I understand that differentiation and I agree with it.
None the less, under the present conditions, we can’t exactly forbid ourselves to reference Hispanic, because there really isn’t another term to address with inclusion all that are here illegally. Even that definition doesn’t address all of them, but it’s the closest descriptor we have.
If we start nuancing ourselves to death, we’ll get nowhere.
I don’t want to describe this situation as “Mexicans” every time I open my mouth. I realize that from 65 to 75% of our illegal problems are associated with Mexico, but as you say, other Central and South Americans are also involved here.
So we’ll either have to agree to disagree or we’ll be at each others throats instead of focusing on the problematic people who deserve our attention.
I appreciate your nice reply. I don’t mean to be a jerk to you, but this issue has been on my radar from one degree or another for 25 years. And while we allowed this to fester because almost nobody would take it serious, we have been severely compromised.
Here in southwest Washington state there are loads of illegal Russians. Many of them do not speak any English. When they come for medical treatment at our facility, the tax payers provide paid translators to accompany them.