not compatible to ours is just a fact. No, non-Mexicans are not exempt if they fit the same descriptions.
"This is an assertion that contains no counterarguments, nor even the pretensions of one. As I said, "I certainly see many of the same tendencies, such as association of negative stereotypes with a given ethnic group (especially dual or foreign loyalties), imputation of those stereotypes to even U.S.-born citizens ("anchor babies"), and dire warnings that their language and culture is a fifth column element that threatens to erode "American" values." Where is your refutation of this comment? Also, it's good to know that non-Mexicans are exempt".
I don't believe in dual citizenship regardless of where someone is from. Anchor babies are all babies born on our soil from illegal parents, not just Mexicans. Stating that a certain culture based on ethnocentricism and non-assimilation is not compatible to ours is just a fact. No, non-Mexicans are not exempt if they fit the same descriptions.
You have Dual Citizenship confused with anchor babies. The United States of America allows it's citizens to hold dual citizenship...wether born on American soil or not: and wether You believe in dual citizenship or not!
Except, um, that in this case, the "fifth column with dual or foreign loyalties seeking to undermine the U.S. from within...".... um..... actually has a website, exists in the form of student groups on college campuses, and actually protests in the street shouting slogans and advertising their agenda on painted large signs that even Helen Keller could understand. Proving they, um, exist.
Really guy, it must physically hurt the way you bend and twist in an attempt to avoid and ignore the obvious.
To condem all dual citizens for the actions of a very very few is ridiculous. Proof of a group's existance, is no guarantee that thier devious mission is acomplishable...
these hispanic groups are funny as hell they forget that trhe language they speak and the first people to set foot in the americas on some coloniztion things were spanish people.
Someone needs to tell the Apaches in Arizona this!! They believe it was the Europeans and now call the Mexicans,the Spanish, their brothers.....next!!
You have Dual Citizenship confused with anchor babies. The United States of America allows it's citizens to hold dual citizenship...wether born on American soil or not: and wether You believe in dual citizenship or not!
No, I don't have dual citizenship confused with anchor babies. I merely said that IMO I don't think dual citizenship should be allowed, period.
Someone needs to tell the Apaches in Arizona this!! They believe it was the Europeans and now call the Mexicans,the Spanish, their brothers.....next!!
No, the Apaches do not consider Mexicans to be their brothers. In fact they was much animosity between the Apaches and the Mexicans and there still is.
No, the Apaches do not consider Mexicans to be their brothers. In fact they was much animosity between the Apaches and the Mexicans and there still is.
Really!!.........Native Americans in Arizona Vow to Deport All Non-Native Americans*|*GlossyNews.com
Short of declaring war on the Arizona government, Chief Standing Wolf instead issued a warning “reverse your laws entitling only English-speaking people to inhabit Arizona. Only then will we back down and allow peace to again grace Arizona, but if you deny our fellow red and brown men their rightful place in this state, there will be bloodshed.”
Apaches, were probably, the most hated tribe, even by other Indians. They still go around poking fingers in the States eye.
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.
