Why Do Americans Think of Latinos As A Separate Demographic?

I'm mean it's so ridiculous. Latino is the only specific ethnic category you can check on the census - as in, there's "White people", and there's "White Latinos", but there's no such thing on the census as "Black Africans" and "Arab Africans" as categories. Why the obsession? It's like everyone who doesn't have a British last name just treated like they're "other", like Anglo-Saxon is default and anyone with a Latin name is somehow different and not normal. Considering most of the Americas were colonized by the Spanish, at least originally, treating Spanish speakers like their a monolithic other seems odd considering how prolific they are. It would be like treating black Americans as the "other" just because their ancestors weren't from Britain despite them being 100% American culturally spea -

Oh wait.

I mean think about it. The British don't treat the Spanish like the "other", so why do the descendants of their colonists treat people from former Spanish colonies like they're somehow different. Honestly most people in the Americas are have a rather common story: Europeans show up, kill/displace/assimilate the natives, start colonies, colonists gets pissed at their treatment by the government, colony revolts and becomes its own country. The differences are mostly which Europeans showed up, where, which natives they killed, and when they revolted. I would think there'd be some kind of solidarity there (though history has unfortunately shown me to be wrong). I mean historically there was a notion of "Latin Europe" as opposed to "Teutonic Europe" and "Slavic Europe", but those differentiations are very old fashioned. The last time such distinctions were seriously made was by the Nazis, who thought the Teutonic Aryans were genetically superior to the Slavs. The only vestige of the distinction is the occasionally-invoked stereotype that Latin Europeans are lazy compared to the hard-working Teutonic Europeans.

I guess language really is the biggest barrier. Doesn't matter if the "Latino" before you has skin as white as any European, as soon as the words coming out of their mouth aren't English, it's like a mental wall goes up and suddenly they're interlopers.

I dunno about you but I just call them Americans. They're no less Americans than those who hail from Anglo-Saxon lineage. Plus you treat them like a monolith - those who do identify with their heritage usually refer to themselves based on the country they're from. Lumping them together as "Latinos" isn't even helpful, each country is different. It would be like lumping Americans and Australians together because they speak English - you'd have to be ignorant of their cultures to think they can be so easily lumped into the same category. HINT HINT.

Granted, it seems most North Americans are ignorant of what differentiates Latin American countries. I've lost count of the number of people who think my favourite El Salvadoran restaurant in Toronto is Mexican. Though the fact they also sell lots of tacos (cuz tacos are popular and make them a lot of money) probably doesn't help with that misconception. I guess people are bad with accents - the guys running the place don't have Mexican accents, anyone who knows what a Mexican accent is will know they're not from Mexico.

 

I assume you live in Canada. 0.3% of Canada's population is Mexican.

 

All those spanish accents sound the same Especially if their speaking in Spanish

 

And your point is what?

 

So you really don't know anything about it.

 

It's just the way it is in the United States.

 

They are different. You see the southwestern United States used to be part of Mexico. Then a bunch of Texans decided they didn't want to be part of Mexico so they broke away and then convinced the US government to attack Mexico. Remember the Alamo and all that. What the US gained was New Mexico, Arizona and the southern halves of California, Utah, and Colorado.

The people living in those areas were not Spanish but rather native people who had fallen under the influence of Spanish Missions. That is to say that Latinos are mostly native Americans who speak Spanish. Hispanic refers to those who speak Spanish. Ethnicity is a separate issue.

 

That isn't a good counter arguement. Mainly because it isnt one.

 

Given that most native Americans were killed or interbred with Spanish settlers, most Latinos are not Native, or at least not mostly native. Some Latinos have a mostly pure Spanish ancestry and look as white as a Spaniard.

 

Hispanics term racial/ethnic identification in the USA, upside-down and inside-out.

 

Why Do Americans Think of Latinos As A Separate Demographic?

Granny says...

... `cause dey ain't white...

... dey's Hispexicans.

 

That's not true. For instance in Mexico those of European ancestry is only around 16%. Take a drive down through southern Colorado around New Mexico, across Arizona and into California. Take a good look at those people, clearly they are not European as much as they are Asian, as all native peoples are.

 

That isn't true. Most Mexicans are of mixed European-Native ancestry, usually somewhere between half to two thirds of one and half to a third of the other. Northern Mexican states tend towards two thirds European and the percentages gradually equalize and the reverse until you get the opposite in Southern Mexico. Those of purely or almost purely European Ancestry are somewhere between 10 and 20% of the population, depending on what % you use (90% European, or higher?). 15% of the population is also purely or almost purely Native. You're looking at a society that is basically, genetically speaking, half native and half European. You have to keep in mind there were a lot more natives in Mexico than in the United States.

But that's irrelevant because you're only talking about Mexicans. Argentines are vastly of European descent and look like Europeans. More than half are of Italian descent, Spanish being the next biggest, followed by French. They sure as hell don't look native.

 

Weren't we talking about why Americans, or more accurately, why white Americans treat Latinos as a separate Demographic? I'm telling you it is because they are of a different race and it is obvious if you see them up close.

This first picture is of Spaniards, the second is of Mexicans. There is a clear difference.

 

But not all Mexicans look like that. Some are entirely native and some are entirely European. Mexico does not contain one race. And again, not all Latinos are from Mexico. Have you ever seen Argentines? You'd probably mistake them for Spaniards because they look European.

I mean you're effectively saying you treat them as separate because of generalizations and racism.

 

The one's in the US look like pic #2. Like someone else said how would you know when you don't live here?

 

Correction, those Spanish/Mexicans who occupied what is California today referred to themselves as "Calfornios." They were white European Castilian and never looked upon themselves as being Mexican after Mexico won it's independence from Spain.

There was a small number of Mexican Mestizo, mulatos and negros who founded Los Angeles and occupied that area of California. But the vast majority of the Californios were white Castilian Europeans.

Twice the Mexican government would empty it's jails and prisons during the late 1820's and use California as a penal colony and the Californios weren't happy campers. These criminals were mestizo Mexicans and were called "cholos" by the Californios.

Mexico never had real sovereignty over what is California, Arizona, Nevada and Utah under "Natural Law." There was only one Mexican establishment west of New Mexico and the coastal areas of California, Tucson (Az.) that were mostly bandidos and other low life "cholos.". For over three hundred years neither Spain or Mexico were able to establish a wagon trail between Santa Fe, N.M. or lower Old Mexico too California. The Mormon Battalion was able to build the wagon road from Santa Fe to San Diego in just a couple of months.

By the late 1830's Mexico was in such debt to England and America that debt was going to be paid off by acquiring California who's actual boundaries extended to western New Mexico.

The Californios never looked upon themselves as Mexicans and were divided on if they wanted to become a British colony or an American territory. Pio Pico wanted California to become a British colony.

The British Crown sent three snoop and poop expeditions to Mexico and California and came to the conclusion that California wasn't worth the trouble, that the Mexicans were already a basket case and they weren't about to get in another shooting war with America. So the British Pacific Squadron set sail heading west to see what the French were up to in the South Pacific.

California's Mexican Governor and the Californios would surrender a total of six times. First when the U.S. Navy jumped the gun thinking that the war against Mexico had started. This happened at Monterey, Ca. The Mexicans/Californios surrendered to the U.S. Marines and blue jackets without a shot being fired. As soon as the Navy realized that the war hadn't started yet, they apologized, lowered the stars and stripes and the Marines and blue jackets went back to their ship. The second time the Mexican California Governor surrendered was to Americans of the Bear Flag Republic (Bear Flag Revolt) . A few days later the Governor would again surrender to American military troops.

Los Angeles would also surrender without a fight to U.S. Marines and blue jackets but here's when the fighting began. The Mexicans thought that Captain Gillespie (U.S. Marine) was just to harsh and the shooting began. The last two surrenders would again happen in the Los Angeles area and California would now become a territory of the United States and the Californios were happy campers.

Now the "cholos" weren't happy campers so the "La Raza" movement was born, the same "La Raza" movement we see today in America.

 

Perhaps it is all part of the divide and conquer strategy by the political parties. I call it the hyphenation of America, we are no longer the melting pot. My wife is from Thailand, when she took her naturalization test to become a citizen she was taught that in America we have no hyphenated Americans. That we are all Americans regardless of race, color, creed or where we came from. That is no more, now unless you are white you are hyphenated.

I think it is all part of dividing us into groups so the political parties can pit one group against another in their search for votes. Make one group hate another in hopes that in the end they will hate the other guy more than they hate you.

 

You would only notice the ones in pic 2.

If an Argentine-American was walking around you wouldn't even realize they were Latino unless they started speaking Spanish because they don't look different.

 

They certainly do treat immigrants differently than they do native born or naturalized citizens every country in the damn world does. Why is America the only country in the world that isn't allowed to enforce its borders?

 

Yes, they are treated the way they are because of racism. Haven't you figured that out yet. America is a very racist country. It seems to be more about culture though.

 

So why the Hell is a Canadian worried about immigrants in the US? With the new Left Wing 'drama teacher' they just elected they will soon be having their own immigration troubles.

 

We are not talking about immigrants. We are talking about Latinos, most of who are native Americans.

 

Seems to me that you are leaving out quite a bit. The purpose of the Spanish missions were to convert the natives to Christianity and European society. That would have never been the case if all the Californians were European. Also if the land did not belong to Mexico than why did we have to fight them for it and why did it not become part of America until after the Mexico ceded it?

 

Says the guy that brought this up as a topic? You're REALLY trying too hard to sound holier than thou. Why not be a poster that just contributes? At any rate, it is precisely because of this fact: That Hispanics refer generally to those who speak Spanish, that is why the different race classification.(At least, that's the PR way of saying it.)

In reality, this whole thing became an issue in the infamous George Zimmerman case, where the Liberal media hoped(and actually succeeded) in flaming racial tensions in spite of the fact that Zimmerman was neither A: racist, nor B: Predominately White. Double-oops. So they decided to coin the term "White-Hispanic" to keep it going.

To show how U.S Justice has fallen, they threw out Zimmerman's law suit even though NBC most certainly deserved to lose a lot of money over an obvious HACK job and a lack of professional journalism.