Latinos in the US (Dominicans 5th largest group)

Thanks for the link.

Interesting article.

I find it interesting how in the article we are referred to as both, Latinos and Hispanos despite the two words having different meanings and thus, different people fall into the two categories, while many fall into both.

However, that's another topic for another thread.

-NALs

no mention of Miami or New York ? big latino populations....

Interesting but...

I agree the article is interesting however, it is solely stats driven and does not expand upon key percentages that have been revealed:

For example:

* Latino education in the USA and the numbers that are reflected. Frankly they are pathetic with the wealth of opportunities available
* the large number of Latinos in the USA who don?t have health care
* the Mexican population makes up more than have the number of Latinos in the USA however, I highly doubt other ethnic groups of Latino descent share the same interests, concerns, plight, success etc.
* the surrounding language issues as a result of such a high minority population which, I have ventured to discuss more than once in the Spanish forum
* the Dominican population does not make a dent in the overall population of Latinos in the USA BUT it is concentrated in the Northeast and the Cuban population is concentrated in the city of Miami and in other parts of Florida state.


What does this mean? What is the future of such a large minority group overall in the USA? It would have been beneficial if the article focused on what these stats represent.


-LDG.

Exxtol-

It's a very real reality and that's why the Latino umbrella term often makes no sense but it's marketable. It's obvious what the cultural and linguistic links are between the individual ethnic groups but let's face it what do many of these groups have in common? Mexican history and emigration differ greatly from Cuban emigration. The conditions under which Cubans can stay are incomparable to any other socioethnic Latino group. If you compare Puerto Ricans and Dominicans two socioethnic groups with similar cultural aspects, island proximity and vernacular, however, their realities are very different in the USA. First of all Dominicans are still a relatively 'new' socioethnic group that is paving its way in the USA. Puerto Ricans have been in mainland USA much longer and have established themselves (regardless what reputation they have) my point here is they have an established history and one can validate their relative sucesses and struggles especially in the greater NYC area.

To emphasize the point in my post that you highlighted those are the essential differences in the whole Latino 'umbrella' concept. Do Latinos on the west coast of the USA have the same struggles as Latinos on the east coast? Do they even care? Where and what are the unifying factors? I will leave you to ponder about this because I know the answers already.

Exxtol, if you are really interested in Latinos in the USA and social studies that have been done on this socioethnic group many universities have began to teach this as a subject in Cultural Studies or Communication and Culture. Just recently I stumbled across a book at a univeristy campus bookstore because that's where you can find the best books whether one is a student or not and that's where I go to book shop. One of the current books being used is titled Latinos, Inc.: The Marketing and Making of a People by Arlene D?vila. When I do read it I anticipate an interesting read and I know some of the points I mentioned in my first post will be addressed.

You know how the saying goes: 'hablamos el mismo idioma' but it's more than just that.


-LDG.

To further elaborate on this...

Lesley D said:

It's a very real reality and that's why the Latino umbrella term often makes no sense but it's marketable. It's obvious what the cultural and linguistic links are between the individual ethnic groups but let's face it what do many of these groups have in common?

...

You know how the saying goes: 'hablamos el mismo idioma' but it's more than just that.


-LDG.

Click to expand...

As I stated in my initial response here, there also exist a debate on whether the Hispanic label is also appropriate, in fact if categorizing various peoples from Latin America into one group makes much sense at all.

Of course, to many of us the term Hispanic does not makes sense, at least not in the way it's used in the United States.

In the US, a Hispanic is someone who comes from a Spanish speaking country in Latin America.

However, in much of Latin American and even in Spain, Hispanics are only people who have full or partial Spanish blood. This would make descendants of Spaniards Hispanic as well as mestizos and mulattos whose European ancestry is of Spanish decent.

Simply being born in a country where the culture is Hispanic is not enough to consider someone Hispanic, such person has to have either full or partial Spanish blood in them.

For this reason many Latin American peoples find themselves with a dilemma when traveling or moving to the U.S.

Example, a person who was born in a Hispanic Latin American country, but has middle eastern or Italian or French or is full Amerindian or perhaps is full African will not be considered Hispanic.

Such person will have a Hispanic culture, but that does not makes them Hispanic per se and usually they don't identify as Hispanics. However, when they travel to the U.S., suddenly they are seen and expected to identify as Hispanic for merely being born in a Spanish speaking Latin American country.

This is the main reason why many Argentinians, for example, don't consider themselves to be Hispanic. Many of them have European ancestry that are not Spanish (ie. Italian, German, French, etc) and thus, they consider themselves Argentinians but not Hispanic. Once they arrive in the U.S., the term Hispanic becomes a dilemma for many of them who in fact are not Hispanic, but are from Hispanic Latin American countries.

Similar experiences occurs with full blooded Amerindians from Mexico and/or Guatemala.

Beyond this there is also the prevailing notion that the word Hispanic means being a mestizo. Usually, Americans think of Hispanics as having mestizo features and puts Hispanics who are either of European, African or Mulatto ancestry into an odd position.

Personally, I think they should simply label people by nationality or, even better, stop labeling people.

-NALs

Exxtol- clarification

Just to ensure that this discussion does not go off in the wrong direction based on the comments above I will clarify my "own" point in my previous post.

I stated: It's obvious what the cultural and linguistic links are between the individual ethnic groups but let's face it what do many of these groups have in common?

The point that I was making when I mentioned cultural and linguistic links just scratches the surface. However, one has to be careful when grouping Latinos in one big category because there are similarities but yet very different historical and political factors that helped shape each country to what it is today. Without fully understanding the history of the Latin American region many think there are very little differences between each socioethnic group when in fact there are notable differences. Some countries have significant similarities from a cultural, historical and linguistic point of view. For example in the Central American region specifically Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador. These are three countries that can be compared logically with respect to my comment above. However, if one tries to compare Argentina and the DR or Chile and the DR on the basis of the term Latino it just does not makes sense thus proving that it's an umbrella terminology and going back to my point in my first post when I stated:

I highly doubt other ethnic groups of Latino descent share the same interests, concerns, plight, success etc.

Those stats however, reveal key statistics and the reality of such a large minority group in the USA.


-LDG.

In the US you are seen as Hispanic if you come from a country that changes governments by junta instead of election, anytime in the last 50 yrs. And if everyone is on the take, from the president down to the cop on the beat. A Spanish accent also helps.
joe

dogstar said:

In the US you are seen as Hispanic if you come from a country that changes governments by junta instead of election, anytime in the last 50 yrs. And if everyone is on the take, from the president down to the cop on the beat. A Spanish accent also helps.
joe

Click to expand...

And historically the US supported those juntas financially and militarily.

What's your point?????????

Yes we are now the 5th largest group. And it continually amazes me that given out percentage numbers we have such high local political representation. The question is how high can we go and ultimately how will that translate to improvements in our quality of life.

A.Hidalgo said:

And historically the US supported those juntas financially and militarily.

What's your point?????????

Click to expand...

My point is that NALS and to some extent Lesly were rattling on about the deferent groups and that unless you had a Spanish blood line you were not Hispanic. To the US, if you come from a Spanish speaking country, you are Hispanic, and although this may grate on the elitist in few of you, you are all equal in the US, and the main concerns should be to become a good and contributing citizen.
Citizen cane
btw you can't corrupt a good person.

Make sure we don't stray which is what it's beginning to do!!!!!

The 5th largest group

I would think there were more Colombians in the USA rather than Dominicans. Anyway, Lesley D, you have made some very interesting points regarding the term "latino" and how it mis-represent people that comes from spanish speaking countries. The history, culture, ethnicity of mejico and the DR are different. But more so the two immigrants have different objectives and goals to accomplish. It really irritates me to see how some groups have conditioned the mass to believe that since "hablamos el mismo idioma" thus should share the same ideas and political viewpoints.

For example most cubans in the South Florida are republicans and very conservative while most mejicanos/chicanos are democrats who can careless if Castro regime stay in power. Now Puerto Ricans are also a spanish speaking group that have different viewpoints depending on social status on the mainland and really are americans who have a fantasy of becoming an independant country but know deep inside they have the best of both worlds which will mostly likely spiral down if they would dare become independant.

Now dominicans are still a new group of spanish speaking immigrants who mainly migrate to Puerto Rico and the East Coast. This group have made strides but are not represented well enough in the mainstream america accept in baseball. Majority have this nostalgia of returning home to live amongst the well off but reality is many will most likely never go back to live permanently.

Now every one of these groups are expected to identify with each others strife and become "latino". The reality is the elite group of mejicanos are the ones benefiting from this market strategy. It really amazes me to hear an anchorman by the name J.R. glorifies this "latino" propaganda. If one takes time to watch the spanish networks 95% are geared to chicanos and unfortunately dominicans are swepts under the rug. The reality is all of these groups have different goals and objectives. I am sure many domincans could careless what happens in Oaxaca, Mejico.

The question is where is this propaganda going to lead "latinos"? As many Argentineans, Chileans, and definitely Brazilians, etc etc refuse to be labeled under the same umbrella.

Quisqueya-

You really understand my point. No surprise though. You hit the nail on the head. You provided a precise follow up to what I have outlined in my three posts thus far in this thread. The article (which is no longer viewable BTW) provided a summary of stats about Latinos in the USA and how they fair in certain categories. As I mentioned in my first post the numbers do reveal interesting data but there should have been some kind of follow up, explanation, analysis especially in what I consider key areas: education, the work force and political representation. Where does such a large minority rank as compared to xxx? This is why I outlined what I deem as some of the important factors in the classification of the stats in my first post. Latinos are ranked under one umbrella group but the stats don't fairly represent their status in most categories in the USA because of the vast diversity of each group and their circumstances. The success of one group may be undervalued due to the failure of others and the interests of one socioethnic group definitely differ from another.

For example Dominicans statistically are the fifth largest group in the USA however, in my opinion currently lost in that umbrella term called "Latino". Although there is evidence of political representation as Deelt mentioned and forth coming progress in that category in the overall Latino picture what other significant representation do Dominicans have within the overall group?

In my opinion the stats reveal some key factors about the future of "Latinos" as a large minority group in the USA. However, one can not overlook many social and political issues that need to be addressed. People may not understand this. The future of this group "Latino" is questionable IMO. There's plenty of potential for individual progress and progress within each socioethinic group i.e. Cubans but the whole Latino umbrella... there are just too many underlying factors.


-LDG.

Quisqueya said:

I would think there were more Colombians in the USA rather than Dominicans. Anyway, Lesley D, you have made some very interesting points regarding the term "latino" and how it mis-represent people that comes from spanish speaking countries. The history, culture, ethnicity of mejico and the DR are different. But more so the two immigrants have different objectives and goals to accomplish. It really irritates me to see how some groups have conditioned the mass to believe that since "hablamos el mismo idioma" thus should share the same ideas and political viewpoints.

For example most cubans in the South Florida are republicans and very conservative while most mejicanos/chicanos are democrats who can careless if Castro regime stay in power. Now Puerto Ricans are also a spanish speaking group that have different viewpoints depending on social status on the mainland and really are americans who have a fantasy of becoming an independant country but know deep inside they have the best of both worlds which will mostly likely spiral down if they would dare become independant.

Now dominicans are still a new group of spanish speaking immigrants who mainly migrate to Puerto Rico and the East Coast. This group have made strides but are not represented well enough in the mainstream america accept in baseball. Majority have this nostalgia of returning home to live amongst the well off but reality is many will most likely never go back to live permanently.

Now every one of these groups are expected to identify with each others strife and become "latino". The reality is the elite group of mejicanos are the ones benefiting from this market strategy. It really amazes me to hear an anchorman by the name J.R. glorifies this "latino" propaganda. If one takes time to watch the spanish networks 95% are geared to chicanos and unfortunately dominicans are swepts under the rug. The reality is all of these groups have different goals and objectives. I am sure many domincans could careless what happens in Oaxaca, Mejico.

The question is where is this propaganda going to lead "latinos"? As many Argentineans, Chileans, and definitely Brazilians, etc etc refuse to be labeled under the same umbrella.

Click to expand...

You should remember that Univision the largest Spanish network television network in the US, is partly owned by Mexican media giant Televisa. Thus heavy play of Mexican programs.

Telemundo, the second largest Spanish network television network in the US, is partners with Argos Comunicacion based out of Mexico which produces Mexican telenovelas.

At the moment in the US market Mexican programs dominate.

Mexico is the country next to the USA. There are currently over 22 million Mexicans in the US. The numbers tell the story, so does it's historical relation to the US. There is no "at the moment" about that.

A.Hidalgo said:

You should remember that Univision the largest Spanish network television network in the US, is partly owned by Mexican media giant Televisa. Thus heavy play of Mexican programs.

Telemundo, the second largest Spanish network television network in the US, is partners with Argos Comunicacion based out of Mexico which produces Mexican telenovelas.

At the moment in the US market Mexican programs dominate.

Click to expand...

deelt said:

Mexico is the country next to the USA. There are currently over 22 million Mexicans in the US. The numbers tell the story, so does it's historical relation to the US. There is no "at the moment" about that.

Click to expand...

Cual es el problema with "at the moment"
Its just a reference in time from the big bang to eternity and everything in between.:cheeky:

Wow, I just wanted to say that I learned so much from reading these two pages on this thread. It makes me regret not adding Latin American and Caribbean Studies to my current degree when I had the chance.
As well, I thought that that was an interesting article and the points people brought up to be extremely informative