Well I don’t know if the question is moot in a growing climate of hate crimes against Latinos. And I think that as long as this posturing continues as part of policy, there will continue to be this othering regardless of status.

Is anyone bothered by the recent study stating that only 3% of first
generation Latinos refer to themselves as American first, preferring
to use the country of origin of their parents? These are children who were born in the US, raised in the US and educated in the US. This whole discussion of assimilation is moot for a different reason. They don’t even THINK they are American. They want nothing to do with it. We are so far from assimilation as could possibly be. If the leaders in the Latino community and the parents who have decided to raise children here spent more time instilling a sense of belonging to this country and less time tying them to a place most will never even visit, we wouldn’t be faced with such disturbing statistics.

I know you will never believe this, since it undermines
one of your most basic premises (bad racist Americans vs. noble immigrants) but we don’t ask for assimilation. We do, however, ask for the most basic sense of wanting to be part of this country, not simply
Mexicans, Dominicans, Peruvians or Colombians who happen to be living here.
That is the true tragedy of this all.

beauceron:

1. maybe we don’t think we’re “american” because we have so many people trying to kick us out and deny us citizenship (think: nativists who are trying to get the 14th amendment repealed, the nativists that call us all anchor babies, etc etc)

2. maybe we think of ourselves as *u.s. citizens* that have ties to both this land and parents homeland

3. 99% or more of first generation Latinos speak English first or ONLY

4. 99% or more of first generation Latinos speak English first or ONLY because *parents* want them to assimilate and “be U.S. citizens.

5. I guess it’s up to Latinos to not ever talk about, read about, consider, acknowledge or otherwise understand that their parents are from a different place. Because who the hell wants to know anything at all about their parents and what shaped/formed them?

6. my basic premise=racist United States government that is continuously reaffirmed by nativist community that *doesn’t want* “mexicans, dominicans, peruvians or colombians” living here to be U.S. citizens. (hence: go back where you came from, get to the back of the line, throw them all in jail and ship them away, etc etc rhetoric).

7. I wonder what nativist positions are on those “white” immigrants such as Australians, Irish, British, Canadians, etc, who teach their children to be proud of being Australian, Irish, British, Canadian–even as those children are U.S. citizens.

Excuse me, it’s La Macha

Beauceron–

my name is la MACHA (no “n”) which means that I am gay, too! which means I trump your gay card–two whole identities that are smacked around by “yahoos.”

1. You link the article and I’ll read it (or wait a minute, maybe I won’t–because this post is NOT ABOUT how much Latinos hate the U.S.!!!!). I’m not going to waste my time looking for some ‘study’ that proves how much Latin@s hate the U.S.–there’s far too many of them. you get what you look for. You want to prove Latin@s hate the U.S., or are ambivalent, or pee every time they sing God Bless America, you will.

3. do you have any idea what assimilation is?

4. Why, yes, a racist u.s. government. you got me! oh, but wait–I’m talking about the same government that said slavery of black people was ok, black people were 3/5 human, indigenous peoples weren’t people at all, etc. etc. Oh, the same *sexist* government that said that women couldn’t vote until 1920 and is taking away the right choose as we speak. Oh, and the SAME homophobic government that has made it illegal for queers/gay folk to get married. Why the U.S. government is all *sorts* of nasty things. These things are just *facts*. I’m really not sure why a Latina stating a fact is more deleterious or anti-u.s.a. or representative of my inherent wrongness or unwillingness to be a u.s. citizen than it is for a white U.S. citizen.

5. maybe parents talk to children about being proud to be “insert race” because it’s so easy to forget you have a right to feel proud of yourself and your background when you are being called anchor baby, spic, a national problem, illegal, and any problem that you ever have (whether it’s not speaking standard English, eating too much fastfood, or going to jail) is blamed on you being latino??

6. regarding your response to #7. well. you certainly are the expert on it all, right? never mind that I, the actual living and breathing latina that grew up surrounded by other Latinos saw exactly opposite. The instability and anxiety around “latino identity” has been well examined and discussed by latinos from every SOuth American country throughout the decades–and if you would take the time to simply look at the extensive fighting ALL of us do just on “naming” (are we: latinos? Latin@s? Mexicans? Chican@s? Tejanos? Mexican-Americans? etc), you’d see some HUGELY different reactions to your “study.”

but what on earth do those of us who are *living* a reality possibly know about ourselves? When white folks and researchers got it all down for us?

La Macha:

Playing the I’m-more-oppressed-than-you game? Really? And by the way, you have no idea who or what I am but your assumptions say it all. I speak four language and have taught ESL for years. I’ve spend my life getting to know other cultures and am a gay democrat from NY and I STILL believe what I believe. No hick here.

1. Here you go http://pewhispanic.org/ . It’s from the Pew Hispanic Center….yeah, that’s what I thought. I
never said Latinos hate the US. I said they feel some sort of cultural treason in identifying with it…that is wrong
no matter how you slice it.

2. Assimilation is complete cultural absorption, no one is advocating that
3. The US government is no more and certainly less “nasty” than governments everywhere. If your beef is with
government as an institution, keep the US out of it. Try measuring progress instead of pulling snapshots from
the worst parts of any government’s history. Talk about manipulating data.
4. I realize crude stereotypes exist and are perpetrated too easily. I do not agree that most people hold them though.
Immigrant parents do a disservice to their children when they refuse to face the fact that the game has changed and so have
the influenced that will come to bear on their children. Forcing children backwards creates confusion.
5. Your attempts to exclude me from the debate due to my lack of supposed credentials would insult me if I didn’t see it for
what it is, a form of intellectual laziness. If you marginalize me, you don’t have to actually listen or god forbid admit that I
have a point or modify yours

Hmm, what a hornet’s nest! So, la mala, what about Estadounidense?

In my experience(I’ve had two girlfriends who were not born in the United States, plus whoever else I’ve known whose parents weren’t born here) the children of “first generation immigrants”, regardless of whether they are from Latin America or not, tend to be in a flux between national identities. I’d venture a guess, however, that as the generations continue, the children of the children of immigrants will identify themselves more as “American(United Statsians)”

Anyone think the latter paragraph may hold true?

We can debate these things all day, but as far as numbers and birth rates go, it’s too late. We will be the majority soon; so whatever American (U.S.) means now is in flux and will continue to change.

Maegan, hate crimes are not only toward Latinos because they aren’t assimilated enough–however you want to define that. My grandparents grew up in New Mexico and California, spoke perfect English, and in my Grandfather’s case served in the Navy. Yet they were still considered greasers and wetbacks no matter what. Your point about your Puerto Rican heritage and status as an American underscores this; so perhaps we agree. My point is that the question of assimilation being important is moot because of the changing demographics–it’s a frame by dominant culture that is losing its dominance. It’s all about power at the end of the day. It’s not about whether we are assimilated enough–those are rationalizations for people who want to keep us from being the majority. Again, it’s too late even if it will still suck in our lifetime.

Beauceron, yes, the argument about asking people to at least want to be part of this country is a good one. It’s too bad the United States never respected that rule when its “pioneers” squatted on land in the Southwest, refused to assimilate to or obey the laws of Mexico, killed off many a native, and started a war to fulfill the ridiculous philosophy of Manifest Destiny. If only you would have been around in the 1800s. You might have convinced your compatriots to renounce such wickedness. As a native Raramuri, I have my own issues with the government of Mexico; still, I can’t help but be amused by the irony (hypocrisy?) of your argument.

I never anywhere saw anything that said “show us sympathy because we are oppressed”.

Mark,
You’re hilarious. I totally said that it wouldn’t happen in my lifetime–read my comment again. But it will happen. BTW, even if everyone ends up being of mixed race eventually, that only reinforces my argument that the current dominant race/culture is moribund.

What is caucasian? Genetically? Phenotypically? Most Latinos are mixed race anyway. I’m not against white folk and if we do become the majority I hope that we will show more love than some have shown to us. My only issue is with the sense of entitlement expressed by some.

Keep your sympathy to yourself; no one asked you for it.

Cockroach:

Sorry, I didn’t read properly; I framed things in the wrong white/non-white comparative manner. What I mean to say is, simply, that regardless of the demographics, a minority group–be it based upon race, ethnicity, class, etc–can still oppress. Nothing is moot when speaking of the future.

Too many comments to read with full comprehension.

Mark,
You’re wrong about muslims: http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2003/03middleeast_taspinar.aspx

No one called the white man evil–those are your words. We Indians were perfectly fine with white folk being here until they showed their true colors and started subjugating and murdering others. I’m still fine with most white people–again, it’s the sense of entitlement that is ridiculous. Speaking of true colors, thanks for revealing your “mision civilisatrice” issues (i.e. we needed whites to civilize the continent). You prove that old-school racism is a live and well.

I eagerly await your evidence comparing crime statistics–don’t forget to include all the border towns where your Minuteman pals are active. Hmmm…I wonder if more black people commit crimes against whites than the reverse. I guess that excuses lynching right?

Bryan,

Yes, any majority can oppress which is why Gandhi pushed Indians to become better people or esle they might end up being worse rulers than the British had been. That is what I meant when I said: “I hope that we will show more love than some have shown us.”

That Latinos should assilimilate to the current dominant culture is the question i said was moot. As to whether the culture that will dominate the new order will demand assimiliation, well, that is a different question.

Beauceron, the referendums are non-Binding meaning they hold no power. Really they are just glorified opinion polls.

Just the fact that you center your argument on how “american” is used in English is revealing of your U.S. centrism. Having lived in South America, I can tell you that it is not a manufactured controversy.

Beuceron:

OK, maybe there is an “American” identity, but in a place like New York City, it’s not that easy to define. In many neighborhoods, the most spoken language isn’t English and I’d venture that many don’t think of themselves as Americans first.

Consider many Jewish folk, including Mr. Bloomberg I bet, who will identify themselves with Israel over the United States.

And American is inaccurate. I like the Spanish version “Estadounidense”, which translates roughly as United Statesian, or North American(Canadians are just North American-light).

You are not very nice Beuceron:, calling my statement an example of “staggering arrogance”, and advising me to keep my “hubris in check”.

I’ll stick with my arrogance and, again, claim there is no concrete, American . Most countries, unlike the United States, are not nations of Immigrants. If you want to consider Brazil, I don’t have to use the double standard–there are plenty of Brazilians who wouldn’t consider themselves Brazilian. See the indigenous peoples in the Amazon. I could go on, using Mexico and all of Central America, where there are probably large amounts of “citizens” of those countries who identify with something else before “Mexican” or “Guatemalan”.

All complaints regarding possible censorship on vivirlatino can be directed to wedontgiveafuck@vivirlatino.com.

I agree, the issue of identity is not easily understood. But once again we get to the double standard.

If the right of self-identification is important, then why are you telling me how to identify myself? Surely if it’s OK for someone who grows up here to completely reject the label American, as you claim is their right, then it is equally my right, without comment from you, to self-identify as American.

Either people can identify themselves as they see fit without interference or they can’t. You can’t have it both ways.

Beauceron clearly has no clue about Puerto Rico. Puerto Ricans on the island currently have fewer rights than other “citizens.” Specifically, constitutional rights. The United States has worked for over a century to quash independence movements. Heck, for a long time Puerto Ricans were not allowed to fly their own flag. The Government of PR is subordinate to the interests of the US by law. Referendums are not binding and in the last one the majority boycotted the vote (they checked “none f the above”) because the progressive (pro-statehood) party rigged the rules.

That many Puerto Ricans prefer the status quo after having been given some of the rights of US citizenship but denied the rights of independence systematically makes perfect sense (or made sense when the U.S. was super-rich and not a jobless write-off for China). Most people are risk averse. People can get used to anything. That said, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009 will hopefully get the question settled.

That “harsh ruler” garbage reminds me of the benevolent slave-master who is surprised by his slave’s will to be free: “don’t I treat you well?”

I wish Beauceron would define the American identity. I do think there is one, but probably not what you think it is since I recognize Canada and Mexico as being part of North America. I also think there is an identity to be had for citizens of the US, but it’s more pluralistic and political than it is cultural or linguistic. Please enlighten us.

Cockroach:

I defer to your obviously greater knowledge of Puerto Rican politics. A couple of things though.
I have no opinion on PR’s independence as do few Americans not of Puerto Rican descent I’m sure. Please, be independent. God bless. Your “harsh ruler” comment only works if I somehow cared what PR’s status was, nice try. PR does nothing for me that can’t be done elsewhere.

I find it difficult to believe that if PR’s had voted for independence and a true grass roots effort were underway that the US government would be successful in ignoring that. The way you abdicate the people of PR of any responsibility for their own situation and ascribe it all to the big racist US
government would be funny if it weren’t so unoriginal and tiresome, not just for you but for any people who find a convenient scapegoat in the big bad US. We have a lot of issues that need to be dealt with, some immediately, but we are not responsible for all the world’s suffering, no matter how attractivean answer that is for you. Sounds like political corruption in PR might be the real issue.

My posting was never supposed to give a concrete American identity; the issue is way too complex.
It was supposed to call out people who apply a double standard to what they consider national identity. My earlier posting regarding Brazil explains it all. I’m sure you would never turn to a Brazilian,
Venezuelan or Mexican friend and state that there is no such thing as X identity, even though they are incredibly diverse societies. That was my point.

Hmm, pluralistic and political identity. Sounds like a very shaky foundation for a country. India and Indonesia are pluralistic democracies. Tell me, Cockroach, does that make you feel Indonesian?

damn now I want koolaid.

Beauceron:
I think you may mean ‘absolve’ not ‘abdicate’ as I can’t relinquish or resign something for others. But assuming you did mean absolve (yes, English is hard to master), then no I do not absolve them of all responsibility. My point is that it is absurd to enslave or colonize a people for over 100 years, then demand that they assume ALL responsibility for their situation.

You are attempting to move the goal post on this one. Either define the American identity of which you speak or move on. Do you even know what pluralism is? It comes from Madison and the Federalist Papers–it’s a fundamental democratic principle of the United States. Perhaps it is you that is from Indonesia!

Beauceron:
I think you may mean ‘absolve’ not ‘abdicate’ as I can’t relinquish or resign something for others. But assuming you did mean absolve (yes, English is hard to master), then no I do not absolve them of all responsibility. My point is that it is absurd to enslave or colonize a people for over 100 years, then demand that they assume ALL responsibility for their situation.

You are attempting to move the goal post on this one. Either define the American identity of which you speak or move on. Do you even know what pluralism is? It comes from Madison and the Federalist Papers–it’s a fundamental democratic principle of the United States. Perhaps it is you that is from Indonesia!!!

I was censored! Ha.

really SDOG? Four of my family members are currently in the military, and three of them are retired. As a chicana, i’ve spent plenty of time in the fields picking fruit and vegetables (as every single person, including the white family members) so that you and your family can be healthy. And I promise you, every single blogger at this site and Latino on this thread can say the same thing.

the problem is, this is not an “our” versus “you” or a “we” versus “them.” Latino identity is complicated and crosses borders in all manners–including the “generation” idea–I am first generation latino from one parent, but the other parent has documents proving our family came on the mayflower. So what does that make me? Am I a part of the 97% of Latinos that never learned to properly love “america” or am I a real and true citizen that has a history, just like every other “american?”

and again, I promise you, most, if not all latinos in the U.S. have very similar backgrounds and histories.

and it’s odd, because I find people who disregard the history of their fellow citizens in the name of a simplistic cheap “american” identity to be sickening too. FInally–we all have something we can agree on.

La Macha,
“Black people were 3/5 human” is not a correct statement. For apportionment in the House of Representatives, only 3/5 of the slave population was counted. The population of free persons (to include free blacks) were completed counted.

*was

Ok dudes, not playing this game anymore. If you can’t comment without using offensive terms regarding ethnicity or status, or stay on topic, the comment will be deleted. Done. Punto. Y muy buenas noches.

Maegan,
I’m not sure the “them” are just DREAMers. Maybe so, because they probably outnumber the student visa holders and probably have far more relatives who vote than the student visa holders.

But Bloomberg’s quote sounds EXACTLY like the kind of phrase I hear when international student recruiting professionals talk about how disadvantaged their offices are compared to, say, UK schools’ international student recruiting offices.

The F-1 & J-1 visas / visa statuses have a strong “get your education and get out–don’t you dare try to stay” feel to them.

But it really does apply to undocumented status, too, doesn’t it?!

How funny. The international student recruiting & advising professionals are so caught up in just doing their own jobs right that I don’t know how many of them have even ever thought of this similarity between undocumented-status students and F-1/J-1-status students.

[...] We’ve spent a considerable amount of time the past two days interrogating what type of citizen…. Now, let’s consider what type of world travelers U.S. citizens are. [...]

[...] NYC Michael Bloomberg is to be praised for hSteve Lis recent pro-immigrant statements, then what of Suffolk County Executive evy? Democrat Levy recently announced that he was thinking [...]

[...] NYC is truly a city that values it’s immigrant residents, then why is there a federal immigration detention center in downtown Manhattan? The Varick Federal [...]