Posted on 12/23/2016 9:00:01 AM PST by PJ-Comix
One thing that has always amused me is why Italian-Americans are not considered Latins or Latinos (which also means "Latin" in Italian). To get an idea of how absurd this is, Italians (or their ancestors) were the original Latins. On top of that Italians are definitely more Latin than the residents of many countries considered to be populated by Latinos. An example is Mexico where folks entirely Indian or Mestizo are considered Latino in this country but Italian-Americans are not.
I'm figuring this has strictly to do with affirmative action programs. Still, it is amusing that the original Latin people are not considered "Latino" in the USA.
p.s. Are people whose ancestors are all from Spain considered "Latino?" If so this makes the fact that Italian-Americans are not considered Latin(o) even more absurd.
Interesting...
The question often asked here as well; tied with the question: who first found himself brave enough eat the ‘things’ deposited by that feathered animal (eggs)?
Hypodescent is a principle rule of slavery. Your story proves racism still flourishes in liberal circles.
Regular European Spaniards and Portuguese aren’t considered “Latino” either. I know, I’ve checked.
For that matter Cubans don’t really count it seems. The term, for all practical purposes as relates to politics and bureaucracy, is limited to Mexicans, Puerto Ricans
We Italians are Latinos but the entire ethnic identification thing should be rejected.
It’s a liberal construct designed to divide.
There's also the pithy quote attributed to Napoleon: "Europe stops at the Pyranees."
100% with you. The reason is that the goal is to create a victim group with all the privileges that that entails. It is already overly broad, including anyone from a country where Spanish is the predominant language.
A subgoal is to cast anyone of Italian descent as an “oppressor”, since Columbus is generally accepted as Italian.
None of this has anything to do with reality. It’s all about establishing as many victim/oppressor divisions as possible.
If they ever met each other they would have eaten each other as well anyway...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Latino
The real definition of Latino is “a person who comes from a country where they speak a derivative of Latin”. Latin is right there in LATINo. Anyone of Italian, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian decent or who comes from one of their derivative countries ( IE, any Latin American country, including Brazil) is Latino.
Not only that, but people who immigrated from Spain have been told by gov’t bureaucrats that they aren’t “Hispanic”. Seriously!
__________________________________________
lolol. Didja hear? Theresa Heinz Kerry is an African American.
Seriously!
“The French language developed from vulgar Latin... would you call a Frenchman Latino?”
Latino? - no.
Vulgar? - yes.
Yep!
I used to work with a girl from Columbia; blonde hair and blue eyes, who played up her minority ethnicity for all she could milk it for on job applications and school enrollment.
It's all about shared ethnicity because, you know, a dirt-poor Mestizo farm laborer in California so much in common culturally with a blue-eyed, square-jawed lawyer in Montevideo, Uruguay.
Interesting example. Another aspect of fascist-leftist racial bean-counting.
The term “latino” means someone born in the Americas south of the US or their descendant.
The term “hispanic” means someone born in a Spanish (sometimes Portugese) speaking country or their descendant.
So the terms aren’t applicable to Italians unless you completely redefine the terms.
My first hearing of it was it's usage in leftist political cant as a wedge to splinter society, about the same time period as the emergence of the various "Latino/Hispanic" racist organizations.
Latino "male Latin-American inhabitant of the United States" (fem. Latina), 1946, American English, from American Spanish,
a shortening of Latinoamericano "Latin-American" (see Latin America).
As an adjective, attested from 1974.
source:
·
Perhaps there has been a declaration that their language is not Latin based. As far as I know Rumanians are not officially Latinos, either, even with their Latinate language. Latinos officially only designates Spanish speakers, and not usually even Spanish people.Latino is the chosen Euphemism to get around the former “wetbacks,” “Spicks,” and some others.
Only if he speaks Argentine Spanish.
Not brown enough to be a protected class.
Anything European must be discriminated against.
It was from Europe that came the world's leading architecture, philosophy, government, justice, cuisine, science, art, literature, inventions, and law.
It must be oppressed and eradicated, at all costs.
I have lived many years in Central and south Texas, and I think that I can see a difference in Mexicans from near the border compared to Mexicans from Central Mexico. Seems to me that the Central Mexicans look Caucasian, while the border Mexicans look American Indian-(No disrespect meant to anyone.)
If you really want to piss off the la raza crowd, ask them how they like speaking the language of a conquering European army.
Hispanic? Not really. Mayan or whatever variation of sub 5’ local variation.
And oh boy do they like to claim to be high bred “Spanish”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.