The term "Anglo" (Albuquerque: rain, work, children)

[catman]

The word "ethnic" is unfortunately used only in conjunction with "minorities", evn if the latter are actually majorities (as they are rapidly becoming in Texas). And the constituent Latino nationalities are nearly as, if not as, varied as those of the "Anglos".

A TV show like All in the Family could not be made these days, since everyone is trying so hard to be offended and possibly sue over it. The PCness has gone way too far.

[City Data Guy]

Originally Posted by Cathy4017

You're correct in that "white" is not an ethnicity.

But we're still often all lumped together (regardless of ethnicity) and seen as having no ethnicity nor culture.

The people who believe that whites are not "ethnic" or have no culture are just misinformed. Did you read the links about Western culture and the culture of Europe?

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by City Data Guy

The people who believe that whites are not "ethnic" or have no culture are just misinformed. Did you read the links about Western culture and the culture of Europe?

Yes, I'm well aware of that....but it doesn't change the fact that whites in the United States are perceived that way.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by catman

The word "ethnic" is unfortunately used only in conjunction with "minorities", evn if the latter are actually majorities (as they are rapidly becoming in Texas). And the constituent Latino nationalities are nearly as, if not as, varied as those of the "Anglos".

A TV show like All in the Family could not be made these days, since everyone is trying so hard to be offended and possibly sue over it. The PCness has gone way too far.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

AITF was groundbreaking, indeed! Nobody but Carroll O'Connor could have done it!

[loborick]

Anyone that has a problem with "anglo" needs to find a copy of "Red Sky At Morning" and watch the scene where Desi Arnaz Jr. explains to Richard Thomas what different ethnicities call other ethnicities in New Mexico. It is hilarious!

[xwideopenskyx]

Originally Posted by ABQConvict

False analogy. I would not call an Iroquois a Navajo, because an Iroquois has a different cultural upbringing than a Navajo.

Why would I call an Eastern European an Anglo? They don't speak English and their countries's institutions are not derived from the English model. There is nothing Anglo about them.

Kenneth Wojeczewski (a hypothetical Polish-American) from Chicago, I would call an Anglo. He doesn't speak much Polish, he read a lot of Shakespeare and other British authors in High School English class, he understands the relevance of the Magna Carta and Common Law to the American political system.

If our Kenneth spoke a bit of Polish and considered pierogies to be a comfort food and basically had a self image of being of Polish extraction, I would consider him a Polish-American and call him such. However, Until I knew of his background, I would would just call him an Anglo.

Your argument doesn't hold any water.

Many eastern Europeans speak English. It's a requirement in school.
Poland for an example is a Parliamentary Republic, based on a western democracy. If one of those people happen to be in New Mexico for a vacation or a business trip you would refer to them as an Anglo based on the color of their skin and because they speak English.

Shakespeare is widely read all over the world and the English political system is studied everywhere.

Nobody in Chicago, Cleveland, New York etc. refers to people of eastern European decent as Anglos. Actually, most of the country knows the difference.

If you prefer to assume that every white English speaking person is an Anglo it is your prerogative. There is really nothing that I can offer to people who prefer to make assumptions before they know the facts.

[ABQConvict]

Originally Posted by xwideopenskyx

Your argument doesn't hold any water.

Many eastern Europeans speak English. It's a requirement in school.
Poland for an example is a Parliamentary Republic, based on a western democracy. If one of those people happen to be in New Mexico for a vacation or a business trip you would refer to them as an Anglo based on the color of their skin and because they speak English.

No, I would not refer to such people as 'Anglo' but kudos to your bold claim that I would.

Let's get pedantic with a definition:

ANGLO: For the purpose of this discussion, the term 'Anglo' is circumscribed by its usage in the Southwest Hispanic vernacular: An American of European heritage who speaks English as his or her first language and is enculturated in the American mainstream, i.e. not a member of an anomalous ethnic subculture such as the Amish, recent immigrant communities like Russians and Poles in New York, etc..

Thus,

An Russian National who speaks English as a second language is not an 'Anglo' because they violate the definition on three points: first, English is not their first language; second, they are not American; third, they are not enculturated in mainstream American culture.

An Amish person from Lancaster County, Pennsylvania is not Anglo either: While they are American by citizenship and of European ancestry, their first language is often German (granted this is changing) and they are not enculturated in the American mainstream culture.

A Mestizo person from the Barelas neighborhood in Albuquerque is not an Anglo because although, they may speak English as their first language, they are not of mainly European ancestry and they are not enculturated in the American mainstream culture.

A third generation Spanish-American from Westchester county, New York is an Anglo because: English is his first language, he is of European ancestry and he is enculturated in the American mainstream culture.

Finally, being that one of the accepted criteria of being an 'Anglo' is European ancestry it is implicit that any 'Anglo' can be of any European hyphenated ancestry (xxx-American) and promote that identity as their cultural touchstone.

Now onto other things.

Originally Posted by xwideopenskyx

Shakespeare is widely read all over the world

True, but only in Anglophone* countries is the study of Shakespeare and other English writers a part of the curriculum germane to the cultural and linguistic context of the society in which the student live.

*this term means 'people who speak the English as their first language irrespective of their genetic heritage'

Incidentally, an aquaintance of mine who is Norwegian (I happen to be a Norwegian-American) studied Shakespeare, an English author whose life predates the existence of America, as part of an American Studies program in a Norwegian University, the logic being that Shakespeare is part of the foundation American culture. There are few non-English authors who can claim to be so (the writers of the Bible are, for better or worse) but several English ones. The same goes for English varieties of religion, philosophy, economics (capitalism, anyone), politics, and government.

Originally Posted by xwideopenskyx

and the English political system is studied everywhere.

But is it the foundation of every government and political philosophy everywhere? No, but it is here in America thus indicating a special inheritance of Anglocentric thought and practices among Americans.

Originally Posted by xwideopenskyx

Nobody in Chicago, Cleveland, New York etc. refers to people of eastern European decent as Anglos. Actually, most of the country knows the difference.

Please tell me where I claimed that 'Anglo' was a term recognized outside the American Southwest. (see above definition)

This discussion is about a word that is part of the Southwest Hispanic vernacular that has been adopted by the greater Southwestern society.

When Americans of Eastern European descent come to New Mexico and other parts of the Southwest, they are referred to as Anlgos. If they wish to be called, "people of Eastern European descent" or "Moravian-Americans" rather than "Anglo", then they are going to have to tell people that.

Originally Posted by xwideopenskyx

If you prefer to assume that every white English speaking person is an Anglo it is your prerogative.

I don't call people 'Anglo'. I am merely discussing its usage in its most widely accepted form here in central/northern New Mexico.

For the record, I don't use the terms 'Anglo' or 'White' except when they are essential to the vocabulary of discussions like this one.

In fact, while I accept the term 'Anglo' based on its semantic validity in popular usage, I despise the term 'White' as a far more meaningless pigeonhole. In fact on the census this year, I had to check "Other" and write in my Euro-hyphenated self-identification. I sure as hell didn't write "Anglo".

Originally Posted by xwideopenskyx

There is really nothing that I can offer to people who prefer to make assumptions before they know the facts.

If someone is referred to as 'Anglo' the only assumption I make is that they are an American, English speaker of European ancestry.


For clarity's sake, the following is a nutshell of how I perceive this discussion:

It seems that my detractors are under the impression that people who use the word 'Anglo' are making the assumption that those to whom they are referring are from England or are of mainly English descent. My argument is that people who use the term Anglo are making the assumption that those to whom they refer are Americans* of European descent who speak English**

*an Anglo-centric culture

**an Anglic language

If you are not 'Anglo', I can assume that you do not speak English as your first language, do not live in the United States (or its kin countries like English-speaking Canada) and/or actively repudiate the English derived aspects of our societal and governmental institutions which are predicated on an English model.

[karmathecat]

Originally Posted by ABQConvict

If someone is referred to as 'Anglo' the only assumption I make is that they are an American, English speaker of European ancestry.

That would mean that the New Mexicans of Spanish descent are Anglos.

[CAVA1990]

You're making this way too complicated. Remember that little form you just filled out that the govt. mailed to you? If you marked it "White/Non-Hispanic" (or whatever PC term they used) over 90% of the folks who marked it something else and whose ancestors arrived in NM before 1822 will consider you an "Anglo". Doesn't matter if your grandparents were Irish, German, Italian, French, or Estonian, or even if you're fresh off the boat from those places. In Hawaii the term "Haole" serves a similar purpose. It basically differentiates the newcomers from the "ones who came before". Remember, this is like Family Feud: it's not the right answer but the most popular that matters.

[ABQConvict]

Originally Posted by karmathecat

That would mean that the New Mexicans of Spanish descent are Anglos.

If it looks like a duck and talks like a duck...

An Anglo can be of Hispanic heritage. If their language and worldview (weltanschauung) are of the mainstream American variety (rather than the Spanish-Native culture of New Mexico) then why not.

Think of it this way, a person designated 'Hispanic' can be of African, Native American, or European descent.

So what makes them 'Hispanic' if they don't have an iota of Spanish blood? Their ancestors, whether from Bantu-speaking regions of West Africa, Mayan-speakers from Central America, or Italian-speakers from Italy at one point found themselves in a Spanish speaking society with a Spanish cultural heritage and customs. The West African in the Dominican Republic, the Mayan in Guatemala, the Italian in Argentina. These people adopted the Spanish language and customs and passed them on to their children. They may maintain African, Mayan, and Italian customs as well, but they are subsidiary to the dominant 'Hispanic' worldview.