California: Hispanics now the relative majority

[Rod1]

Well, when you take a look at Mexico or most other Hispanic countries, it's understandable why some people might be apprehensive about it. This massive Hispanic growth has occurred over a relatively short period of time and is driven almost exclusively by the poor and uneducated masses. That's scary to a lot of people.

Mexico and these other countries are not fucked up by the poor and uneducated masses, in the same way north korea is not fucked up by the poor and uneducated masses.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Well, when you take a look at Mexico or most other Hispanic countries, it's understandable why some people might be apprehensive about it. This massive Hispanic growth has occurred over a relatively short period of time and is driven almost exclusively by the poor and uneducated masses. That's scary to a lot of people.

It's understandable, but from the perspective of realizing that people are dumb. The U.S.'s advantage is superior institutions and infrastructure. That's not going away. It's not like there's something genetic causing Mexico to be poorer than America. And everyone is born uneducated. You can easily change that status by getting an education.

 

[Selukrid612]

Mexico and these other countries are not fucked up by the poor and uneducated masses, in the same way north korea is not fucked up by the poor and uneducated masses.

You're right, they send their poor and uneducated masses here to fuck our country up instead.

 

[Bald1]

Hispanic was a term given to subjects of the Spanish empire, then it became a term used for people who shared the spanish culture.

Latino came with the french, since they thought it would be cool to take over the remnants of the spanish empire, they legitimized it by changing hispanic culture for latin culture.

Since hispanics were not latins, they shared common ground with the french through the common roman heritage of the french and the spanish. Of course the Americans wanted no european influence in latin America and they applied the "Monroe Doctrine" to kick the french out.

The french, being the cultural powerhouse of the time, managed to make the term stick. Also latino has the benefit of including the Brazilians who were never hispanics

Basically the correct term is hispanic and hispanic-america for spanish speaking cultures.

So the two labels are cultural, and really have not much to do with race. That makes sense. When people use hispanic interchangeably with race, culture, and ethnicity I'm left scratching my head. Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[Rod1]

You're right, they send their poor and uneducated masses here to fuck our country up instead.

While the rich and educated that steal billions get prizes and recognitions by the world leaders. They of course stay in 5 stars hotels, all paid by the poor and uneducated.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Probably the reason why people dont like muslim immigrants, their women are all covered up.

I dislike all religions especially Islam but i'll be honest. Them covering up is a major downside in addition to their alien hostile culture.

I feel bad for Europeans who hold a fake smile about how "happy" they are because importing large amounts of 3rd world Middle Eastern/African Muslims and the ONLY benefits they can mention is "the food".

Ha!

Latinos bring non-covered up women, often sex bronze/tannish skin/BETTER food, an accepting and loving culture, and so much more.

This thread is now about Latin women

 

[Rod1]

You're right, they send their poor and uneducated masses here to fuck our country up instead.

This mentality is why possession of drugs can get you decades in prison, but laundering billions for terrorists, dictators and international crime organizations only gets you a slap on the wrist.

 

[IDL]

This mentality is why possession of drugs can get you decades in prison, but laundering billions for terrorists, dictators and international crime organizations only gets you a slap on the wrist.

Well that and the problem of the wealthy making the rules.

 

[Selukrid612]

It's understandable, but from the perspective of realizing that people are dumb. The U.S.'s advantage is superior institutions and infrastructure. That's not going away. It's not like there's something genetic causing Mexico to be poorer than America. And everyone is born uneducated. You can easily change that status by getting an education.

You're right, only dumb people would be apprehensive about a tidal wave of peasants with foreign allegiances taking over their state. Solid point, surely not at all influenced by your own ethnic origins. The institutions will still be there, but not every culture and/or group takes advantage of them at the same rate.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Well, when you take a look at Mexico or most other Hispanic countries, it's understandable why some people might be apprehensive about it. This massive Hispanic growth has occurred over a relatively short period of time and is driven almost exclusively by the poor and uneducated masses. That's scary to a lot of people.

It's only scary to those that are ignorant of history.

Mass migration is almost always driven by the poor and uneducated. The well-off and educated aren't going to abandon their countries in droves. That's been true in the US and everywhere else in the world for hundreds of years.

The US in the late 1800-early 1900s saw a proportionately bigger number of poor, uneducated immigrants (Ireland, Italy, Russia, etc. were poor backwaters) arrive and guess what, it didn't turn the US into a 3rd world country.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You're right, only dumb people would be apprehensive about a tidal wave of peasants with foreign allegiances taking over their state. Solid point, surely not at all influenced by your own ethnic origins. The institutions will still be there, but not every culture and/or group takes advantage of them at the same rate.

Your inability to grasp my point and inaccurate view of American history is also likely influenced by your ethnic origins. It's not unusual for "a tidal wave of peasants with foreign allegiances" to "take over" a state. That's how the country, which was founded as a (wildly successful, as it turned out) experiment in the concept of civic nationalism, has grown.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

You're right, only dumb people would be apprehensive about a tidal wave of peasants with foreign allegiances taking over their state. Solid point, surely not at all influenced by your own ethnic origins. The institutions will still be there, but not every culture and/or group takes advantage of them at the same rate.

Yup. Hopefully someone will knock some sense into white people.

Their culture just doesn't believe in higher education it seems:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/next...ptimistic-about-the-value-of-college-20131107

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yup. Hopefully someone will knock some sense into white people.

Their culture just doesn't believe in higher education it seems:

The most interesting thing there to me is that whites who go to college are less likely to think it's a ticket to success, while non-whites who go to college are much more likely to think it's a ticket. What's up with that?

 

[Perfidious]

The most interesting thing there to me is that whites who go to college are less likely to think it's a ticket to success, while non-whites who go to college are much more likely to think it's a ticket. What's up with that?

Comments about liberal arts degrees and underwater basketweaving IMO

 

[Cuzcatlan]

You're right, only dumb people would be apprehensive about a tidal wave of peasants with foreign allegiances taking over their state. Solid point, surely not at all influenced by your own ethnic origins. The institutions will still be there, but not every culture and/or group takes advantage of them at the same rate.

Lol were do you people get this stuff?

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

So the two labels are cultural, and really have not much to do with race. That makes sense. When people use hispanic interchangeably with race, culture, and ethnicity I'm left scratching my head. Thanks for clearing it up.

I've always used the word Latino more so because that is how I was taught and because it encompassed Brazilians as well and because it includes peoples from all the Latin American speaking countries. Hispanic was a term applied to those residents of Spain. In the U.S. people who AREN'T Mexican I find are more likely to call themselves Latinos and if you ask their race they can be more specific.

Racially? It varies. You have White Latinos who are white and often have like +95% European blood. But racist White Supremacists often construct some weird scenario where White Latinos/Armenians/people from Caucus with white blood etc. Are to be excluded because they are 'tainted'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Latin_American


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_peoples_of_the_Americas

The Indigenous peoples are also a heavy mix. There stated numbers are higher than their actual frequency. It's for example hip for White Americans to claim 'native' ancestry which is fine because many have it but to actual natives its a little bit insulting when blonde haired, blue eyed Sarah is 1/16th Native American and claims to be 'in touch and native' yet she can't list anything about her actual native heritage.

Realistically the most intact 'Aborigen' populations are in Peru, Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, and then Mexico. I don't put much stock on the U.S. and all the whites who want to claim being native.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Latin_American

Afro-Latinos get a little more tricky. Wiki says 150 million in Latin America have 'partial' or some Afro blood. But typically people from e South America will not identify as black unless they look black. So really id say the numbers wiki lists on the bottom are more accurate. Brazil by far has the most blacks then haiti, and then columbia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizo

And similar terms exist for people in Brazil of complete mixed ancestry. Mexico documents this best

A 2012 study published by the Journal of Human Genetics found that the majority of the current Mexican population (~93%) is mixed race to some degree, the study found that the Y-chromosome (paternal) ancestry of the average Mexican-Mestizo was predominately European (64.9%), followed by Native American (30.8%), and African (4.2%). The European ancestry was more prevalent in the north and west (66.7 - 95%) and Native American ancestry increased in the centre and south-east (37 - 50%), the African ancestry was low and relatively homogeneous (0 - 8.8%)

So there are just some general terms. South America is going to be more white cause the natives were wiped out more so in the Southern part of South America just as they were in North America. Where as Mexico/Central America and North part of South America are going to be more mixed with similar genetics to that of Mexicos 'Mesitzo' population.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

The Spainards in terms of reproduction are one hell of an 'ethnic' group though I must say. I got some Spanish blood and probably the majority of people in all of Latin America have some.

That's a lot of f#cking that went on.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Yup. Hopefully someone will knock some sense into white people.

Their culture just doesn't believe in higher education it seems:

So some people are catching on quicker that the game is changing? :icon_lol:

 

[uppercutbus]

these poor, low quality darkskins gonna ruin everything

amirite or am i right?

 

[Selukrid612]

It's only scary to those that are ignorant of history.

Mass migration is almost always driven by the poor and uneducated. The well-off and educated aren't going to abandon their countries in droves. That's been true in the US and everywhere else in the world for hundreds of years.

The US in the late 1800-early 1900s saw a proportionately bigger number of poor, uneducated immigrants (Ireland, Italy, Russia, etc. were poor backwaters) arrive and guess what, it didn't turn the US into a 3rd world country.

Your inability to grasp my point and inaccurate view of American history is also likely influenced by your ethnic origins. It's not unusual for "a tidal wave of peasants with foreign allegiances" to "take over" a state. That's how the country, which was founded as a (wildly successful, as it turned out) experiment in the concept of civic nationalism, has grown.

The difference being that Hispanics will never fully transition into the "white" category with the dominant group, this new wave of immigrants will create lasting divisions that will forever change the country. This isn't simply a repeat of earlier migration trends. Not to mention the fact that immigrants from those European countries were basically forced to lose touch with their roots and fully embrace the American experience due to geography and the state of travel and communication at the time. In many cases the Hispanics that are driving the growth in question are living right across the border from their country of origin. This is unique in American history.