Will Hispanics reach "socio-economic" parity with Whites? (ethic, racism, Bill Richardson)
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.
Hispanics were segregated in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and especially Texas
No they were not. I call this "Latino Historical Revisionism".
Mexican segregation is probably one of the biggest historical myths that circulate today and all of the youtube videos you flooded this thread with are testament to that.
There have never been any laws in U.S history that discriminated against or excluded Mexican Americans, or "Spanish" people or people with Spanish surnames. It did not exist. Especially not in Texas. The only laws on the books that even pertained to Mexicans were those that explicitly stated that they were white. Laws in the south uniquely discriminated against people of african descent, never "spanish" people.
What did exist was social (de-facto) discrimination that happened on a non-consistent basis. Mexicans were socially considered an "ethnic white" nationality, a lesser kind of white people similar to Italians the Irish Jews and Eastern Europeans, but they were not minorities. So in some social contexts you can find signs that barred Mexicans from certain restaurants. This was not the norm however. In texas, California, New Mexico, and Arizona "white only" included Mexicans.
Mexican schools were limited to just certain (usually rural) districts, and the argument behind them was language and not race. They were special needs schools and not racially segregated. In every court case that fought Mexican schools, this is made clear. You can see that in the Westminister Case and the Lemon Grove case if you simply read the original court documents and look at the arguments made.
"Latino" historians today are piecing together these isolated incidents to fabricate a history that's simply not true. Ask any American that was alive during segregation in a state like Florida, Louisiana, Texas, California, New Mexico, "Where were the hispanics during segregation?"
There were deportations of American born Mexicans in the 1930s so NO they weren't considered white prior to 1980
This is not debatable.
Look at any historical record before 1980: census records, birth certificates, court documents, draft cards, anything…the race of Mexicans and the vast majority of Cubans, Puerto Ricans, or other Spanish surnamed people is listed plainly as "white".
Deportation is an immigration issue that's not related to race.
I would argue that those Hispanics who are second and third generation Americans already have. What makes Hispanic poverty and unemployment rates look high is the fact that so many are still just arriving this skews the statistics. Obviously someone who just got here, does not speak English will not do as well as an established American citizen of any race. Given so many are still arriving from the Spanish speaking world its pretty hard to compare the Hispanic ethnic group in America with any other ethnic group that has long been in the US. If you could separate out the second and third generation Hispanics I would bet money they rate pretty well compared to most other Americans.
Hispanics are not much different than the immigrants who came to the US from southern and Eastern Europe 100 years ago. They are a Catholic culture speaking European based language, this should make them compatable with the US culture. History also says they are a good fit for assimilation into US culture just as the Italians and Poles who came before them were, and those Hispanics who have been here a while seem to bear that out.
As a African American I think they will. Why..... because they have a nation that supports their diaspora where as African Americans don't even have a home base of operations outside of America they can receive cheap goods to sell to the American public.
For example Mexico and many central American nations are industrializing, making their own products and I can see them bringing those products to Latin American communities to sell to the rest of the American populous. Latin Americans will certainly outpace the African American population and many white ethnic groups in America as well.
An African American can't just open up a African shop without it seeming racist or to pro-black to non-blacks. Latin American pride is not demonized like African Americans so the success rate of Latin shops are cool within white American population.
All I'm saying is Latin Americans (Especially Mestizo) are having better transition unlike African Americans. The torch is being handed to Latinos they know it too.
Until African Americans get a nation state outside of America where they have full economic, and political control they will remain America's 2nd and 3rd class citizens.
Geopolitics will reign supreme for Latinos in America in the near future
Until African Americans get a nation state outside of America where they have full economic, and political control they will remain America's 2nd and 3rd class citizens.
Or AA could just take advantage of opportunities here and now, especially in places where there are many like the south. It has worked in Atlanta, and DC.
You do realize that many hispanics are white, don't you OP? Sigh good grief.
Fair enough, I should have clearified "non-Hispanic whites." Yes, Latino is an ethinicty not a race. But, from a sociological standpoint, Hispancis are considered to be a "minorities" OR "persons of color." While there are many Hispanic people like Charlie Sheen who are functionally white, the reality is that pretty much across the board, people who idenfity as Hispanic/Latino will have on average lower educational, income, wealth measures that whites (generally restricted to non-Hispanic whites).
Now, yes both of these reports obviously are written through a white privilage perspective and attribute the socio-economic gaps to racism/discrimination. Others may take issue with that and argue other factors like immigration patterns or somewhat nebulous ideas like habits/norms also play a role. But, the fact remans that on average Hispanics have on average lower social economic outcomes than non-Hispanic whites.
While there are many Hispanic people like Charlie Sheen who are functionally white, the reality is that pretty much across the board, people who idenfity as Hispanic/Latino will have on average lower educational, income, wealth measures that whites (generally restricted to non-Hispanic whites).
"Hispanics" were once considered to be various different poor white immigrant groups. In the 70s they essentially took poor white people from Latin America, made them "minorities", and called them "hispanic".
So it's not significant that they have "lower education, income, and weather measure" than other whites.
Imagine if tommorow someone were to arbitrarily create a new minority group from Appalacian whites by an executive order (how hispanics were made). The Appalacian minority group would also have lower levels of "education, income, and wealth measures" than whites.
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.
