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.
Chicagonut: "Mestizos are comprised of that "leachy" European blood you are demonizing. They cannot deny that part of their genetics while only claiming their indigenous side."
Good Gravy!
You think you are going to educate immigrants about their genealogy? That’s funny.
If my Irish father were to beat my Mexican mother and I sock him in the face it does not mean I have a double standard concerning my DNA. What it means is that I am defending one part of me from abusing the other. Duh.
That’s it, we’re through....and don't try sending me flowers.
I don't need to educate mexican mestizos as to what their genetics are. It is common knowledge. If they refuse to acknowledge their entire genetic makeup it is their problem. I don't care if Jack the Ripper is your father. Genetically he is still your father.
Yes, you'll be through one way or another. You are breaking the rules of the forum with your personal insults.
I don't need to educate mexican mestizos as to what their genetics are. It is common knowledge. If they refuse to acknowledge their entire genetic makeup it is their problem. I don't care if Jack the Ripper is your father. Genetically he is still your father.
And, under momobear's theory, if Jack the Ripper WAS her father (or great great great great grandfather), then SHE should be forced to spend time in jail for his crimes, or to pay restitution to the descendants of his victims.
(In a way though, it makes sense. Our current theory of liability IS one developed in the British common law tradition. People who grew up outside of that culture are often ill-fitted to understand if they come from cultures that hold otherwise).
And, under momobear's theory, if Jack the Ripper WAS her father (or great great great great grandfather), then SHE should be forced to spend time in jail for his crimes, or to pay restitution to the descendants of his victims.
(In a way though, it makes sense. Our current theory of liability IS one developed in the British common law tradition. People who grew up outside of that culture are often ill-fitted to understand if they come from cultures that hold otherwise).
Good points. I guess we should hold the mexican mestizos accountable for the sins of their Spanish ancestors then, right? I mean we don't want a double standard here now, do we? My Polish ancestors came here the same time that the Irish did. Why am I and my Polish ancestors being held accountable for the past but her Irish ancestors aren't?
Originally Posted by inturbide "I DONT CARE IF HISPANICS COME IN RAINBOWS, what I do see , and love seeing is the fact that all those in some way or another were oppressed once, and know they are turning the tables on the
leachy europeans".
But the oppressors of the mestizos mexicans are the elite white Spanish controlling the government of Mexico. They aren't here in this country oppressing anyone. So why aren't they fighting their fight in Mexico?
Good points. I guess we should hold the mexican mestizos accountable for the sins of their Spanish ancestors then, right?
Pretty much. Though with many "mixed" people (culturally, religiously and racially), the tendency is often to identify more with the "oppressed" side of the ancestry or heritage because it relieves that person from the guilt they project on others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
I mean we don't want a double standard here now, do we?
We don't, but their world IS a double standard and contradiction. Why else would you leave crap hole country X because it's intolerable, come to America, and they try to turn America into a mirror image of crap hole country X? ESPECIALLY Mestizos!, through whom the blood of Spanish conquistadors is the most violent of all. Most USA native Americans died from diseases, not war. A full 90-95%.... and no, not from small pox blankets.
(arguably, exposure of natives to small box was inevitable. It would have happened somehow, eventually. Just as Eurasia was devestated in population by bubonic plague from the mid and far east).
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
My Polish ancestors came here the same time that the Irish did. Why am I and my Polish ancestors being held accountable for the past but her Irish ancestors aren't?
Because righteous indignation would be even more absurd if she were to acknowledge her roots or true history.
"Why else would you leave crap hole country X because it's intolerable, come to America, and they try to turn America into a mirror image of crap hole country X? ESPECIALLY Mestizos!"
Waa, waa, waa. Stop the insults, please. I can't take this anymore. You've ruffled my feathers one too many times.
I would hit that button thingy to report you but seeing how I don't care and you've taken the time to post here like 10,000 times I am afraid you might lose your cookies or something.
FYI, momobear theory is not a theory, it's a fact. The Mexican Imposition is here.
Drink some herbal tea tonight or instead of counting sheep tonight you'll be counting immigrants hopping the fence.
Drink some herbal tea tonight or instead of counting sheep tonight you'll be counting immigrants hopping the fence.
Sorry sweetie, half of my family ARE immigrants. (Only they came here the proper way).
Oh, and by the way, you can deny it all you want, but you'll NEVER be able to shake that guilt you've internalized and tried to squash within. Ingratiating yourself to one side of your heritage won't make you feel better in the long run. Sorry. That's a cross you'll have to bear on your own, so "the rest of us" would appreciate it if you could keep the nonsense to yourself in the future?
Thank you for the above post, although sadly it falls on deaf ears. Haters are haters. They are not interested in historical truths. They are only concerned with not having to run into too many "brownies" on their way to the mall.
Most posters on political forums are entrenched in their own views. If they didn't already have well-established political viewpoints that they were willing to argue, they wouldn't come to a place focused on combative argument. It's the lurkers and guests on the forum that are really reached, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Haters? What does our right to have and to enforce our immigration laws as every other country does, have to do with hate?
The premise of this thread is that the government of the United States cannot claim, on a deontological basis, to have moral rights of absolute national sovereignty over the territory of the United States, when it was gained through massive acts of illegal immigration and genocide against the prior inhabitants. I believe it has survived challenge. Personally, I find the utilitarian debate on immigration (what are the consequences of more authoritarian or libertarian immigration policy on the economy, the law, etc?), more interesting and vibrant. The references to jingoistic sentiments (chants of "our land!", etc.), and legal fetishism ("Illegal means illegal!"), are so logically fallacious that I'm not as interested in them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
I accept the full truth of history. Some only want to accept the parts that fit their agenda. Some people live in the past and don't want to accept that wars are fought, monies paid and lands have exchanged hands throughout history on this entire planet.
Then why would you care about the so-called "reconquista"? It would just be another inevitable act of conquest that a portion of humanity engages in. You have a double standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Some will nurse wounds hundreds of years old even though they weren't even alive back then themselves and refuse to live in the present. They continually blame and hold accountable those of us alive today for a past we played no role in and no we do not owe the descendants of those who feel they own the entire continent anything.
For what is now the fifth or sixth time, the issue is not a matter of personal culpability, but residual economic consequences. Indians are the poorest ethnic group in the United States.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
They need to fix their own "individual" countries that they are a citizens of. They have no claims to an entire continent and certainly not a country that they aren't even a citizen of.
Why? People generally do not choose their nationalities; they do not choose which countries and circumstances they are born into. Why should some people have a completely different set of circumstances and opportunities as a result of random fate? Once again, the issue is not even whether Mesoamerican immigrants have claims to the continent, but that the U.S. government most certainly does not. In the best case scenario, it would be an instance of the pot calling the kettle black; in the worst case scenario, it would be illegal alien Europeans audaciously labeling Indians, the true owners of the land, "illegal."
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Your last crack about "brownies" is just race card pulling. We have Americans of all colors and ethnic groups. It is only illegal aliens we object to and it doesn't matter if they are brown, black, white, pink or purple.
Perhaps, but since the majority of illegal immigrants and undocumented residents are of Mesoamerican Indian background, it will be inevitable that generalizations will be used as a mechanism for quickly and conveniently categorizing them as one group. The same mentality of support for profiling is seen in additional screening of Middle Easterners at security checkpoints, and in a more extreme sense, the internment of Japanese-Americans. When there is a movement to depict immigration patterns as an "invasion," and your racist conspiracy theories are incorporated, the same foundations are set. It is the natural consequence of a doctrine of "security before liberty."
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Historical truths?
Aren't you the one who said a couple posts up that the Americas' "true roots" are "mestizo"?
Can't have MESTIZO without EUROPEAN creating the other half.
It is not a matter of "half"! There have been numerous studies posted in this thread that validated my claim that the so-called "mestizos" of Mexico and Central America (particularly the Mesoamerican cultural area), are predominantly Indian and minority European. This is truer of them than of second and third generation "Mexican Americans," frankly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Plus, last I checked, "Native" Americans did not spring up from the ground in the Americas, as their ancestors ORIGINALLY travelled HERE from somewhere ELSE.... a place called EURAsia, I believe....
There is confirmation of my remark to Opyelie here. After he criticized the term "Indian," another poster with the same opposition viewpoint is now criticizing the term "Native American." Both can be criticized as inaccurate in a literal sense, but this is usually done by people aiming to be contrary rather than constructive. The roots of all anatomically modern humans are in East Africa, aren't they? Should the historical homelands of various indigenous peoples, where they established their civilizations, societies, and cultures, be ignored, because someone wants to be selectively literal and antagonistic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Ugh, get over yourself.
"Hispanic" means nothing, except that you come from a country that speaks Spanish. It's barely an ethnicity.
And no, the people in those photos do not look "Hispanic".... they look like Indios (a slur to many of Hispanic background, btw). You need to understand that "Hispanic" is not a race. There are white hispanics, black hispanics, Indian hispanics, Asian Hispanics.
So far so good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Here in South Florida we have a lot of diversity of different types of Hispanics, unlike the American Southwest, which has basically Mexicans. The vast majority of Hispanics in South Florida look like a) Mediterranean Europeans (especially those from the higher classes of South America and Cuba), or b) Mulattos (such as Dominicans, Puerto Ricans, etc.).
An issue that should be addressed here is the fact that on average, Mediterranean Europeans are "mestizos" in a sense, having acquired North and sub-Saharan African genetic admixture from historical patterns.
The most obvious is the Moorish occupation, and as put in Moors and Saracens in Europe: estimating the medieval North African male legacy in southern Europe, "To investigate the male genetic legacy of the Arab rule in southern Europe during medieval times, we focused on specific Northwest African haplogroups and identified evolutionary close STR-defined haplotypes in Iberia, Sicily and the Italian peninsula. Our results point to a higher recent Northwest African contribution in Iberia and Sicily in agreement with historical data. southern Italian regions known to have experienced long-term Arab presence also show an enrichment of Northwest African types. The forensic and genomic implications of these findings are discussed."
Concurrence is found in North African Berber and Arab Influences in the Western Mediterranean Revealed by Y-Chromosome DNA Haplotypes, which notes that, "We have analyzed Y-chromosome diversity in the western Mediterranean area, examining p49a,f TaqI haplotype V and subhaplotypes Vb (Berber) and Va (Arab). A total of 2,196 unrelated DNA samples, belonging to 22 populations from North Africa and the southern Mediterranean coast of occidental Europe, have been typed. Subhaplotype Vb, predominant in a Berber population of Morocco (63.5%), was also found at high frequencies in southern Portugal (35.9%) and Andalusia (25.4%). The Arab sub-haplotype Va, predominant in Algeria (53.9%) and Tunisia (50.6%), was also found at a relatively high frequency in Sicily (23.1%) and Naples (16.4%); its highest frequency in Iberia was in northern Portugal (22.8%) and Andalusia (15.5%). In Iberia there is a gradient of decreasing frequencies in latitude for both subhaplotypes Va and Vb, related to eight centuries of Muslim domination (8th to 15th centuries) in southern Iberia."
However, there is also evidence of admixture prior to that historical event found in the nature of the dispersal of U6 haplotypes. This is noted in African Female Heritage in Iberia: A Reassessment of mtDNA Lineage Distribution in Present Times, "The Iberian peninsula is a peripheral region of Europe in close proximity to Africa. Its inhabitants have an overall mtDNA genetic landscape typical of European background, although with signs of some African influence, whose features we deemed to disclose by analyzing available mtDNA HVRI distributions and new data. We analyzed 1,045 sequences. The most relevant results are the following: (1) North African sequences (haplogroup U6) present an overall frequency of 2.39%, and sub-Saharan sequences reach 3.83%, values that are, in both cases, much higher than those generally observed in Europe; and (2) there is a substantial geographic heterogeneity in the distribution of these lineages (haplogroup L being the most frequent in the south, whereas haplogroup U6 is generally more common in the north). The analysis of the observed diversity within each haplogroup strongly suggests that both were recently introduced (in historical times). Although for haplogroup U6 the documented event that is demographically compatible is the Islamic period (beginning of the 8th century to the end of the 15th century), for haplogroup L the most probable origin is the modern slave trade (mid 15th century to the end of the 18th century). However, the observed geographic structuring for one of the haplogroups does not fit the expected distribution provided by simplistic historical considerations. In fact, although for haplogroup L the north-south increasing frequency is corroborated by historical data, the opposite trend, observed for haplogroup U6, is more difficult to reconcile with the magnitude and time span of the Islamic political and cultural influence, which lasted longer and was more intense in the south. To clarify this conundrum, we need not only a substantial increase in the amount of mtDNA data (particularly for North Africa) but also new historical data and interpretations."
It is corroborated by Mitochondrial DNA Affinities at the Atlantic Fringe of Europe: "Mitochondrial DNA analysis of Atlantic European samples has detected significant latitudinal clines for several clusters with Paleolithic (H) and Neolithic (J, U4, U5a1, and U5a1a) coalescence ages in Europe. These gradients may be explained as the result of Neolithic influence on a rather homogeneous Paleolithic background. There is also evidence that some Neolithic clusters reached this border by a continental route (J, J1, J1a, U5a1, and U5a1a), whereas others (J2) did so through the Mediterranean coast. An important gene flow from Africa was detected in the Atlantic Iberia. Specific sub-Saharan lineages appeared mainly restricted to southern Portugal, and could be attributed to historic Black slave trade in the area and to a probable Saharan Neolithic influence. In fact, U6 haplotypes of specific North African origin have only been detected in the Iberian peninsula northwards from central Portugal. Based on this peculiar distribution and the high diversity pi value (0.014 +/- 0.001) in this area compared to North Africa (0.006 +/- 0.001), we reject the proposal that only historic events such as the Moslem occupation are the main cause of this gene flow, and instead propose a pre-Neolithic origin for it."
To balance mitochondrial DNA analysis, we have examination of Y chromosome haplotypes in the region in The Genetic Legacy of Religious Diversity and Intolerance: Paternal Lineages of Christians, Jews, and Muslims in the Iberian Peninsula: "Most studies of European genetic diversity have focused on large-scale variation and interpretations based on events in prehistory, but migrations and invasions in historical times could also have had profound effects on the genetic landscape. The Iberian Peninsula provides a suitable region for examination of the demographic impact of such recent events, because its complex recent history has involved the long-term residence of two very different populations with distinct geographical origins and their own particular cultural and religious characteristics—North African Muslims and Sephardic Jews. To address this issue, we analyzed Y chromosome haplotypes, which provide the necessary phylogeographic resolution, in 1140 males from the Iberian Peninsula and Balearic Islands. Admixture analysis based on binary and Y-STR haplotypes indicates a high mean proportion of ancestry from North African (10.6%) and Sephardic Jewish (19.8%) sources. Despite alternative possible sources for lineages ascribed a Sephardic Jewish origin, these proportions attest to a high level of religious conversion (whether voluntary or enforced), driven by historical episodes of social and religious intolerance, that ultimately led to the integration of descendants. In agreement with the historical record, analysis of haplotype sharing and diversity within specific haplogroups suggests that the Sephardic Jewish component is the more ancient. The geographical distribution of North African ancestry in the peninsula does not reflect the initial colonization and subsequent withdrawal and is likely to result from later enforced population movement—more marked in some regions than in others—plus the effects of genetic drift."
Incidentally are there "higher classes" of Cuba? The white Cuban exiles don't seem to think so:
I am in the upper middle class and my parents are both upper class and in the top tax bracket.
Most of our Cuban friends also have advanced degrees from American Universities and are upper middle class or higher up.
When Communism came to Cuba my family lost a lot. My great grandfather had owned a sugar mill and even had his own trains to carry sugar cane from the fields to the mill.
When he passed away the family sold the mill and invested the money in real estate and farmland. By the time Castro came to power our family had a lot of property, but the government seized it all.
That is what destroyed the White Cuban population and the reason most have left the country. Do you think a white man wants to live in the country that took everything his family had and gave it away to negroes and mullatos?
Do you know how I felt every time I walked by a house which my family had owned and saw a bunch of Negroes living in it? Negroes who never worked to own that house, who were only living there because those Cummunist pigs stole it from us and gave it to them. That is unforgivable.
Will the higher classes of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and other nations whose governments adhere to the Bolivarian Revolution continue to exist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
There is a sizeable Guatemalan community, but they tend to be migrant, and most have intention to go home once they make their money. Their numbers have dipped with the economic situation, but they aren't interested in your racist reconquista agenda. (Just when you think it's "brown against the town".... suddenly, it isn't.)
Racist reconquista agenda? According to your own true statement, "the white Mexican elite basically runs everything." How then would "brown" people advocate a "racist reconquista agenda" that entails the extension of the authority and power of "the white Mexican elite"? This is a challenge that chicagonut has failed to address despite it being issued repeatedly: What interest do Indians have in extending the power of those that they fight in Mesoamerica? It is only a crude misconception of "Mexicans" as a homogenous racial group rather than a multi-racial national group that can propel this racist conspiracy theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
It is ignorance to lump all "Hispanic" people in one group, or to assume that they share your agenda, or ANY kind of ethnic affinity with you whatsoever, outside of a MAYBE shared language and some basic cultural accoutrements. My god, one of the biggest insults you can give Hispanics outside the Southwest is to call them Mexican or Mestizo.
Yes, that is the result of the racist white supremacist elements in Hispanic culture. Hispanic culture itself, of course, is not characterized by equal mixture of all cultures of Iberia, or even of Spain, but of Castilian dominance over Catalan, Galician, and Basque ethnic and cultural minorities even in Spain alone. I believe this desire for cultural dominance was somewhat of a consequence of the turbulent history of Spain. The first major acts committed under a united Hispanic identity created through the marriage of Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile and Leon were the actual "reconquista" that culminated with the capture of Granada, the aftermath of which was the Inquisition and persecution, torture, and massacres of Jews and Muslims that it entailed (arguably a genocide of its own), and the genocide of the Taino on Hispaniola and surrounding Caribbean islands that Columbus's expeditions and settlements brought about. The proto-Chicano author Lazaro Gutierrez de Lara described it this way in his book The Mexican People:
Quote:
Standing at the gate of Europe, Spain, desperately fighting for her own preservation, was the bulwark which prevented the Moors from invading the northern, central, and western states. Her daily sacrifice of blood was the safeguard of her sister Christian nations. For in the whole eight hundred years during which the Islamic invasion was principcally concentrated on her conquest, Spain was never actually vanquished. The mountains of Asturias constituted a line of defense beyond which the Moors were unable to penetrate, and Europe remained inviolate. This tremendous struggle for religion and country left an indelible impression on the psychology of the Spanish people. The passion for Catholicism and country became the very substance of their souls. It is easy to understand, then, that when, at the surrender of Boabdil in Granada, the Spanish people under Isabella and Ferdinand inflicted the last blow on the Moorish power in Spain, nothing short of the Inquisition could satisfy their spirit of burning fanaticism. The discovery of the New World at the same time opened to them a sphere for the expression of that lust of blood and conquest developed in them during their long, cruel struggle with the Moors.
I am in essential agreement with that section of his commentary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
I never look at a brown person and immediately assume that they are an illegal nor do most Americans but then those with a victimhood mentality like to play the race card especially when they are on the wrong side of the law. White people are no more or no less racist than any other racial/ethnic group today. Objecting to illegal immigration has nothing to do with racism anyway.
Your post demonstrates white populist racial resentment - an anger at a perception that ethnic minorities receive better treatment than "whites" without having earned it, therefore making such people immoral for taking things that they have not worked for. The subconscious tendency to generalize is what drives prejudicial views. Empirical research, moreover, affirms my views. Consider Is Immigration a Racial Issue? Anglo Attitudes on Immigration Policies in a Border County:
Quote:
Objective. This study assesses the association between Anglo aversion to Latinos, physical proximity to Latinos, and contact with ethnic minorities, with expressed preferences for immigration policies.
Methods. Data were drawn from a telephone survey of San Diego County, California, residents (N=549 Anglos) using random-digit-dial procedures during 2005–2006 that was conducted by closely supervised professional interviewers. Descriptive reports, tau-b correlations, and multivariate logistic regressions were used for analysis.
Results. Aversion to Latinos, as indicated by an adaptation of the Bogardus social distance scale, was related to more restrictionist attitudes about legal and Mexican immigration. Associations increased when respondents were primed to consider Mexican immigration, although aversion to Latinos was not related to attitudes about amnesty for undocumented persons. Contrary to some previous findings, proximity to Latino populations increased opposition to legal immigration and amnesty. Reported minority contact had minimal impact but increased support for amnesty.
Conclusions. Attitudes about immigration may be motivated more by racial resentments than other considerations. Future research should identify racial factors that influence Anglo policy positions beyond the classic Anglo/African division that has dominated this research arena.
Moreover, as I'm sure you realize, popular misconception associates Hispanic identity with Indian phenotypic features. As put in Indians and Mestizos in the Americas, "In a great irony of U.S. history, the true natives of this land have become the immigrants. People who can trace their ancestry back the farthest are stopped and questioned because "they look Hispanic"--meaning they look Indian." We're therefore able to combine this empirical evidence with other empirical evidence that indicates there is a racial hierarchy among the so-called "Hispanic" or "Latino" population in the United States in which social status and Indian admixture have an inverse relationship, i.e. social status declines as Indian admixture levels rise. Here are some examples:
1. Phenotype and Life Chances among Chicanos: "Data from a national Chicano survey with nearly 1,000 respondents were examined to test the hypothesis that, because of internal (intragroup) and external (intergroup) discrimination, both past and present, Mexican Americans with a European physical appearance will have higher socioeconomic status than Mexican Americans with an indigenous Native American physical appearance. (JHZ)"
2. Phenotype and Schooling among Mexican Americans: "The study presented here examined the effect of phenotype (both skin color and physical features) on schooling attainment among Mexican Americans with data from the 1979 National Chicano Survey. It found that the lightest skin-toned and most European-looking quarter of the Mexican American population had about 1.5 more years of schooling than the darker and more Indian-looking majority."
3. Annual Income, Hourly Wages, and Identity Among Mexican Americans and other Latinos: "Two processes that influence Hispanic heterogeneity include acculturation and labor market discrimination because of skin shade/phenotype...Americans of Mexican and Cuban descent but less so Puerto Ricans, are able to increase annual income and hourly wages by acculturating into a Non-Hispanic white racial identity. However, neither the abandonment of Spanish nor the abandonment of a specifically Hispanic racial self-identity is sufficient to overcome the penalties associated with having a dark complexion and Non-European phenotype."
4. Latino Phenotypic Discrimination Revisited: The Impact of Skin Color on Occupational Status"Our findings indicate that darker-skinned Mexicans and Cubans face significantly lower occupational prestige scores than their lighter-skinned counterparts even when controlling for factors that influence performance in the labor market. However, we find no conclusive evidence that skin-color differences impact occupational prestige scores for Puerto Ricans. Conclusions. Using earlier data, some scholars found evidence for difference in labor market performance among Mexican Americans as a function of phenotypic variations among Mexican Americans. Today, dark-skinned Mexican Americans and Cuban Americans continue to face higher levels of discrimination in the labor market, whereas dark-skinned Puerto Ricans do not, which may indicate regional differences across the three groups that need to be controlled for."
5. Social class, admixture, and skin color variation in Mexican-Americans and Anglo-Americans living in San Antonio, Texas: "Social class may act in different ways as a barrier to gene flow in urban populations, depending on ethnicity. We test the hypothesis that biological variation is affected by social class subdivision using skin reflectance data collected for 393 Anglo-American and 930 Mexican-American adults in the major urban population of San Antonio, Texas. Two socioeconomic groups were sampled for the Anglo-American population: a middle-income transitional group and a high-income suburban group. In addition, we sampled a third socioeconomic group for Mexican-Americans: a low income barrio. Sex and age effects on skin color are minimal. Social class has no effect on skin color variation for Anglo-Americans, whereas there is a highly significant effect on social class subdivision for Mexican-Americans. Admixture estimates were derived from skin reflectance data and show that the proportion of native American ancestry decreases as social class increases."
The empirical literature contradicts your claims, comrade!
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Hispanic is a culture and not a race. Mestizos are comprised of that "leachy" European blood you are demonizing. They cannot deny that part of their genetics while only claiming their indigenous side. It is the Mexican government that is oppressing them, not the U.S. We are only responsible for our own citizens not those of Mexico or other countries so no, we aren't oppressing them.
Your posts are based on pretensions that arguments that directly refute earlier content that you've written do not exist. Your false insinuations and claims that so-called "mestizos" are half European and half Amerindian have been extensively refuted, so why do you continue to make the same claims?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Do yourself a favor and get an education before lecturing others, mmkay hombre?
Why are you mocking others with "ethnic" terminology?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
See, where I'm from, you often can't tell who is "Hispanic" unless they open their mouths, or are obviously mestizo or Indio. My neighbors are "Hispanic" and they are whiter than my father's side in appearance, who come from Iberia.
If they were "obviously mestizo or Indio," how would that make them "Hispanic"? There are plenty of American Indians in non-Hispanic countries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
This may shock you, but there's a whole Latin American world outside of Mexico and Central America. Argentinia, Chile, Uruguay, Southern Brazil.... in these places, the majority can trace their lineage directly back to Europe to places like Germany, Portugal, Italy, Spain. Yet, they are still "Hispanic," and when they come here, they are counted as "Hispanic."
Those populations are by no means pure-blooded whites. In fact, they're probably more deserving of the appellation "mestizo" than the predominantly Indian peoples of Mexico and Central America. First, consider the aforementioned research that indicates African genetic admixture in Mediterranean Europe. Then consider the fact that there was further mixture between these Mediterranean "white" immigrants and existing Amerindian populations. Integrated urban peoples in the Americas are generally "mestizos" to some extent, but in places where there were fewer Indians, European admixture obviously dominated, with Indian admixture remaining a minority component, and the converse being true in regions where there were higher numbers of Indians.
The Indian populations of American countries correspond to their pre-contact prevalence, since the relative genetic homogeneity of Native Americans rendered them roughly similarly susceptible to foreign disease, with casualty rates ostensibly being approximately similar as a result. They sustained the highest population densities in the urban civilizations of Mesoamerica and the Andes, and central-southern Mexico, Central America, and Peru and Bolivia are therefore populated by the highest numbers and rates of Indians in the Western Hemisphere, whereas other countries had fewer Indians to begin with and ended up being populated by fewer in post-epidemic times. But that component is still there, as I said. For example, consider Corach's Evaluation of the Ethnic Composition in the Population of Argentina:
Quote:
In the early XVI century, at the moment of the Spanish conquest, the territory of Argentina was inhabited by an Amerindian population with an extremely low population density. Accordingly it was supported by anthropologists that the Aboriginal component was in the past and is at present extremely scarce, considering that most inhabitants are of European ancestry and hence, Argentina and Uruguay claim to be the "European countries" of Latin America. In addition, it is accepted that the overall Amerindian population at the moment of the conquest was about 400,000 people. Nowadays, it is recognized by the government authorities that the Aboriginal component is less than 200,000 people, representing less than 0.5% of Argentina's population. Demographic estimations, census and counting may provide biased information. Some molecular analysis carried out on blood groups denoted quite different results compared with the anthropological data. In order to investigate the actual ethnic composition of our population uniparentally inherited genetic markers were chosen. Some Y-chromosome specific Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (Snips) are considered ethnic-specific for Amerindian populations, such as the one located at the locus DYS199. Moreover, mitochondrial DNA sequencing of HVRI and the ins/del of 9bp in RV, might identify Haplogroups A, B, C, and D, that defines Amerindian matrilineage. Accordingly, the combined analysis of Y chromosome and mtDNA polymorphisms may provide a clue to address the ethnic composition of our heterogeneous population. A set of over 200 unrelated males inhabiting urban areas of some of the most populated provinces of Argentina including: Buenos Aires, Rio Negro, Mendoza, Santa Fe and Misiones were selected for analysis. All samples were typed for DYS199 and with the Charit's Y-STR nonaplex. Nucleotide sequence of mtDNA HVRI was obtained in all cases in order to identify Amerindian mitochondrial haplogroups. The proportion of individuals with either Y and mitochondrial haplogroups not considered Amerindian (Caucasian?) was 47%, those with both Y-chromosome and mtDNA Amerindian haplogroups were 10% and the mestizo condition (either one or the other amerindian lineages) accounted for 43%. As depicted in most Latin American countries, there is in Argentina, a clear asymmetry regarding Amerindian matrilineage mestizo (83.3%) when compared with Amerindian patrilineage (16.7%). A clear discrepancy arose in comparison with the physical anthropological position that claims a minimal aboriginal component in Argentina's population. This contribution provides additional information that supports a more relevant Amerindian component in a country that claimed to be the most European one of the entire Latin America.
Pre-Neolithic North African admixture + Moorish-Saracen occupation induced admixture + Amerindian admixture = Mestizo! Personally, I'm willing to consider these essentially castizo peoples "white," since they're predominantly white. But I don't believe that the WN community, with their insistence on one-drop rules, will be quite as accommodating as me...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
A racist calling other people racists. Typical.
And yes, it IS your "own little world." It will never come to fruitition, because most people do not think like you, and the vast majority of even Mestizos who come to the United States do not want to turn the United States into what they were fleeing. That would defeat the point. Why leave the cess pool that is most of Central America, only to turn where you're going into the same cess pool?
Too true! Why reproduce the catastrophe of white supremacist governance elsewhere? Hopefully chicagonut will learn from and understand this, and cease the inaccurate assertions that the "reconquista" agenda represents some kind of viable or even comprehensible idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
Really? You don't care? You don't care because it smashes your assumptions and your "simile."
For example, the rise in Hispanics in South Florida, for example, was started by an influx of rich, white Cubans, who arguably OPPRESSED other Cubans in Cuba. Their numbers "growing" (not really, like most established immigrant groups, the numbers slow after a couple of generations and assimilation), does not vindicte the oppressed. The descendants of the formerly oppressed are stuck in Cuba. Rotting under Castro.
I'm not a supporter of that administration myself, but in line with the "security over liberty" doctrine that chicagonut seems to support, it is apparently logical for the Cuban government to be authoritarian, given the state terrorist activities that the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations orchestrated against Cuban territory and infrastructure. You're familiar with Operations Northwoods and Mongoose?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
BTW: Numbers do not equal power. Ask the Jews in America, who do quite well despite their numerical minority. Indeed, in Mexico and much of Latin America, the white Mexican elite basically runs everything. When I went to Peru, the slums were full of Indios, Mestizos, while the 10% Europeans that make up the population lived in Mira Flores and shopped at American stores. If you and others want to "vindicate" your people, why don't you start in your native lands, against the people that ACTUALLY oppressed you? (Hint: "WASPS" did not exactly colonize Central America or South America). That was the Portuguese, and the Spanish.
What exactly are the countries of Belize and Guyana, in that case? Or is there some fundamental distinction between the Maya of Guatemala and the Maya of Belize? I am speaking as an individual that is of paternal Southwestern indigenous descent on this topic, incidentally. And the pan-Indian ideal also requires the unification of the indigenous peoples of America for a mutual resistance network against oppression.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
What's your agenda, really, other than a racist/ethnocentric one? Can't fault the gringos if you're basically confirming what they've been saying about you and your compatriots "intentions!"
"The gringos"? I am a gringo; the term gringo is a national epithet that applies to people from the U.S. How is it "racist/ethnocentric"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
You're right. I refuse to be held accountable for what some people out of the past did. My ancestors in fact weren't even involved in any native indian conflicts. I have repeated that over and over. Are you practicing selective reading here? Or does just having a white face qualify you for being held guilty for the past according to you?
Even in the case of non-involvement, those who have disproportionately benefited from the theft should be dispossessed; their assets should be expropriated and returned to their rightful owners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
I am beholding to "current" laws. I don't live in the past. There are no laws about who can and cannot become a citizen of this country just that immigrants come legally to gain such citizenship. The Mestizos of Mexico are not indigenous to this country so no, they weren't displaced in THIS country. The descendants of those whose tribes were indigenous to THIS country already are U.S. citizens. Just who are you arguing for?
Actually, as has been said numerous times, the "mestizos" of the northern border states of Mexico are descended from indigenous ethnic groups of the U.S. at times. The Tohono O'odham and several Apache tribes are the examples that I have mentioned and you have repeatedly ignored. My paternal family is from the crossroads of the Chiricahua, Mescalero, and Lipan tribes. And U.S. Indians are the poorest ethnic group in the country. But you again miss the point, regardless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Don't call me a liar either. I couldn't care less what a legal immigrant or my fellow citizen's skin color is. We have been diverse racially since the founding of this country.
Philanthropy could not wish to see this continent restored to the conditions in which it was found by our forefathers. What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by a few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms, embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization, and religion?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Oh, so only Mexican fathers built this nation while white, black and asian Americans sat on their porches sipping tea? You're really out there, aren't you? Good to know that only those of Mexican ancestry do any manual labor jobs also, lol.
"Of Mexican ancestry"? No such thing, since nationality is not a genetically inherited characteristic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
I don't need to educate mexican mestizos as to what their genetics are. It is common knowledge. If they refuse to acknowledge their entire genetic makeup it is their problem. I don't care if Jack the Ripper is your father. Genetically he is still your father.
Your assertions concerning the genetic admixture of Mexican "mestizos" have been thoroughly inaccurate, since most are predominantly Amerindian and minority European, not an equal mixture of both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7
And, under momobear's theory, if Jack the Ripper WAS her father (or great great great great grandfather), then SHE should be forced to spend time in jail for his crimes, or to pay restitution to the descendants of his victims.
Only if she had benefited from the acquisition of assets that were lost to others and caused them and their descendants to lose. It is a compensatory issue, not a punitive one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Good points. I guess we should hold the mexican mestizos accountable for the sins of their Spanish ancestors then, right?
If you can demonstrate material wealth in a population at the expense of another, that has been created as a result of distributive injustice, then reparations are in order. Can you do this with the group you mention?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
I mean we don't want a double standard here now, do we? My Polish ancestors came here the same time that the Irish did. Why am I and my Polish ancestors being held accountable for the past but her Irish ancestors aren't?
As I said, while Eastern Europeans have undergone racial discrimination at the hands of the descendants of Western Europeans, generally Anglo-Protestants in the past, they are now benefiting from socioeconomic structures that provide them with more life opportunities than Indians. If there are wealthy among them that need to be expropriated, so be it, in my view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut
Butthe oppressors of the mestizos mexicans are the elite white Spanish controlling the government of Mexico. They aren't here in this country oppressing anyone. So why aren't they fighting their fight in Mexico?
I have listed three organizations and their states/regions of operation for you at least twice before; I'll now do so again.
Apart from Mexico, I also quoted a book passage that illustrated Mayan grievances with the Guatemalan government. I don't know how it can be made any clearer for you.
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.
You cut me to the quick
