Hispanics and "Whites" (Mennonites, maintenance, inclusive)

[karstic]

They just have to teach history. History of the US and the world.
But real history, not PC correct bok that are a laugh.

[shamrockfisher]

Originally Posted by jcarbonellcuba

Wow, really, you bubble finally exploded and you have been coming out more and more like a hater.

The only one complaining and whining have been you. And I said it before, people from Latin America should not be talking this crap from people like you. I can't imagine how people like yourself feel the need to degrade others to feel themselves better.

Clearly your opinion about us is very low and that why I will continue to teach people not to listen to people like you.

And my hand is never constantly out. I have never even asked for Food Stamps or Medicaid in my 14 years in this country.

I think you have been doing all the complaining about not wanting to be classified as hispani. Meanwhile, Cubans cost American taxpayers almost $700 million in foodstamps and medicaid and refugee assistance and social security for cubans over 65 years of age even though they never worked in this country but can still collect.

For that expense, the Amercian government can create any name they want for you, hispanic or otherwise.

[jwolfer]

Originally Posted by shamrockfisher

A lot. Ethnicity, language, culture, physical traits, socio-economic background. A lot of reasons demographers separate the two. On the other hand, sometimes very little is different.

Perhaps in a couple generations there will be enough assimilation that the category goes away. Kind of like the way 3rd and 4th generation Italians in the U.S. that do not speak Italian are considered white.

So how could I tell, without hearing them speak, a 3rd Generation Uruguayan who speaks Spanish only from a 3rd generation American from Port Richmond, Philadelphia, PA who speaks English only when all Great Grandparents came from the same village in Poland...

Ethnicity, Physical Traits and in many cases socio-economics would be the same.

Much of Latin America, like the US, had immigration and African Slavery added on top of a Western European population, (yes Spain like England is in Western Europe and the populations share many genetic markers)

The native American component is higher especially in Central America and the Andes than in the US generally. But there are parts of the US where many claim partial Native American heritage, like Oklahoma, parts of the Appalachians and the the west

[karstic]

Orientals -urogayans- are African in origen, they were expelled from Argentina using a priest and a donkey as a guide. "The 12 urogayans and the priest". They are also Amerindians, the bolita tribe.

[Aspiration]

My apologies, for I'm back to my scholarly work. Anyway... Thank you very much for the response to the post!

It was a great post, maybe a little wasted in the Miami forum where most people are aware that latinos come in any race. South Florida latino population is way more racially diverse than other states'.

Correct. What amazes me is that in certain states or specific cities, a certain Latina/o group predominates the community, whereas the opposite occurs in Miami-Dade County of Southern Florida, where there is more range within the Latina/o community. The major groups (in chronological order) are Cubans, followed by Puerto Ricans, then communities from other countries in Central America, as well as a small, but emerging community from South American countries. Each community represents the rich historical culture of the city.

Having said that, that bit I quoted above fells like a little bit reductionist. Hispanic culture is way more than a language.

Typically, science and other fields including (culture and history) require elements of reductionism to reach a conclusion. If you carefully read the post, as stated, language was not a primary focus of my post, you would see there is also discussion on a wide of concepts such as biological tenants of genetics, geography, and historical overview of cultures. Thus, not one concept was intended to dominate the point(s) of the post. Albeit that said, Latin America does correlate with Language in a strong way, as the overwhelming majority of inhabitants in Latin America speak a group of Romance Languages derived from Latin.

The US census asks what language people speaks in a different section and leaves it open to include any alternative.

See above point about the influence of language on the geography of Latin America, which brings back to your point of a correlation between language and identity of the Latina/o population.

Also, I'm not sure that, in the context of sorting US population, 'latino' is meant to include Italians and French.

Well, historically, those languages are dominant in the sphere of Latin American countries. For example, in Latin America, French is widely recognized in Haiti, Quebec region of Canada, and visible presence in U.S. States of Louisiana and Maine. Italians also have a presence in Latin America, as they formed large pockets of migration towards nations such as Argentina, Uruguay, and Mexico (a couple of countries to name some), each respective forming communities. Hence, you could even see the effects of rich Italian customs such as Italian cuisine that exert influence throughout restaurants in South America. In fact, a personal anecdote came from a documentary series, "Chef's Table," wherein one segment, there was famous Brazilian Chef, Enrique Olvera, who quoted that, "Italian and French Chefs were treated as Gods' in the restaurant atmosphere in Brazil." Regardless, these and other European groups have had an influence on the development of Latin America whether overtly or covertly presented.



Once again, thank you for the response to the post, as that brought engaging conversation towards a better understanding of the study of this dynamic region!

[Aspiration]

Thank you for the reply to the post! Will break down your commentary into related components.

False, and typical of American-based misconceptions.

Incorrect. The information is not American-based misconceptions.

In fact, if we're going to talk about American-based misconceptions, then the American-based misconception of the term "Hispanics" came from the U.S. Government's attempts following the new immigration laws post-1965, to categorize groups who originated from Spanish-speaking countries. Of course, this was flawed and one-sided.

The input through appropriate historical revisionism was able to provide a valid, grounded definition in regards to correct historical process. Thus, I was dispelling these American-based concepts through proper research (supported by credible historians).

Portuguese people are not Hispanic. Ancient Hispania on one hand and modern day Portugal and Spain are 2 different things. Hispania was an administrative region of the Roman Empire, it was never a unified country with its own identity and ended 1500 years ago. Modern Spain molded its named after it.

Like others have stated such as karstic, have pointed out that this concept doesn't correlate to a particular country's traditional curriculum, rather a universal concept. Just open up a map of Hispania and see the outcome. Here I'll do it for you:



Image Description: Map of Roman roads of Hispania (312 CE), the modern-day countries of Portugal and Spain included in the traditional sense of Hispania.

This is why people in new world colonized by Spain are called Hispanic, because they speak Spanish.

Spain wasn't the only European colony to explore the Americas, in fact, the Portuguese were the first European power to explore the Americas. Hence, the term "Americas" coined by Italian explorer Amerigo Vespucci's name in Latin, ultimately discovering a new continent. Affiliated with the Spanish and Portuguese kingdoms, in which they financially supported Christopher Columbus's exploration team (which Vespucci was under). Afterward, they split their influence through expanded territory. Thus, the Portuguese alongside the Spanish were the emerging powers beyond the development of Latin America.



Image Description: Initial routes of Spanish and Portuguese exploration, 1400-1600.

Nowadays in the US hispanic really means someone originating somewhere south oth border, it has nothing to do with ancient times Hispania. Portuguese and US Hispanics are 2 unrelated ethnicities.

Since their conception of the term falls from the accurate description, of course, the two would not be interchangeable. Thus, through the contradictions, logical fallacies, and generalizations, you're referring to the real American-based misconceptions of the term "Hispanics," in which the government in charge of the U.S. Census portrays the term "Hispanics" to be.

Also, furthermore, if you follow that logic of the "South of the Border" methodology, then we also include Brazil, leading to the origins of Portuguese exploration, hence interconnecting with the Portuguese. Thus, the saying "Two wrongs do make a right," applies to this context.

We're here to correct you, with historically-sound and rational points that guide you to the right answer.



Once again, Thank you for the viewing of the post!

[Aspiration]

Thank you very much for adding more perspective onto this topic!

Hispania was the name that the PHOENICIANS gave to the Iberian Peninsula (3.000 years ago) that later was adopted by Romans. Roman divided Hispania in several provinces.

Correct, this is in connection to the etymology of the term "Hispania." About my (original) post, was regarding the term "Hispania" in a more contemporary historical period to show the emergence of the phrase that would extend on to the legacy of Latin America. Thank you for providing this fact, which adds more to the historical knowledge presented.

This is history, not Brazilian history or whatever.

Hispanics, including Brazilians, are indeed related to Hispania.

The Roman province of Hispania.

Correct, this supports my proposition to the post written above, in connection with your remarks.

You were supposed to learn that in HS.

Unfortunately, the educational system, especially in certain public school outlets in the United States of America have fallen from grace, in which students are not worried about learning for the sake of knowledge, rather the threat of grades. As a result, the quality of education is declining dramatically.


Once again, thank you for your insight onto the topic.

[Aspiration]

Thank you for the unique perspective from your post!

I agree with you on Hispanic should include Brazilians because of Hispania referring to the entire Iberian Peninsula... However the "official" definition of Hispanic is for people who come from or are descended from Spanish Speaking countries .. And to further muddy the waters. Latino/a would cover Brazilians as well... But then we have Chicano referring specially to Mexicans. The natives called the land "Meshico"... in 16th century Spanish the "X" represented the SH sound ( this is retained in Portuguese BTW).. so the Spanish spelled it "Mexico".. so the SH shifted a bit to CH and thus... [Mex]Chicano.

Historically, the term you stated ("Chicano") were in connotation to movements for the growing size of Mexican communities in the United States of America during the twentieth century. Specifically, this was known as the Chicano Movement. The Chicano Movement popularized during the 1940s and raised to its zenith during the Civil Rights Period (1960s), in which the Latina/o expounded into mainstream culture. Thus, resulting in several organizational groups such as La Raza (supported by Democrats and Republicans - Bipartisanship), which in hand has leveled the rise of the Latina/o community. Therefore, in this context the term "Chicano," refers to social identity rather than racial classification.

why all the categorizations and divisions? WE should treat people as individuals but sadly its not reality

Agree in the sense that a person's judgment should come from their character rather than external makeup. Thus, resulting in a system of meritocracy (appropriate skills and abilities).

However, there is a point for categorization and identification (to an extent), because that's what makes the world a balanced perspective. If we didn't go by an identity, then we would all be of the same worthless specter, just merely living in the plane of dull existence. Therefore, everyone should love and embrace the background (originated from).



Once again, thank you for your perspective in the post!

[Aspiration]

Thank you very much for your response to the post!

And also Asia, as there are Caucuses in western China and the Ainu, the original inhabitants of Japan, are caucasic.

In regards to China, you're referring to Uyghur people, who form the plurality of the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (forty-seven percent) - 0.79 % of the total China population. They're a Turkic-speaking ethnic group, who were reported to have "Caucasian-looking features." However, when looking at scientific reports that showed their genetics, it was revealed that they were descendant from Turkish Tribes mixed with Caucasian and East Asian ancestries. Found this from several certified sources including the European Journal of Human Genetics under the Nature Scientific magazine:

European Journal of Human Genetics - Polymorphisms of the PRNP gene in Chinese populations and the identification of a novel insertion mutation


As well, as Khazaria.com - History of Jewish Khazars, Khazar Turk, Khazarian Jews, which profoundly analyzed several dedicated reports to this topic:

Uygur Genetics - DNA of Turkic people from Xinjiang, China

Shuhua Xu, Huang Wei, Qian Ji, and Jin Li. "Analysis of Genomic Admixture in Uyghur and Its Implication in Mapping Strategy." The American Journal of Human Genetics 82 (2008): pages 883-894. As individuals, this study's Uygurs' "European" ancestral component ranges from as low as 48.7% in one person to as high as 62.2% in another person. Excerpts from the Abstract:

"The Uyghur (UIG) population, settled in Xinjiang, China, is a population presenting a typical admixture of Eastern and Western anthropometric traits. We dissected its genomic structure at population level, individual level, and chromosome level by using 20,177 SNPs spanning nearly the entire chromosome 21. Our results showed that UIG was formed by two-way admixture, with 60% European ancestry and 40% East Asian ancestry. [...] we estimated that the admixture event of UIG occurred about 126 [107-146] generations ago, or 2520 [2140-2920] years ago [...]"

Although these are primary sources introducing a topic, leading to great caution, they provide a trail for more understanding on the background of the Uyghur people(s).


Furthermore, through the organization Japanese Society, it was discovered that the Ainu people (original inhabitants of Japan) were NOT of Caucasian admixture.



Once again, thank you for your input towards the topic!

[karstic]

Originally Posted by jwolfer

So how could I tell, without hearing them speak, a 3rd Generation Uruguayan who speaks Spanish only from a 3rd generation American from Port Richmond, Philadelphia, PA who speaks English only when all Great Grandparents came from the same village in Poland...

Ethnicity, Physical Traits and in many cases socio-economics would be the same.

Much of Latin America, like the US, had immigration and African Slavery added on top of a Western European population, (yes Spain like England is in Western Europe and the populations share many genetic markers)

The native American component is higher especially in Central America and the Andes than in the US generally. But there are parts of the US where many claim partial Native American heritage, like Oklahoma, parts of the Appalachians and the the west

But Latin America is closer to Europe, at least to western Europe, no matter if they are checkered with green spots. Northamerica is as different as China as they rejected Europe - and most were expelled from Europe, so they created a nation based on ideas that were prosecuted in Europe 200 years ago or more.

European immigration was brainwashed, not the case of Latin America were you find many that speak their original language, preserved their culture, etc.

The US is just as if European Jehova Witnesses had colonized a planet 300 years ago, they would have not many elements in common except language.