Hispanics fuel US white population growth

briancali · Oct 8, 2011

orejon4 said: ↑

I think you've got it. In the article's example, it cites primarily areas with heavily settled populations of often relatively wealthier Latinos who tend to identify more closely with a white identity, regardless of how prevalent their European ancestry is. Many Cubans in Southeast Florida identify as white, even when African/Indigenous ancestry is visibly dominant/expressed. And even Spaniards in Spain have black and Arab ancestry in many parts of the country. The strength of a 'Latino' identity is largely based around the degree of integration of a given individual. If there is a strong community and ethnic identity, that notion of self remains. In areas divided along black/white lines, people figure out how to navigate that minefield. In parts of the midwest where Latino race conceptions are anathema or at least a new concept, visibly white Latinos could be accepted as 'white' and non-white Latinos were grouped with the black community or as 'other'.

But Kunoichi's article highlights what I think is the central faultline within the Latino community: class. The waves of mass immigration of Latinos now occurring are comprised primarily of indigenous, black and racially mixed Latinos. Why? Latin America's grossly unequal distribution of wealth means that primarily wealthy individuals (largely those we would consider as visibly white) remain in their countries in dominant positions and the rural and urban poor (largely black/indigenous/mixed) migrate. Earlier Latino populations included wealthy white Cuban exiles and multi-generational landowning families in the U.S. Southwest whose roots go back to the time when that part of the country was Mexico. Their wealth and relative distance from the working class racially mixed parts of their ethnic groups fosters a perception of themselves as 'white', whether or not their racial makeup actually affirms that self-concept.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Here is a interesting link of the first settlers of Los Angeles, which was a mix bag of people. Actually the last african descent governor of California was in fact Mexican, his name was Pio Pico. The street Pico blvd was obviously named after him.

http://www.laalmanac.com/history/hi03c.htm

first settlers registry around 1781

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pío_Pico
Pio Pico

satyr · Oct 8, 2011

Do you even know the reason why primarily non-whites settled Los Angeles?

Felipe de Neve, then governor of Las California, ordered settlement of the land to establish a Spanish colonial presence as a deterrent against other potential European (English, Russian, etc.) settlement plans.

Spain established a complex racial hierarchy in the California territory, one where blacks and indigenous people were deemed inferior to "white" Spaniards. No surprise there. A problem arose when the call was made by de Neve to settle what would become Los Angeles. Whites wanted no part of settling an untamed frontier north of the relatively well-colonized areas of Mexico (then Baja California). Why? Because the incentives that the Spanish empire offered was no match for privileges accorded with being white in Baja California.

After some period of time twelve families of mostly blacks and natives were sent north to settle the land. As non-whites they had nothing to lose in leaving Baja California to strike out for a new frontier.

briancali said: ↑

I agree with you. Here is a interesting link of the first settlers of Los Angeles, which was a mix bag of people. Actually the last african descent governor of California was in fact Mexican, his name was Pio Pico. The street Pico blvd was obviously named after him.

http://www.laalmanac.com/history/hi03c.htm

first settlers registry around 1781

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pío_Pico
Pio Pico
Click to expand...

briancali · Oct 8, 2011

satyr said: ↑

Do you even know the reason why primarily non-whites settled Los Angeles?

Felipe de Neve, then governor of Las California, ordered settlement of the land to establish a Spanish colonial presence as a deterrent against other potential European (English, Russian, etc.) settlement plans.

Spain established a complex racial hierarchy in the California territory, one where blacks and indigenous people were deemed inferior to "white" Spaniards. No surprise there. A problem arose when the call was made by de Neve to settle what would become Los Angeles. Whites wanted no part of settling an untamed frontier north of the relatively well-colonized areas of Mexico (then Baja California). Why? Because the incentives that the Spanish empire offered was no match for privileges accorded with being white in Baja California.

After some period of time twelve families of mostly blacks and natives were sent north to settle the land. As non-whites they had nothing to lose in leaving Baja California to strike out for a new frontier.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I did not know that! It seems as they created their own little world until others came. I am going to look further into that, also i am going to research if any of the descendants still live in Los Angeles or Southern California.

Sign In

Register

Hispanics fuel US white population growth

briancali Member

satyr New Member

briancali Member

Share This Page

White Women Black Men.com