The future of Washington Heights (New York, Peru: renting, house, college)

[nyc0127]

''nyc0127, I think you are a little bit confused. When I say the people in Inwood were Irish, I don't mean they were Irish-American. I mean they physically came to the USA from Ireland (probably back then they actually took a boat over here) and moved to Inwood. The same situation exists in my neighborhood, where a lot of the people were born in Ireland and then moved here in their 20s/30s.

There aren't many neighborhoods with ongoing Irish immigration, so most people don't think that such places like these even exist anymore, but there are a couple of them. I think there are larger neighborhoods up in Boston like this though.''

I understand the point you're trying to make, but you've thrown your personal feeling into it. I'm right there with you on the physical part of things. You've referred to people as Irish people as if it's an existing nationality though. I remember you saying to me on the other forum we used to talk on that you were an Irish guy from the Bronx.

What did your lineage physically moving from point A to point B have to do forced useless label? I'm not saying this to insult you. My ancestry is mostly Italian, mixed with some Spanish and a little Irish. I won't be a hypocrite to none of you. I have nothing and never will and that's the way how things are going to be.

When you say ongoing immigration, what do you mean? I hope you don't mean that in modern day. I'm sure there are a few from European countries who move everywhere, but are few in numbers and reasons are very different. For one, Ireland doesn't have a lot of people. Secondly, they're based off the Euro, so moving to the U.S. would by no means be an enhancement for quality of life. If they were to move to this country, they'd likely have business-oriented aspirations. They probably wouldn't desire citizenship much either.

One of the biggest years for Irish immigration was 1848 due to the Patato Famine. This was a high period for German immigration as well. Same thing with a couple different years in the 1860's. The most recent one of significance was in the early 1920's (more so for political reasons). Some chose to move to the United States, but other places like Australia was being more considered.

The things that kept Irish immigrants together back than are the same reasons why people do now. They had something other groups didn't though. As non-diverse as they seem compared to the groups that followed them, they endured much higher discrimination. A median year for major city Irish catholic immigration was in the 1850's though. Even if it were to last longer, when poverty relinquished, the reasoning for holding any culture would be different. The feeling of an ethnic label (corresponding to a median year of the immigration peak) for those of Irish descent was gone within the first generation of the twentieth century.

Part of the reason why was that the torch was passed on to the next group. During the late 1800's, they were the overwhelming majority of white Catholic's in New York City. The next catholic group with an ethnic title became Italian immigrants. One of the biggest years for Italian immigration was 1905. That's right abut when the ethnic label became diluted for Irish people.

That societal ethnic title lasted over 50 years. Italian immigration occurred between 1890 and 1930 (or 1924). During the depression and WWII, immigration slowed down for about 15 years. Italian's began to lose their ethnic title after WWII for a variety of reasons. For one, immigration stopped. The feel of a foreign scent was gone. In fact, if you've known anyone who may have lived in the generation where they'd have this ethnic title, you'd notice they over-pride themselves in American culture. They didn't do this because they were more American than anyone else though, because they weren't. They did it as a way of denying their heritage and to force it out quicker. Similarly to the Irish that came before them though, they held something for around 50 years.

Many moving out to the suburbs also was heavily influential on this too. And similarly to Irish descendants, the torch of high-population inner-city working-class class catholic immigrants was passed on to Puerto Ricans. Because of the increasing pace of assimilation and level of expense though (and the fact that it's a post 1492 created culture), this title wouldn't last with Puerto Ricans as long as it did with Irish or Italians. This title lasted until the early to mid 1980's for Puerto Ricans. They had something that Dominican-Americans didn't have that. That was one full generation of an ethnic-labeled identity.

Most Puerto Rican migration to New York happened in between 1945 and 1970. A median year for that period was in the late 50's, around the same time when Italians lost everything. Than this slowed in the 70's. Than the torch was passed onto Dominican's in it's highest peaks in between the early 80's and early twenty-first century. Because assimilation is even faster in this highly-expensive city, Dominican-Americans would be very lucky if they get as long as Puerto Ricans. If the best cultural acknowledgement you could hope for in your second generation is a $9.99 Puerto Rico necklace, than you know you're screwed lol

Now because there aren't a whole lot more groups to come and because the ''American Dream'' has lost it's value, the torch has been put out. All these four groups have shared this trend in common over the past century and a half. All have and/or will end up similar in the end. That is as non-religious Catholic middle-class Americans with no heritage. When Italians were done though, they had the Irish to compare themselves to. Puerto Ricans had that with Italian. Dominicans had that with Italians. Similarly to the Puerto Ricans with the Dominicans, it made non-ethnic labeled Irish-Americans feel special to be recognized. It also preserved the Italian immigrants whiteness to be able to scapegoat saying the word ''white.''

Puerto Ricans did this with Italians. Similarly to how you see Dominicans with non-ethnic labeled Puerto Rican-Americans, intermarrying was popular because they resided in the same neighborhoods and were members of the same churches. That is why Italian/Irish, Italian/Puerto Rican, Puerto Rican/Dominican and what ever combination you could make of that is some of the most popular mixes of this city.

What all share in common at the end is where they end up though. For those who have the courage to remain and keep up economically with the city and/or your ancestor's ethnic enclave, I give you much credit. With that being said, I respect the fact that you live in the Bronx. A lot of people who look like you would have run out with their tail in between their legs because of ''diversity.''

[mead]

Wow that is a long post.

LISTEN TO ME! Probably anywhere from 1/3 to nearly 1/2 of my neighborhood is physically from Ireland. I'm not talking about Irish-American people living in the burbs who think drinking green beer and eating corned-beef is Irish culture. I'm talking about people who have accents, drink Magners, and eat weird Irish-sausages on the regular.

Yes, I'm thoroughly Irish-American, but a lot of people around here are not. It is ongoing immigration because there is a continous flow of people from Ireland arriving in my neighborhood.

As I said previously most people are unaware of this, so they don't think it exists. There are only about 10 neighborhoods in the country with similar flows of Irish people moving to the USA. One is actually outside of Philly, I think it is Upper Darby or one of the surrounding towns. Boston obviously has the largest concentration.

EDIT: In addition to the Irish there are also a small number of recent Albanian arrivals in the area as well. A lot of Albanians move to the Bronx when they immigrate to the USA.

To put things in perspective, there are currently believed to be 50,000 illegal Irish immigrants in the USA. Please take a look here if you want more details: The Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform

[SuperMario]

Originally Posted by nyc0127

Being that the Dominican Republic is much more black than it is white though, it has to feel very awkward that they're living under a way of life enforced by European visions (i.e. the Spanish language, Catholicism). Personally, if I was an African-descendant in the Dominican Republic, I'd say what is wrong with this picture all the time. To prevent societal depression though, it is promoted not to think with the philosophy I use. Being black there is normal. No one is going to pound you into the ground for being black there. Therefore, if black Dominicans were to say something there, not many could challenge them.

Uhhh No.

Is not more black, let alone much more black. Why do you keep saying this? What is your reasoning behind this. If you like stats, I will tell you again.

THERE ARE MORE DOMINICANS OF SPANISH DESCENT (WHITE) THAN AFRICAN (BLACK).

16% WHITE
11% BLACK

The rest of the 73% are of BOTH. So a simple excercise

16+73 = means 89% of Dominicans have Spanish in their blood.

11+73= 84% of Dominicans have African in them.

Mixed Dominicans dont necessarily have dark skins. Many of them have light skin. So in no way do Dominicans have more black...let alone MUCH MORE black in them.

I personally celebrate my Spanish ancestry....I dont care too much for the other. I look more spanish than black, and it's my heritage...language and culture. So no offense to nobody but to hell with the African part.

[nyc0127]

''I couldn't disagree more. 75% of Dominicans identify themselves as "mixed". Why are you assuming that 75% said they were of African descent only? In fact there are more of pure spanish descent (16%) than pure African descent (11%). The term "mixed" doesn't make them black. You are forgetting to mention their spanish and to a lesser extent Taino roots. Why shouldn't they celebrate their western European roots? It so happens that many decide to choose those European roots because it's "the mother country" to many Dominicans, their language originated from there and quite frankly they dont want to associate themselves with being slaves. I have no problem with that. Both Spanish and African are in Dominican blood, yet you criticize them for recognizing one (Spanish) but denying the other (African). It's their right to choose which they prefer since they are BOTH, not African only.

Also you also assume that being mixed means they look black in appearance. You say that in a few decades when Dominicans assimilate entirely, this 75% would be no different from regular blacks. This makes me ask the question, Have you ever seen a Dominican? I am mixed. So I am part of that 75%. Yet my skin color is more light than dark, enough so that if you ever accuse me of being black you would get laughed at. Sure I have African features, hair, nose, lips etc........That is why I am mixed, and not black. There are a lot of that 75% (mixed) who are not dark of skin. I wont deny that there are some who despite being mixed, are black, but I take offense to you assuming we would be looked at as no different than black americans. This point is true for the 11% (African) but not the mixed majority.

I have a hard time believing that 80% of Puerto Ricans are white. I personally know ALOT of black Ricans. If that were the case then I would be hard pressed to find any black Ricans. I think this is more of a case of Puerto Ricans denying their African heritage moreso than Dominicans. Also I believe that the 16% white Dominican is an undercount. I wont deny the fact that in general PR's are lighter than DR's but that's too big a discrepancey IMO. I say its more like 60% for PR's and 25% for DR's in terms of being white. I would not put too much weight into these numbers. It's really a persons opinion on how they view themselves. How do you know there being truthful? Also a lot of the mixed Ricans would sway to one side (white in this case) resulting in the low mixed count. Unless im missing something, but there were also slaves in PR and Cuba.....so stop making DR look like Africa.''


I relayed the information incorrectly. I apologize for that. I knew what it was though. The Dominican Republic does have a higher rate of African ancestry within the mixed population though. What I should have said was that 76% was significantly African descended. Although 76% is mixed, it's obvious that there are more black people on that island than white. What I should have explained was that 76% was very neglectful of their African roots. It's the same to many Latin Americans though. America's blacks have taken no interest in African roots either, but have not denied the social construction of blackness. Within saying someone is legitimately mixed, that can really range from one quarter to three quarters of either white or black. More lean towards being three quarters black in the D.R. though. If I were wrong, than the overwhelming majority wouldn't appear to be physically black.

One point that you brought up was that because Dominicans are mixed, it's hard for them to have self-identity with blacks or whites. It all depends on which group you lean towards more though. Most aren't a split 50/50. For those who are though, they'd be more likely to integrate into the white world, being there are more whites in this country. Also because more whites are catholic than blacks.

Another thing, a lot of idiots believe the word Spanish has no association to Europe. Anyone who thinks that needs to throw out that trash. People don't associate Spanish heritage with Europe. Than because of the reluctance of being a dry white American, people will actually try to re-construct the idea that people from Spain are not white. People's bias interests and/or concerns has created a lot of gray territory that has left Latin America with a confusing identity. If you're apart of it, you can understand. When it's someone lineage and no one teaches them about this in this country though, they really know no more than any other American.

You have to understand the culture of both America and Latin America to understand the social construction of ''blackness.'' In the United States, the historical ''one drop'' rule has lingered onto the sense of mixed people in this country. For example, many know who Halle Berry is, yet don't know she's half white. In Latin America, there is no one drop rule. There was more of a social rule that went along with what it was that you looked. Mixing was more accepted there, but by no means preferred.

You're right. They should celebrate their Western European roots, but be acknowledging of all. Hypothetically, say you got a 33 on a test. Should you only re-study on the one-third questions you got correct or should you try to understand all? It's one thing to favor one thing, but deny something? They should also take into effect that if there is a God and he was much kinder and didn't allow all those rapes and slavery to exist, they wouldn't even exist today.

The same could be said to the south and many are disgusted by it. At the same time, many are overwhelmingly proud. I don't blame people to pick parts out of their heritage, but that isn't how life works. I'm not blaming the reasoning for the choices of neglecting parts of their heritage. You're right, slavery is depressing. It's a completely different thing to deny it though. I've talked to some of the most stubborn people you'll ever meet. He was of Dominican descent and very black. He said he was only of Spanish and Taino background. It's one thing to favor, but to deny is pathetic. I know most don't go that far, but why are they so reluctant to celebrating all their heritage? They do have the right to choose if it applies to their individual situation, but it's complete bull to say part of your blood doesn't exist.

Those who are mixed in Latin America need to understand something important though. One, being mixed is not it's own individual descent. That is bias and ignorant. That is popular amongst many people of Mexican background who share Spaniard and Aztec ancestry. Most people in America had never heard of the word Meztiso. There are terms for being mixed within Latin America. Most people have matured enough that they don't actually need to commonly say it, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.

Another thing you see in Latin America and other parts of the world unlike this country is people that say ''we'', rather than ''I''. I'm sure it's much more healthy for a society to feel socially unified, but that doesn't re-construct your lineage. Each individual should have an obligation to know their lineage inside and out. It's their blood. If it wasn't for that, they wouldn't exist. Each person has a different situation. Just because your friend is 3/4 white 1/4 black, doesn't make you. Each person has their own bloodline, their own situation and their own way of looking at it.

Yes, I have met many Dominicans. I have many friends of Dominican lineage. More Dominicans are of more black descent. You could use any reference you want. Personal friends, pro baseball players, anything you want. There are many Dominican baseball players in pro baseball. I know there are many who might be of mixed descent, but why is it so common to see people who are black, yet rarely white? It's much easier to find someone who looks all black in the Dominican Republic than it is to find someone who is white (even though there are technically more who are full white in the D.R). Even though the pure European and pure African ancestral lines are similar, this is no where near true for the physical appearances of people.

Part of the problem is that you refer yourself to all Dominicans. I don't know if you know the exact percentage of your bloodline, but say you're ''mixed'' isn't good enough. You can't just assume a person of Dominican background is mixed because the majority are. Some are white. Some are black.

Because you are a mix of both white and black doesn't make you a new category though. By using the term light-skinned is complete ignorance. Do white people call themselves ''light-skinned''. Sure, you could qualify for light-skinned black if you wanted to use those terms, or how about dark-skinned white? It's not your fault, but you've mixed both the American and Dominican philosophy of blackness and whiteness into one. In ways, I'm sure there could have a scent of an Americanized vibe that has come off my words. For one, you say light-skinned as a means of white-American reluctance in the regards that society has taught you that you shouldn't want to be a white American. And on the other hard, you've defended your whiteness a means of protecting yourself and others favoritism of yours Spaniard lineage.

Why would I offend you? You're using a foreign-oriented vision to look at this. You need to put on new glasses. Physically speaking because of U.S. demographics, black sticks out more than white does. If you were black mixed with white in South Africa (which is over 3/4 black), it'd be more noticed. Another thing is that most European ancestry in the United States is very white (i.e. Irish, English, German). In Latin America, the whites are going to be darker with darker features because of the region of Europe their ancestry comes from. Also unlike America, within European-descend Spanish speaking Latin America, almost all are of Spaniard decent too.

In America, if you look black, that is how you will be taken. If you're mixed, you may come out looking mixed, white or black. People in this country have a big problem with this. I'm not saying a Dominican who leans towards black wouldn't mix in with white Americans, but white Americans are more reluctant to marry blacks or people who look it. It's not even because they wouldn't marry blacks, but the steps that come before it. It's because they physically show favoritism to what their media has taught them is ''beautiful.''

For those of white-Dominican or mixed with a mixed-appeared descent will likely mesh in with the rest of European and Euro/mixed-Latin American descended Americans. This will especially come about when many move out to suburbs and other regions of the country they don't have any connections to. It doesn't matter if they marry white or black Americans. The point is which ever physical world it is they chose to join in America will become who they are. The title of being Dominican will dissolve.

You've made some good points. For you to ''acknowledge'' 'ricans' is one thing, but at least say it properly. The people in Puerto Rico never did anything to deserve a disrespectful term like that. You'd probably say ''Puerto Ricans'' you've met aren't offended by it, and I'd say what Puerto Ricans lol Think about it though, what people of Puerto Rican descent do you know? Mostly ones of descent you've met in New York. That isn't Puerto Rico nor their demographics.

Yes, 80% of Puerto Rico is white, but not for the ones in New York. 62% is clearly white. I said there might be a ten percent window in Puerto Rico for unmarked mixes. Similarly to the U.S. mainland though, it's safe to say that Puerto Rico is around 70% of full European-descent.

You say Puerto Ricans are ''lighter'' as if you took every human being, forced them to have sex and make babies like a human-blender. That isn't how things work. Puerto Rico is as full-white as the Dominican Republic is white/black. Both places have similar full black populations. With that being said, the separation is that the Dominican Republic is largely mixed, where as Puerto Rico is largely white. Both aren't like 95%+ though. They both are like the U.S. It's unfair to denote it as one category.

One time I had a conversation with someone in this city about how Iraqi's in the Iraq war have tried to camflouge as American soldiers. He said how is this possible being that they're darker? Is that fair to all the black soldiers? The U.S. military is 17% black. Around 3/4 is of European descent, but that isn't 95% either.

For who you've met, that 60% and 25% is likely right. I believe there is also a larger black number in the D.R. and it's probably less than 25%, but we both aren't that far off. You're right. It is about how the person views themselves. That depends only on those who are mixed though. If you're white or black, there is nothing to dispute. Same thing if you are overwhelmingly one or the other. Regardless of who you are, other individual's situations have no effect on your ethnicity.

Yes, I'm sure people on Puerto Rico are bias. That is why I said there should be a 10 percent window. I can't see them being more off than that. Their census is apart of the U.S. Government, which seems incompetent. I doubt any of you have ever thoroughly communicated with the Census or will for the 2010 one, so it really proves their information is either outdated or off. They use former censuses to form the next ones mixed with immigration and birth/death tolls.

I'm not demonizing the Dominican Republic. I'm simply just saying that too many all over Latin America refuse to acknowledge their African roots. When they arrive to America is when it really gets tested. And the more years you get integrated into America, the more difficult the test becomes because the foreign title dissolves. That is why we all dissolve into a title of either being white, black or Asian in this country.

The tone you've used is as if making it look like Africa would be a bad thing. Why? Basically what I'm saying is that if you look black though, expect to become a black American. Expect your biggest pools husband/wives. The same goes to those who are white. To those who are mixed, you have flexibility. Regardless, things won't be how they are now unless you live in a little box from now till the end of the time.

[nyc0127]

73% is a big window. Read my message. Find me demographics that discuss what goes on within that 73%. Mixed is a very general word.

[SuperMario]

Originally Posted by nyc0127

73% is a big window. Read my message. Find me demographics that discuss what goes on within that 73%. Mixed is a very general word.

Your making all the assumptions. You said that African holds a larger percentage in the mix because you seen more dark Dominincans. You dont know this for sure because we dont have the exact percentages. Personally, I've seen more white Dominicans than black Dominicans. The majority is neither black or white....some have light shades and others dark. There are examples of dark Puerto Ricans everywhere....Carlos Delgado, Tego Calderon, Ruben Gotay etc........meanwhile A-rod is Dominican and he's of a really light complexion..

In the Dominican Republic there are many places where whites are majority. The whole Cibao area (San Fransisco de Macoris, Santiago, Tenares, Jarabacoa etc) the people are white. The only place where I would agree with a majority black is the capital, Santo Domingo. I bet you dont know that during the dictator Trujillos reign, he brought alot of Jews over to DR so they can mix with the Dominicans and give them a lighter shade. You are seriously underestimating the white population in the Dominican. As a matter of fact, the only reason Dominicans are darker in shade than PR's is because of the Haitian population mixing with the Dominicans. If DR, had the whole island to itself, then the white population would be equal to PR.

Again I agree with you that 11% of the population would be looked at as no different than blacks. But your assumption that indian conplexion is black is plain wrong.

You want a country with strong African influence than look at Haiti.

[nyc0127]

''Wow that is a long post.

LISTEN TO ME! Probably anywhere from 1/3 to nearly 1/2 of my neighborhood is physically from Ireland. I'm not talking about Irish-American people living in the burbs who think drinking green beer and eating corned-beef is Irish culture. I'm talking about people who have accents, drink Magners, and eat weird Irish-sausages on the regular.

Yes, I'm thoroughly Irish-American, but a lot of people around here are not. It is ongoing immigration because there is a continous flow of people from Ireland arriving in my neighborhood.

As I said previously most people are unaware of this, so they don't think it exists. There are only about 10 neighborhoods in the country with similar flows of Irish people moving to the USA. One is actually outside of Philly, I think it is Upper Darby or one of the surrounding towns. Boston obviously has the largest concentration.

EDIT: In addition to the Irish there are also a small number of recent Albanian arrivals in the area as well. A lot of Albanians move to the Bronx when they immigrate to the USA.

To put things in perspective, there are currently believed to be 50,000 illegal Irish immigrants in the USA. Please take a look here if you want more details: The Irish Lobby for Immigration Reform''


Okay, first off, 50,000 is not that much. It really isn't. I don't really credit that resource either being that it's a bias resource. It has the word Irish in it for god sakes lol Organizations that are bias always have a way of changing or pumping up numbers. If you don't believe me, look at the NIAF web-site. They day there are 26 million Americans of Italian descent. The U.S. Census is off, but not that off. They claim 15.6 million are of Italian descent in this country. However, only 11 million reported themselves to the Census that is there descent. They were generous though. To replace these invisible people though, they've had to enter an extra 4.6 million people throughout the country who actually don't exist.

That is why if you looked throughout hillbilly towns in America they'll tell you that 10 percent of the population is of Italian descent. Obviously though, it's not true. If you want one good reference, just read names in the white pages lol Look at last names. They say south jersey is the most Italian descended part of my county. They said the county I live in (Burlington county) is over 20 percent of Italian descent. Pick up a white pages for yourself and look.

I live right outside Philadelphia and have yet to meet someone from Ireland here. I work in a retail store in an immigrated area and many a lot of people from all over the Philadelphia area all the time.

Get me demographics behind your insinuation. With all due respect, it's difficult to believe that any neighborhood in the Bronx that is in a relatively immigrated and working-class area could be of that much Euro-American Christian descent. One thing you can realize about the Census is that they never go over on the ''Hispanic'' number. In fact, they usually go way under.

They say that almost all parts of my county are like 2 percent are, even though over 10 percent of people's last name are Spanish surnamed. They say Mississippi has more people of Latin American descent than my town lol

The Bronx is 48.8% of Latin-American background. The Bronx is 36% black. Unlike most other cities, New York City does the demographics of finding out people within the Latin American population who are black. That is why New York City is 27% black. Really though, 19% of NYC is African-American/West Indian/African immigrants. The Bronx is approximately 30% of African-American/West Indian/African immigrants. It's also 3% Asian, 1% Middle Eastern and 6.7% Jewish. Albanians are in between a half and one percent.

Beyond that, there is only 13% that is white Christian in the Bronx. Almost 1 million people left the Bronx between 1950 and now. Part was because there was no room (as they've went down in population), but part was because they were cowards and didn't want to live around diversity. Part was that they desired the suburban image of Suffolk county, upstate New York, Florida, California or where ever else they could have chosen.

Irish-Americans are very little of the Bronx though. They're around 3 to 4 percent of the Bronx. The census doesn't do individual nationality demographics by neighborhood, so I have it difficult to believe your population assumption lacks resource and is overly bias.

Also, what is thoroughly Irish-American? There is no such thing. You haven't answered me the most simple question. What does it do for you? Does it come in your dreams and fill your bank account with money? Are you like one of those people who freak out and think they're from Dublin because they have one freckle on their face and a cousin with red hair? Come on man. I know you know your history well, but the title you've proposed for yourself is delusional.

I would like to know more about this ''immigration'' though. Even if there was though, it is statistically insignificant. People freak out about believing Russian and Albanian immigrant numbers are high in the Bronx, but they really aren't. They're both less than one percent of the population. Irish immigrants are no where in that neighborhood.

And if thee were, you'd have nothing to do with you. In your own little world, you could attach yourself to them, but you're a white-American who's uniquely lasted in a very diverse/immigrated part of a major city, nothing more nor nothing less. There reasoning for coming here is different. Many probably don't want citizenship. Many are business oriented. If they weren't, why would they come here? There are plenty of better countries they get go to (like one north of them). Ireland's money is worth more than ours. You could pretend this is the days off the 1800's, or just count how many Irish immigrants there are that correspond to the Bronx's foreign-born population.

Find me immigration statistics that correspond to the general population if you want to convince me that places like Upper darby have Irish immigrants (that are statistically significant).

[nyc0127]

''Your making all the assumptions. You said that African holds a larger percentage in the mix because you seen more dark Dominincans. You dont know this for sure because we dont have the exact percentages. Personally, I've seen more white Dominicans than black Dominicans. The majority is neither black or white....some have light shades and others dark. There are examples of dark Puerto Ricans everywhere....Carlos Delgado, Tego Calderon, Ruben Gotay etc........meanwhile A-rod is Dominican and he's of a really light complexion..

In the Dominican Republic there are many places where whites are majority. The whole Cibao area (San Fransisco de Macoris, Santiago, Tenares, Jarabacoa etc) the people are white. The only place where I would agree with a majority black is the capital, Santo Domingo. I bet you dont know that during the dictator Trujillos reign, he brought alot of Jews over to DR so they can mix with the Dominicans and give them a lighter shade. You are seriously underestimating the white population in the Dominican. As a matter of fact, the only reason Dominicans are darker in shade than PR's is because of the Haitian population mixing with the Dominicans. If DR, had the whole island to itself, then the white population would be equal to PR.

Again I agree with you that 11% of the population would be looked at as no different than blacks. But your assumption that indian conplexion is black is plain wrong.

You want a country with strong African influence than look at Haiti.''

What would make you any more correct than myself though? You have no statistical reference to your assumption being true either. If you want, go back to the first message you wrote to me. You said that Dominicans are neither black nor white and that is why they're in the middle and have features that represent both.

By saying that you have neglected 27% of the Dominican Republic (16% White, 11% Black), regardless of how you look at the 73% that is mixed. You've used yourself as a representation for all. It's like that example I gave of that person who said aren't Iraqi soldiers darker than American soldiers (regarding military camouflage). The U.S. military is about 73% European-American, but is that a fair statement to make? Wouldn't that be neglecting the other 27% of our soldiers? 27% is a large number.

You have admitted that Dominicans do seem to be more blacker than Puerto Ricans. Well, why? I said there are several reasons for why you are to come to your beliefs. Statistics is part of it. Personal relationship and experiences are others. I'm telling you what I've experienced. I know it's not the same as everyone, but pro athletes are for everyone to see.

If you want a non-bias resource with plenty of players of Dominican descent, look at the Mets Pro, AAA and AA roster's. Many are born in the D.R. Find the ones from the D.R. and look at how they look. There are dozens of players, so there are enough people to come to a clear judgement. I'm not arguing that the majority will appear to be mixed, but more will be black than white. Why?

Alex Rodriguez is likely to be of mostly Spaniard descent. Sammy Sosa is to be mostly of African descent. You can't call them the same ethnicity though. They may share the same culture (although A-Rod is from the U.S. and denaturalized himself from his ethnic enclave at age 4 when his family moved from to Florida), but they don't share the same ethnicity. Dominican is not an ethnicity. It's just like the term American, but is not an ethnicity. That is not how people take it in this country because people are not very intellectual here. In the Dominican Republic on the other hand though, people understand their history correctly.

Even if Sosa was 85% black and A-Rod was 85% white, that doesn't make them the same ethnicity. Sure, they're a tiny bit like eachother, but not overwhelmingly. People's families on both the Spaniard and African sides have been their longer than whites and blacks have lived in the deep south. They've had time to come out to percentage as high as 80-90% and as low as 10-20% on both ends.

Where did you get Indian into all this? Look at the Taino population in 1492 and correspond that to 2008. Judge for yourself. Almost no one is of any significant Taino blood. It may be within much of the population, but at percentages that can be like 1-3%. That isn't enough to consider that significantly apart of your ethnicity.

[nyc0127]

'''Good post, SuperMario. Most Dominicans are neither "black" nor "white" in the traditional sense; most appear to be a mix of the two. Most Dominicans in NYC are mixed and I wouldn't want to force anyone to "pick" black or white when they are clearly mixed.

The demographics of Puerto Ricans in the NYC area versus on the island itself do vary: most Puerto Ricans in this area appear to be mixed; not pure "white" or "black." On the island itself, the majority of the people are (virtually) non-mixed white with a large minority of mixed people and a fairly small minority of black people. Most Puerto Rican people I encounter in NYC are pretty mixed actually, they just tend to be lighter-skinned than Dominicans.''

What is your reference for determining that most people of Puerto Rican descent appear to be mixed? Do you ask people? A lot would either take that invasive or not know how to answer that, consider few have asked it. Ironically, people in New York are so consumed with the idea of race at every given moment though.

62% claimed they were non-mixed white. About 10% of Puerto Rican descendants in NYC claimed to be black. The other 28% claimed to be mixed. There could be a 5-10% window of people who didn't feel comfortable reporting that they were mixed, but still the majority has claimed white. So yes, 28% mixed. The guy who you agree with has used a similar statistic. You've contradicted him though. You believe 28% is significant (% of Puerto Ricans who represent mixed lineage in NYC). He has used himself as a reference to the rest of the Dominican Republic's ethnic charts. He's neglected that 27% that is full-black and full-white.

Maybe the fact that you nor many others in New York City no anyone of direct Spaniard ancestry (or people from Spain) is the part that is perplexing your interpretation of what full white people in Puerto Rico look like. Very few people directly immigrated from Spain to the U.S (especially on the east coast). And if they did, they would have come in small numbers and likely mixed out early. A person you might say would appear to be mixed might be Jennifer Lopez. Her mother is from Spain. Her father is from Puerto Rico, although said he had more recent Spaniard immigrated ancestry.

Both of you guys need to stop saying lighter-skinned or light-skinned as if all are the member of the same ethnicity. Because you are mixed doesn't create your own category of skin, heritage or anything else. You become a member of more than one group. It doesn't mean you aren't who you are individually. You can't create new categories just to comfort yourselves though. People on that island don't use those terms, so you've obviously been taught by the American media and people who have been brainwashed by that them, which influenced the start of using that term.

[SuperMario]

Originally Posted by nyc0127

What would make you any more correct than myself though? You have no statistical reference to your assumption being true either. If you want, go back to the first message you wrote to me. You said that Dominicans are neither black nor white and that is why they're in the middle and have features that represent both.

Yes I did say that. The majority of the population is mixed, so neither is truly white or black. I dont have stats but neither do you. I have seen more white Dominicans than black. You see it the other way. The point is that you dont have enough hard evidence to conclude that Dominicans have a stronger African roots than Spanish.

By saying that you have neglected 27% of the Dominican Republic (16% White, 11% Black), regardless of how you look at the 73% that is mixed. You've used yourself as a representation for all. It's like that example I gave of that person who said aren't Iraqi soldiers darker than American soldiers (regarding military camouflage). The U.S. military is about 73% European-American, but is that a fair statement to make? Wouldn't that be neglecting the other 27% of our soldiers? 27% is a large number.

If anything ignoring that 27% HELPS your cause for the simple fact that there are more white Dominicans than black...16% to 11%. The 73% I use because you made it seem like they were all black. Also since they are majority they are a better representation of the people. Who reallly are neither white nor black.

You have admitted that Dominicans do seem to be more blacker than Puerto Ricans. Well, why? I said there are several reasons for why you are to come to your beliefs. Statistics is part of it. Personal relationship and experiences are others. I'm telling you what I've experienced. I know it's not the same as everyone, but pro athletes are for everyone to see.

If you want a non-bias resource with plenty of players of Dominican descent, look at the Mets Pro, AAA and AA roster's. Many are born in the D.R. Find the ones from the D.R. and look at how they look. There are dozens of players, so there are enough people to come to a clear judgement. I'm not arguing that the majority will appear to be mixed, but more will be black than white. Why?

Yes, Dominicans are darker than Puerto Ricans in general. I will not argue with that and this is common knowledge. Pro athletes do not make up the majority of the population or even close....especially 12 players. I'll give you reason why there are more black Dominican baseball players than white.

DR has a hierachy. In general the lighter skinned population is better off than the darker skinned. Seems like it has something to do with class. If you ever get to look at a Dominican pueblo (village) rich in poverty you would notice that everyone is black. Baseball scouts go to DR to get the best talents. These are usually the kids in these poor neighborhoods trying to find an escape or trying to be good enough to get noticed. Poverty drives desire. Rarely if ever does a well off Dominican kid get drafted or signed. Read the stories of Sosa, Martinez, Guerrero etc...they were all dirt poor. If you were to take a look at the city there from also it would most likely be outside the cibao...which holds most of the white populations. Another reason may be that the camps are mostly outside the cibao...so most of the people who show up are black. Finally this may sound a bit rascist but whatever....it is believed that blacks have more phisical skill and ability than whites. That's why you see most of the NBA players being black. Also despite really 60 years of being allowed to play proffesional baseball, blacks are all over the all time lists. The home run list top eight.....six of which are black (inlcuding Sosa).

Where did you get Indian into all this? Look at the Taino population in 1492 and correspond that to 2008. Judge for yourself. Almost no one is of any significant Taino blood. It may be within much of the population, but at percentages that can be like 1-3%. That isn't enough to consider that significantly apart of your ethnicity.

When I said indian, I did not mean the Taino. I was reffering to the skin color which is a mix of black and white.

It is also my belief that most of the Dominicans in the US are lighter tones.