Hispanics are officially the biggest share of Texas's population. (San Antonio: mayor, island)

[Dopo]

Originally Posted by Suesbal

Is there a restaurant in SA that serves papas arrugadas?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papas_arrugadas

I’ve never seen a Native American restaurant
Based on your logic, that means that Native Americans are immigrants

[NigerianNightmare]

When I’m talking immigration I’m talking since Texas became a fully-US governed state. San Antonio even back then was heavily Hispanic and only became majority white through non-stop immigration. The argument that San Antonio was a historically white city but due to immigration became Hispanic only works if you count white immigrants as organic white growth but count all Hispanic immigrants as “immigrant growth”. Which is what I was accusing posters of doing. Pushing a narrative that required some mental gymnastics. When San Antonio was mostly Native it wasn’t a city, so that argument doesn’t make sense either.

You can’t say this state was colonized by Spain/Mexico because you want to have an origin story even though it is well documented of large populations of Mexican citizens located here and in New Mexico/Southern Colorado. Now if the argument was California or Arizona or Nevada don’t have any cultural heritage worth mentioning because these areas had minuscule populations of Mexicans/Mestizos or Spanish-speakers I would agree or at least not argue that. But Texas? San Antonio was majority Hispanic or close to plurality and the biggest city in the state when we became an independent country and lost its role to Galveston within a few years of us becoming a State. But still stayed extremely relevant as a major city in Texas for decades.

[Thoreau424]

This is a return to the demographics of the early 1800s, before the waves of Anglos came into the state. Hispanics (and Native Indians) were the majority then.

[Soonhun]

Originally Posted by Thoreau424

This is a return to the demographics of the early 1800s, before the waves of Anglos came into the state. Hispanics (and Native Indians) were the majority then.

That's like saying Non-Hispanic Whites (and Asians) are the majority now. Hispanics alone were never the majority in Texas before this century and it isn't like the two got along very well before the Republic.

[Soonhun]

Originally Posted by NigerianNightmare

People keep saying this but don’t realize the irony of San Antonio being mostly white due to exclusive European immigration. It’s not the descendant of white Texans that mostly populated San Antonio. I don’t know the exact demographics but from what I gather San Antonio would still be heavily Hispanic with no immigration today. Probably not majority Hispanic but heavily. The only reason San Antonio went from around a 50-50 city to more of like a 80-20 city in terms of white to nonwhite is because at one point 30% of the city was German and descendent from German immigrants and more and more Anglos moved in to Texas. Moreso than Hispanic populations. Which had periods of growth but were often expulsed or repressed in various ways whether legally or through attacks.

Houston and Dallas were more white and black cities, and while immigration made them less black than they would have historically been especially Houston which had areas like Fort Bend Count the majority black. I just say this to say that the cultural heritage is so obviously there and if you applied blanket treatment across the board this would still be a very Hispanic state.

You do realize Hispanics can be White, right? San Antonio historically was both because a large portion of its original settlers were Hispanics coming directly from the Old World, and not other parts of Mexico. They came directly from the Canary Islands and were, therefore, Hispanic and White, not Mestizo. So, yes, Texas was conlonized in a way different from certain other parts of Latin America. There was less intermarriage with the Amerindians, which is why Tejanos tend to be White or majority White (in the same sense that most Black Americans have some White heritage but pass completely as Black).

For instance, the founders Antonio de Olivares, and Martin de Alarcon were born in Spain, the first non-Amerindian families came directly from the Canary Islands, and the last mayor was born to two of them. By the laymen interpretation, these people would wrongly be assumed in todays world to be non-Hispanic Whites. San Antonio was not settled in most part by Hispanics from the rest of New Spain.

[Thoreau424]

Originally Posted by Soonhun

Hispanics alone were never the majority in Texas before this century

Then you haven't studied Texas history.

Just look at the year 1810, for example. It was approximately 55% Hispanic, 30% Native Indian, and about 15% Anglo/white.

Go back before that, and the Anglo number gets lower, while the percentages of other two groups increases.

[Soonhun]

Originally Posted by Thoreau424

Then you haven't studied Texas history.

Just look at the year 1810, for example. It was approximately 55% Hispanic, 30% Native Indian, and about 15% Anglo/white.

Go back before that, and the Anglo number gets lower, while the percentages of other two groups increases.

It is you who have never studied Texas history. Those numbers are only valid if we count the population of subjugated Amerindians, largely living in missions or Spanish towns. If we are talking the entire territory of modern day Texas, the Hispanic population did not exceed that of the Amerindian population under Spanish or Mexican Texas. And of those Hispanics, many where direct immigrants from Spain.

The estimated Hispanic population of Texas is less than five thousand. Do you honestly believe less than five thousand Amerindians lived in all of Texas?

Please learn your history and distinguish Amerindians from Hispanics.

[SanJac]

Is Amerindians a new term? I’ve never heard it before in my life. I might just be uneducated.

[Dopo]

Ok, there were no Hispanics in Texas until a few years ago
Who cares?
We live in 2023

[Soonhun]

Originally Posted by Dopo

Ok, there were no Hispanics in Texas until a few years ago
Who cares?
We live in 2023

Five centuries is hardly a few years ago compared to the history of the US. I don't emotionallg care about who has the majority of Texas now or was in ths past. What I do care about is this misinformation people are spreading. If lies are not challenged, then some people will believe them and repeat them elsewhere. And once a lie has taken root, it can be difficult to eradicate it.