Jump to content

Talk:Hispanic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Scipio-62 (talk | contribs) at 16:10, 31 August 2009 (→Racist Country). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Werdnabot

Question

Is there any explanation as to why the Spanish get their own race, but not the descendants of other European countries, such as Italian, Irish, German, etc? Why are all these people considered white, but not the Spanish? (This is a legitimate historical question, not a political statement.) James Callahan 04:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC) James. According to the US Census most Hispanics in the US are White. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.212.61 (talk) 06:36, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are not another race..Its purly because ..before the USA only included Hispanic americans as Hispanics...even though i read that the term Hispanic was put into the census by a Spanish descendent...from New mexico... Later they Included spain since..they are including all countries that speak spanish or have a tie to the Spanish Empire .therefore leaving out the country where Hispanicity comes from seemed stupid....so they are included......its purly based on cultural link... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spain21 (talk • contribs) , July 14 2007 (UTC)
Your question, James, is one that only American whites can answer. FilipeS 18:29, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
James, Hispanic is not a racial label anywhere but in the American culture, and even there it is not an official racial category, since in the census the question asked is if you are Hispanic, and then if you are white or other. The question is that, in Europe, Spanish are white. And that in the States you confused Spanish with Mexicans or others, who are essencialy native americans. This confusion makes many Americans believe Spanish look the same as Mexicans. This is a confusion! This racial confused use of the term Hispanic is only found in the States. In my country an Hispanic is someone who speaks Spanish, regardless of race! Cheers. The Ogre 20:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mexicans aren't "essentially" Native Americans....Over 70% of the country of Mexico is of European descent....besides Mexico has a white popoulation of a small European country...and that doesn't include Mestizos who you claim are Indians...Cali567 18:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry Cali567, I did not make myself understood. What I meant was that the average Mexican physical apperance denotes the contribution of Native American stock, and that that should not be confused with the average Spanish. When I said that Mexicans "are essencialy native americans", I meant that most Mexicans have Native American ancestors, as well as European. As it is said in the article about Mexico, "Mestizos (those of European and Amerindian ancestry) form the largest group, making up to 60%–75% of the total population." And it should be noted that "The second article of the Mexican Constitution defines the country to be a pluricultural nation originally founded upon the indigenous peoples", as it is said in Demography of Mexico. The Ogre 01:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, you didn't make yourself clear...but thank you for the explanation..."And that in the States you confused Spanish with Mexicans or others, who are essencialy native americans." I'll take the explanation, but I'm not sure that it was your original thought. I will add that I have seen many Spaniards and Mexicans who look identical, regardless of Native American admixture. Cali567 07:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cali567! I assure that that was my original though! And yes, I have also seen many Spaniards and Mexicans who look similar - and I could add many other nationalities or ethnic groups (namely Anglo-Americans). The Ogre 07:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Very well, I rest this case... =} Cali567 08:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
James, have you read the article? The Ogre 20:13, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In defense of James, the article does not once explain what the term "hispanic" means. No, it's not a race, but saying that it is instead an "ethnicity" doesn't really mean anything. Whites from Spain are "Hispanic." Mixed-race individuals with Spanish blood are "Hispanic." So far, so good. But it also says that some pure-blood Native Americans are "Hispanic," as potentially are some pure-blood blacks. How does a Native American who grew up in America have "Hispanic" heritage? How do blacks who grew up, say, in the Dominican Republic, get lumped into the "Hispanic" category as well? Is speaking Spanish the only criterion? The reason people in America are so confused by "white Hispanic," "Hispanic non-white," the fact that "hispanic" does not mean "latino," etc. -- is that the concept is ill-defined and has little or nothing to do with Hispania. The article is terribly unclear about this, despite the fact that most people reading the article probably just want to know what the heck "Hispanic" means. -69.47.186.226 05:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello 69.47.186.226. You must remember that Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, and, in this case, the definition of Hispanic can not be restricted to the one prevailing in the States. Now, regarding that specific issue (the definition in the States), I must say it is inherently dubious, as all ethnic/racial categories are. For me, as an European, it has no meaning whatsoever! I just looks like an American confusion! Even if I know it is indeed operative in American culture and social relations. The Ogre 14:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article used to have a section called Historical Mistake that stated: "...this historical mistake is happening nowadays in the United States of America, where since the late 20th century the terms Hispanic and Latino have broken the cultural label to become an ethnic label, thus not only perpetuating but increasing the alienation, not only of the non-Castilian Hispanics from Spain (through the term Hispanic) and the other Latin peoples from the rest of the World, including those non-Castilian Spaniards (through the term Latino), but also reaching the same Castilian-speaking peoples of the Peninsula, because this time, the acceptance of the term Hispanic as an ethnic label implies the identification of the same Castilian-speaking Spaniards with the large majority of Castilian-speaking peoples of Amerindian and South American ethnicity. In this context, the Castilian-speaking peoples of Spain have become a minority, like once were the non-Castilian peoples of the Iberian Peninsula in front of the Castilians, and thus, many cultural and linguistic issues relating the Spaniards are often confused and mixed with those relating to Mexicans and other Hispanic American peoples. Today, although some people not only from the Hispanophone but also from other parts of the World are conscious of these issues, they are still very few in front of the, although young, deep-rooted tradition that the terms Hispanic and Latino have generated among the Latin American community. The majority of the so-called Latinos do not know the real meaning of the term Hispanic, and thus perpetuate the bad usage of the term and spread it over the Americas, reaching the United States of America, and leading to the appearance of the ethnic label. Nowadays, the same reasons that have provoked all this ignorance and confusion around the words Hispanic and Latino are still prevailing, and the so-called Latinos, among other people from all over the World, especially in the United States, keep the bad usage of the terms and, paradoxically, many of them support the ethnic label that surrounds these words, considering themselves as people of a different race, as Hispanics or Latinos, and thus establishing a common link among them, but at the same time, excluding and alienating more and more the other Hispanics from Spain (both the Castilian and the non-Castilian-speaking) and also the Latin peoples from the rest of the World, who are not included in this new definition they have given to the term Hispanic." I believe this sheds some light in this discussion... The Ogre 08:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know people, What i think is going to happen in the next 20+ years....all these Hispanics that claim to have Puerto Rican , cuban and any other people that choose their ancestors 'Nationality' in the "ANCESTRY" Question....is gonna change....since nationality is not a RACE even though most like to choose it. And the term Hispanic (Hispania=España) usage will change or atleast decrease the poulation, since alot are gonna be Native American Indian or Black African instead of Hispanic-Hispano meaning Spanish..........and the Hispanics will be the people of only Spanish ancestry.....because thats what alot of cubans and others are of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.198.211 (talk • contribs) - probably User:Spain21, that didn't sign properly.

I'm even more confused than before I read this: In US usage (as seen on tv "The victim/suspect is a Latino/Hispanic male...") what is the difference between "Hispanic" and "Latino"? I've always assumed they are exact synonyms meaning Spanish speaking people of mixed European (Spanish) and Native American ancestry. Would a (white/caucasian/european) Spaniard actually refer to themself as "Hispanic"? I'd almost bet money that if anyone were to ask a random sample of natives of Spain if they are Hispanic the answer would almost always be "No, I'm Spanish not Hispanic". Roger 14:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They ARE Hispanics. Only in the USA are they likely to not be regarded as such. And Latino doesn't mean mixed, although again many USonians think a latino has to be "brown". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.207.18.250 (talk) 10:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but Spaniards ARE white europeans, as much as an Italian, a French or a Portuguese. This classification sucks and your comment even more. Now Spain is the only country in Europe with a particular race? Come on... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.13.190.45 (talk) 01:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know many say that the term "Hispanic" is not meant as a racial classification, but the everyday governmental and media use of that term does not agree with any of you. That made up bogus term has it's roots in Anglo Saxon racial supremism. If one looks at the history of that propaganda garbage, its clear to see that propaganda illustrations portray Spaniards(not "Hispanics") as dark skinned and hawk nosed. Just read news paper caricatures that were printed during the Spanish American War. These racial features that are common in the Middle East. See the purpose? Basically, because of the enmity that British society had for Spain, Spaniards are portrayed as racial bastards and less White as way to make them less human. Re-call that such nonsense was tried on the Germans during World War 1 with propaganda books by calling them "Huns". The shame of it is that this garbage is now accepted as true by Americans despite the fact that DNA genome studies conducted in the past few years have continuously proven this nonsense wrong. And for those "One Drop Rule" racial purists theologians, I say this; Its historical fact that Hunic tribes were once the dominant military force in Northern and Central Europe and its is known that they did indeed leave their Asiatic genes all over the place. Moreover, Britain, of all places, did have an empire and they imported a lot more non Whites into their country than Spain ever did. I am still waiting, but I have yet to hear or read about terms like "Britannic", Gaulic, "Scandinavic" and so on. --Charles A 16:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)

This article is US-centric

I think this article is US-centric and needs to be totally rewritten. Hispanic means primarily people of Latin American descent or Spanish-speaking people residing in the U.S. and, thus, this article should only include Spanish people because of their language and shouldn't confuse them ethnically with Hispanic/Latinos and vice versa. 62.43.55.155 20:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I totally agree! Hispanics "as a group" exist only in the mind of Americans. It is a gross generalization based on ignorance. If anyone said people from Nigeria, India or the USA are English because they speak English, you would not agree. Yet you (in America) seem to agree that a Spaniard and say, a Mexican are Hispanic Because they speak Spanish! The term Hispanic (as viewed from America) is pure nonsense!! Oh by the way Spain is in Europe, next to Portugal and France.

Keep in mind that it is not just English speaking Americans that are to blame for this stupid "Hispanic" term. "Latin" Americans with little or no Spanish heritage regularly refer to themselves as "Spanish" whether its true or not. I've met many "Latin" Americans ranging from Amerindian Central Americans to mixed Black and pure Black Caribbean types that regularly call themselves "Spanish". Its well known even before the advent of scientifically valid DNA genome studies that the majority of African Americans have a high portion of British and other Northern and Central European blood in their gene pool. Our own President Obama is half White. Yet there are no racial classifications like "Britannic" or "Francic". Moreover, that stupid "One Drop Rule" is often evoked even though most people that use it can't prove their pure genetic bloodline. Even by Adolf Hitler's own admission in his infamous book, Mein Kampf. He admitted that most Germans were not truly pure blonde Nordic Aryans. Its high time that that term be deleted from the English language and people accept their own true back round by not lying --Charles A 01:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)

What? Hispanics are descended from Iberia. In Europe. It doesn't mean people residing in the US everywhere. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 22:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hispanics are descended from Iberia?. Well, some Hispanics are descended from Iberia but globally neither Iberian/Spaniards are Hispanics nor they're Latino.
That's simply a popular ignorant misconception of Americans. According to most English dictionaries Hispanic means a Spanish-speaking person, especially one of Latin American descent, residing in the US such as a Cuban, a Mexican or a Puerto Rican. Most of the article focuses on Spanish people with an odd pedagogic tone and only succeed in deepening prejudices and ignorance about Spanish people. Felve 19:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I think we all agree that much of the content and general structure of the article is wrong. The article, for one, should be much shorter. The article was drafted by now banned user Onofre Bouvila. It was done in a very non-encyclopedic way and was geared to making a rather obscure point which I never managed to completely work out. I seriously think it should be rewritten from scratch, but thats just my opinion. --Burgas00 22:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Not all hispanics descend from Iberia. But the people from Iberia, according to celtic Irish mythology and genetic studies are ancestors of the British people who colonised the USA.[1] So, following you line of thought, north Americans are Hispanics as much as South Americans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.181.43.190 (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

" But the people from Iberia, according to Celtic Irish mythology and genetic studies are ancestors of the British people who colonised the USA.[2]" I go to the link after reading that. The article as read to me as Britian/Celts are descended from Iberian fisherman who went north and colonized Britian. Wfoj2 14:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of Interest to me. In the America's Hemisphere, Central and Southern America can be ignorantly thought of as predominantly Hispanic by USA citizens. How many Spaniards/"European Hispanics" have emigrated/ colonized to the Americas over the last 515 years? Verasus what is the Americas' total Hispanic Population? What is the Central/South America total population that can be thought of as predonimant indigenous ("Indian") background. I personally would not think of when meeting a person from Spain as Hispanic. From a race perspective, and features, they are probably caucasian. To me the defination of a hispanic should be a person whose anchestry includes some portion of a emigrant/ colonizer from Spain. That portion can vary very highly. To be Hispanic one does not need to speak or know Spanish. as I read above the Question Section "Is there any explanation as to why the Spanish get their own race, but not the descendants of other European countries, such as Italian, Irish, German, etc?" I am a US Citizen by birth, and surprised by this statement. I would love to hear from a European if they agree with this statement in regard to thoughts on a person from the Iberian Penisula's race. If the were to agree with this statement, that would be a good basis for removal of a lot of content fromthe page, work on a strong revision. Actually a fdifferenet thought- some forms have a block for Nationality or citizenship. Never is there an entry in that block for "Hispanic". Frequently there is a block for race. From an US citizen perspective- choices are Caucasian, Black/negroid, Asian, Hispanic, Indian/(indiginious). From A European/Spanish by nationality perspective how many of those people would claim check Hispanic. RE- Below "The Problem with this article". What would really help as reading this Talk page would be be for people to identify themselves, continent they are from, perhaps their nationality/citizenship, and perhaps their race (especially when many readers would make race assumptions based on majority fo what read for continent/natiunality/citizenship.)

Wfoj2 14:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are Americans British/English? NO! Then why are Mexicans "hispanic"?

If Mexicans (for example) are Spanish because they were part of the Spanish Empire and they speak Spanish, then aren't Americans British because they were part of the British Empire and they speak English? I see the same logic here. This is a serious question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karljoos (talk • contribs) 19:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the same logic is applied at least to white non-Hispanic Americans: they're also referred to as "Anglos", due to the English heritage. SamEV (talk) 02:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
English is also an official language in India and some African countries (not only South Africa). In Kenya, English is an official language: are Kenyans English? They qualify to be English: they were a former colony and they speak English. Yes,if Mexicans, Argentinians and Venezuelans are Hispanic (since they are a former colony of Spain and speak Spanish), then Kenyans and Indians are also Anglos. This whole "Hispanic" thing is really wrong, I think. --Karljoos (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hispanic is very different from Anglo

The whole "Hispanic thing" is not wrong. Hispanic means the people, countries or cultures with a strong Spanish cultural base, due to historic reasons. In most of these cases it includes the Spanish language, but not always. The Philippines is arguably a Hispanic country (Spanish traditions, Catholic religion, cuisine with much Spanish and Mexican influence, thousands of Spanish loanwords in native languages, Spanish family names etc.) but Filipinos no longer speak the Spanish language (except for a Spanish creole spoken by about 600.000 people in certain parts of the country). Therefore, those countries where the Spanish culture (and language) has taken roots due to centuries of assimilation, are called Hispanic.
Now, one of the differences with "Anglo" is that in many former British colonies, the English culture has not been assimilated to the same extent. For example, although English is spoken in Kenya, you would not say it is an Anglo Saxon country because the people do not have an Anglo mentality, follow Anglo traditions or typically English religion (How many Kenyans are Anglicans?). You could say however, that Kenyan culture has Anglo influence, but it is not an "Anglo" country as such.
The other difference is that "Anglo" carries a racial meaning. Anglo usually means "White" English-speaking people and culture. That is why it is not used for Kenya or India or other Asian and African nations. With Hispanic this is very different: one because there has been an important racial mix in Hispanic countries (the Spanish colonial authorities did not ban or persecute intermarriage) resulting in a majority mixed population, and therefore the Spanish culture has really been assimilated. Spanish culture has really taken roots, alongside the native American roots. However, in most African or Asian countries formerly ruled by Britain, there was no intermarriage, and because the white population was a minority, the "Anglo" culture did not really sink in. Of course, in those countries where the white population became a majority (and the native one was wiped out) it did sink in, and today we call them Anglo Saxon countries: the US, Canada and Australia.


That contention of yours does not stand up to the facts. It is well known even before the advent of DNA research that the majority of African Americans are also indeed of mixed blood. And when I state mixed blood, I mean mixed with a lot of Anglo American genes. The same is true for Native Americans like Hopi, Cherokee, Apache, and so forth. Yet, again, those people are not referred to as "Anglics". Anglic does not even show up on my MS Word spell check. My point is the, yes. While its true that there are people of mixed blood in Central and South America, the same is also true of English Speaking North America. The whole notion of racial purity that is portrayed by English speaking societies everywhere is Anglo racial supremist bunk.--Charles A 13:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your post. Please, If you’re going to make such strong statements, at least sign them so we know who is making them. --Karljoos (talk) 17:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are Spanish people "Hispanic"?

Given the modern meaning of "Hispanic", it seems unlikely that actual Spanish people, from Spain, qualify - since they are, after all, white Europeans. ðarkuncoll 23:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The modern meaning is supposed to transcend racial and even ethnic origins, much as how "Anglo" is used to mean more than English blood, solely tied to the language convention. Quot homines tot sententiae: suo quoique mos. (talk) 09:40, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hispanic as is understood by the overwhelming majority of people in the US and many other countries (including use in the media, police, health care institutions, employers etc) is equivalent of Mestizo and indeed treated as a race. To deny it is to live in other world. The technical census definition that nobody uses is completely out of sync with how the word has evolved and is used in the real world. Spaniards are Europeans by race and culture and they don't fit anymore into that Hispanic label. As it has been mentioned previously, they are much more related in culture/race to other Southern Europeans than to "Hispanics". Are Italians or the Southern French Hispanics also? No way a Mexican Mestizo could be considered from the same ethnicity than an ethnic Spaniard/Italian/Southern French. -Kg--81.184.133.122 (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

///////////

The question is a bit complicated and dates back a few centuries. English nationalism grew strong anti Spanish since the XVI century, when Spain was the foremost world power. This type of nationalism went hand in hand with Protestantism and the Beginnings of Nordicism. In this context some Northern European nations were envious and jealous of Spanish success (Holland, Belgium, Luxemburg, parts of France and Germany, and also most of Italy) became Spanish colonies (by the way, not only Hispanic America). In this situation, a strong anti Spanish propaganda began to emerge, that due to the fact that it coincided with the birth of the racial doctrine known as Nordicism (born out of an inferiorty complex of Northern Europeans towards successful Southern Europeans at the time and in history) began to take racial overtones. In this line of thinking the Spanish began to be attacked as being a different race that wanted to subjugate Northern Europe, a race that was supposed to be even Non/White, or at least less white. It was the only consolation they had left for their mediocrity at the time, and this myth was made specially strong by the English and then by the Americans, who passed it on onto the Hispanic Americans as a whole, this myth being reinforced by the mixed origins of Mexicans , their neighbors.


In fact, this myth has become very strong due to Anglo Saxon Propaganda for centuries. Let's take an example:

Often the stereotype about the Spanish is about a short and swarthy person, stereotypes that have often been elevated to the categories of racial features, representing a race apart.

Like the field of genetics is presenting important surprises,


http://www.scs.uiuc.edu/~mcdonald/WorldHaplogroupsMaps.pdf


other studies are doing the same in relation to body height and skin pigmentation.

About body height, recent studies show that the average young Spaniard is even taller than the average Briton, and young Spaniards are still growing.

See: http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12501087

From there I cut and pasted this:

"The improvement in Spaniards’ lives is instantly visible. Many elderly people are short, stunted by the hunger they suffered as children in the hard years of fascist autarky after Franco won the civil war of 1936-39. Young Spaniards are strikingly taller than their grandparents, exemplified by Pau Gasol, who measures seven feet (2.13 metres) and was voted the most valuable player when Spain won the latest world basketball championship."


See also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_height

About skin pigmentation, in a 21st century study that disregards the effects of tanning, Spaniards have some of the lighest skins in the world.

See page 18.

http://www.bgsu.edu/departments/chem/faculty/leontis/chem447/PDF_files/Jablonski_skin_color_2000.pdf


If are too lazy to read it here is a summary. The link is to a page that is controversial but the summary is good. In fact you can check it in the original paper if you are diligent. I include it here for those too lazy. You can also see some shocked reactions that reflect the preconceived vision of reality and its reactions before facts.

http://racialreality.blogspot.com/2006/01/skin-reflectance-of-selected-world.html

In short, it seems that some features that were related to race have more to do with the environment and living conditions than with anything else.

The myth of the Spanish and racial overtones were also part of the black legend:

Here is an illuminating account,

cultural critics and historians such as Roberto Fernandez Retamar, Benjamin Keen, Patricia Shaw, David J. Weber, and, most recently and convincingly, Eric Griffin, have dedicated hundreds of pages to understanding the development and persistence of the Black Legend in Europe. In his excellent study, Eric Griffin outlines the evolution of English anti-Spanish sentiment from the early modern period to the present and discusses how an uncritical acceptance of many ethnic stereotypes that began in the sixteenth century can be traced to the present day. He begins by mapping out the Black Legend as it appears in Christopher Marlowe's The Jew of Malta, in which one can see an essentialized representation of the Spaniard as "other." In Marlowe's work, as in the contemporary European films I shall discuss in this essay, the villain utters Spanish phrases at key moments in the articulation of the plot. Griffin insists that by emphasizing the villain Barabas's Spanish-ness, Marlowe reinforces through literature the stereotype of the avaricious Spaniard that was already widespread as a result of the translation and diffusion of Bartolome de las Casas's published accounts. Griffin then points to Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, which dramatizes "much the same kind of ethno-nationalist problem", concluding that "in the English public mind of the 1590s, anti-Semitism and Hispanophobia seem to have been two sides of the same coin".


In short, the Spanish as a race apart is part of a type of propaganda that is very old in Anglo Saxon countries. Then, if we take into account that Anglo Saxon countries in general and the US in particular are so obsessed with racial issues and with the so strong desire of presenting themselves as the whitest in the world (funny this all started with an inferiority complex), there you have it all: Spaniards are not that white and people of Hispanic America are not white either, even if they are of 100 per cent European ancestry. This all is very funny and interesting if the roots of the issues are well known.


If to finish this contribution we add that 21st century genetic science is proving that the English themselves and the Britons come mainly from the Spanish, the comedy is served. For this latest statement see Stephen Oppenheimer and Brian Sykes. Kun.


Kun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.8.186.204 (talk) 11:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo to Kun. Not only is this foolish obsession with race in America stupid, it begins to border the insanity of another race obsessed society, NAZI Germany. This Anglo-centric race theories have the following premises: 

 Anyone with a cultural connection to Spain now has a racial classification. 
  This notion has absolutely no basis in science, but now has the added 
  caveat of hardcore genetic studies that blew this crap out of the water.
\
Racial purity. It simply does not always exist here. Almost anyone with 
  roots that go back before the great European migrations here in The USA
  does not have them. The 1st successful English settlement, Jamestown, had 
  a shortage of Caucasian women. What did red blooded Englishman do when
  confronted with that circumstance?? Mmm?

African and Indian blooded people do not exist south of the Rio Grande. They
  are all racially regarded as Hispanics, obvious things aside.

This term term "Hispanic" should be permanently expunged from the English language and Mexicans and other likes peoples should be re-classified as the racial Indians they truly are. --Charles A 20:11, 24 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)

Racist Country

Virtually all of the confusion surrounding this topic stems from the US racism. People in the US are conditioned to classify people by race despite the fact that racism was discredited in the rest of the world in the 1940s (Ever heard of Hitler?). This is a good example of how uneducated and ignorant people are in the US. The Spanish terms Hispanohablante (Spanish speaker) and Anglohablante (English speaker) give some insight into a different cultural perspective where the distinction is language and by extension culture. Please try to move beyond this fixation with whether someone is a "White European" or an exotic Indian. We are all human beings but we do speak different languages and have different religions, cuisines and other cultural characteristics. According the US Census Bureau, most Hispanics in the US are "White", whatever--Scipio-62 22:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC) that outdated racist category means. Yet the majority of you seem obsessed with the idea that Hispanic means non-White. You are trapped in an outdated view of the world. Who is White? Is Barack Obama White? Is Sonia Sotomayor White? Does it really matter? Move on America! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.212.61 (talk) 06:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where you get your data, but most "Hispanics" in the USA are not White, but a mixture of Whites with Indigenous and African roots. Even Dominican born baseball player Sammy Sosa could not pass for the stereotypical Arab looking Spaniard of bogus Anglo propaganda. But more to the point, why are you seemingly fixated embracing and accepting this stereotype when we have just proved this is all BS and there is no such thing as a "Hispanic" racial category? If you are wishing to embrace this stupid racial theory, then maybe you could convince your Anglo friends to drop their own "White" racial category and just call themselves "Anglics". The next time you write an opinion, you need to make sure it is signed.--Scipio-62 22:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

As I stated: "According to the US Census Bureau..." This is not my data nor my category. I think White is an American cultural category. The fact that Americans still refer to this as a racial category reveals a lack of education. We are all members of the human race. Racism (the belief that humans can be divided into separate races) was scientifically discredited many decades ago. So I am not sure what stereotype you think I am embracing. By the way, the beauty of Wikipedia is that anyone can write and edit whatever they please without anyone even knowing who they are. The lack of authority is wonderful. This article is a great example of one unverifiable sentence after another.--Dr. Cali —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.193.38 (talk) 02:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can you can back up your claim about there being no such thing as races with some references? Its my opinion that such beliefs are just matters of Liberal inspired politically correct opinion. Whether anyone believes in human races or not should not be be confused with racism. Moreover, the last time I read the census form, "Hispanics" were defined as people that are descended from any Spanish speaking country and Whites from any European country. Such a self contradicting notion is stupid and should not be included in any US government form.--Scipio-62 05:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)

Please read the American Anthropological Association's Statement on "Race" at http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm I hope that a bit of elightenment will make clear that in fact racism is by definition the belief in distinct races within humans. As for your unenlightened opinions on US government forms, I don't see how those are relevant to the topic. My opinion is that only a racist country would ask every resident which race they come from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.231.143 (talk) 16:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You and others are entitled to your opinion when it comes to race. The idea one the "One Race Theory" is nothing new. This view has been around well before the advent of DNA genome studies. What I and others deeply resent are these manufactured race theories that are utilized to satisfy some desire for revenge that England could never achieve on the military battlefield. I will never deny my true heritage no matter how politically expedient it becomes. That is why no one has to answer the census form. "Hispanic" political groups are only interested in answering theses census forms because they are more interested in getting tax payer funds for illegal alien welfare. Its interesting to note that a documentary on the human genome on the Discovery Channel just yesterday featured a Puerto Rican woman. The geneticists traced her DNA to Native Americans and no mention of a "Hispanic" race was ever mentioned. What are these poor Anglocentists supposed to do when their Nazi est race theories are falling apart. --Scipio-62 16:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Native americans

If "hispanic" is a cultural term, second generation hispanics in the U.S. who don't speak Spanish become native americans or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.129.35.2 (talk) 13:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hispanic&oldid=311100980"