Dominicans and their ancestry

[Mr_DR]

No dude, my mother is not Taino and I don't have African blood in me because I am not the slightest way Dominican. My mother is of descent from India, not indio like Native American. I don't confues terms. Both my parents are foreigners as in not from here at all! And yes I live in the DR so I know what I'm talking about

See, Just because your mother is from India that does not mean that you may not have some black. There are many blacks in India as well and if you are trying to tell me there isn't you may as well go hit the books.

 

[Mr_DR]

I did posted once many (though not all) of the books I have read.

If you want you can always make a search.

And if what I am saying doesn't makes sense and/or is false, then why is it getting on your nerves to the point of making you post this last post.

Clearly define to me a few sources, don't tell me to just go and read something. Enough of that I have done, show me where you get your material so that I can investigate it myself from top to bottom and see why you think the way you do. Though, I will never discount your highly black/white distorted mentality (a byproduct of your American influence) as a factor in all of this.

Don't waste your breath with Matos Nal0whs,
el esta mas loco que una cabra.

He is the kind of people that no matter how much books and research you show him to justify your point he will always tell you that the orginators are wrong.

He babbles about the whole subject.
He must be a close Hippo's relative.

 

[Mr_DR]

More often than not, mestizo is used to describe a white-indian mixed person, though what you said is true to a certain extent depending on the country.

The meaning of words change over borders and time.



That is all I wanted you to acknowledge because based on your other posts, it appeared as if you were denying ANY Taino genes and/or influence in Dominicans and our culture.



They are not foreign born, they are Dominican born from multiple generations on this island.

I know about them because one time I got lost in those windy rural roads and behold, I thought I hit a hidden Taino town nobody knew about.

Don't take these things too seriously.

I have to admire your patience with these people Nal0whs
these people are confused, now the residents of La Vega are not dominicans to this guy.
That cracks me up.

I have to admire your patience with these people

 

[Berzin]

PS. The CIA is the most informed intelligence agency in the world . i would rather trust them then some powerless organization who gives out info that is known to be false.and in not nals im fuegoazul ,19 years old from jersey(201)[/QUOTE]


They are so informed that they have been involved in toppling democratic movements all over Central and South America for the sole purpose of keeping the sweatshop culture alive and well for US corporations. And of course they were extremey concise about the whole weapons of mass destruction thing.

 

[FuegoAzul21]

Excuse the Nal0W-osian length of this post. The arguments presented here are not well versed on what the US Census is and how it is composed.

On the Numbers
The 2000 Census was the most accurate Census ever done in the history of its existence. It has a 0.7 percent+/- margin of error when it came to counting Latinos...usually termed as undercount. This is almost perfect! Their only failure was not in undercounting but in miscategorizing us...as Dominicans but not as Latinons. Misrepresentation out of the whole sample for Dominicans was 25%. Other smaller nationalistic Latinos groups also suffered like Salvadorians, etc.. However, while it is politically easy to suggest that undocumented did not fill out the form, this is not in fact the case since the Census even needed to correct their numbers to account for some double-counting.

On Race
Again, the US Census is based on people's responses of their own self-
perception. The terminology of race used in the Census is a scholarly one and one that is often misunderstood. However, the 2000 Census did allow for much flexibility in self-identification, especially for mixed raced people such as Dominicans.

This is why I firmly stand by how critical it is that Dominicans and Dominican-American that live in the US identify and label themselves using an Americanized system not try to super impose the DR color scheme. Their skewed self identification has national implications in terms of services rendered to communities. For example, many Dominicans checked off that they were "Native Americans" because they wanted to call themselves "indio"...because they did not want to check off black and they could not justify within themselves checking off white.

Many Latinos in a similar boat, however, did make use of the new mixed category. Nevertheless, Mexican-Americans that have been here for many (4 or 5) generations and are in fact white due to mixing and other factors. As such, I think your argument lacks a national perception. There are new immigrant Mexican enclaves. This is what is being seen in throughout the Eastern end of the US. Mexicans are new to NY, NJ. Because of this you tend to see more of the "new immigrant...mojado/wetback" look that tends to be more indigenous looking. (That to me is the REAL INDIO look...not as Dominicans see it). However, not such is the case for more than 70% of the rest of the US (in terms of geography) that have long standing Mexican-American communities.

As for PR, I also think that your argument lacks a historical perspective. Most of the Puerto Ricans that left the island were PRs of color. While you might be "surrounded" by PRs it is a self-selected group and one that has been here for many generations and that has mixed with many cultures including African-Americans. The PRs left in the island and that have lived there for generations do tend to look more Anglo-Taino and this look does predominate the island. However, they do applaud their more African traits unlike Dominicans. The only thing black island based-PRs tend not to like is Dominicans. But I think this is slowly changing.

D

First, i have an extensive expeirience with mexicans , i ve been to Mexico (Cancun), Los Angeles , San Diego , and Houston . I used to work with mexicans , my parents rent to some mexicans who live above us , i ve had alot of mexican friends, i dated a mexican girl for a while. One thing i've noticed is that they dont differ racially by region (the same mexicans in cali are the same ones in Texas,florida,and the rest of the states) now i know mexicans come in differant shapes and sizes ,but they do have a certain look that might seperate them from say a ecuadorian(at least i do becuase i come in contact with them alot)Also, most mexicans in the states have come within the last 35 years, i dont beleive being here thirty years is gonna make you white , when you came in as a mostly indian desent meztizo or just plain indian(native american) . as for the 4th and 5th generation mexicans you maybe right but they dont make up 70% of all mexicans ,30 percent maybe. The same would go for most latinos , most have them have come within the last thirty years (central ,south americans ,as well as Dominicans) most of these people are meztizo and indian(native americans),how living in the states makes you white ,i dont know ,I guess you and Matos can figure out a way to prove how indians are just red skinned white people,becuase last time i checked indians arent white and a white + indian ,meztizo +indian , black + white,black + indian,Black + meztiso, do not make white either . Also , if i , a person of mixed race and i say that im white , it doesnt change the fact that IM NOT WHITE , but i guess to you two, it does .

 

[Matos]

Don't waste your breath with Matos Nal0whs,
el esta mas loco que una cabra.

He is the kind of people that no matter how much books and research you show him to justify your point he will always tell you that the orginators are wrong.

He babbles about the whole subject.
He must be a close Hippo's relative.

"RACIAL AND ETHNIC GROUPS

Ethnic Heritage

The island's indigenous inhabitants were mainly Taino Indians, an Arawak-speaking group, and a small settlement of carib Indians around the Bahia de Samana. These indians, estimated to number perhaps 1 million at the time of their initial contact with Europeans, all of whom had been killed or died by the 1550's as a result of harsh spanish treatment. The Tainos were especially ill-treated.
The importation of African slaves began in 1503. By the nineteenth century, the population was roughly 150,000: 40,000 were spanish descent,40,000 were black slaves, and the remainder were either freed blacks or mulattoes. In the mid-1990's, approximately 10% of the population was white and 15 percent black; the remainder were mulattoes-- 75 percent(the percentages of dominico haitian or haitions are not included). Since then the percentage of whites has been slowly decreasing and that of mulattoes increasing; the black percentage has remained almost about the same. The figures about ethnic ration and its changing composition are a SENSITIVE Dominican issue because many elite and upper-class whites are anti-african(blacks and mulattoes) and seek to claim a higher, constant "white" figure. Many mulattoes, however, claim a larger percentage for themselves at the same time that many others have difficulty acknowledging their African roots.
Contemporary Dominican society and culture are primarily spanish in origin. At the same time, much of popular culture reflects many African influences. Taino influence is limited to cultigens, such as Maize or Corn, and a few vocabulary words, such as huracan(hurricane) and hamaca(hammock). The African influence in society was officially suppressed and ignored by the Trujillo regime(1930_1961) and then by Balaguer until the 1980s. However, certain religious brotherhoods with significant black membership have incorporated some afro-american elements. Observers also have noted the presence of African influence in popular dance and music(see Culture, this ch.)
There has long been a preference in Dominican society for light skin, straight hair, and "white" racial features. Blackness in itself, however, does not necessarily restrict a person to a lower status position. Upward mobility is possible for the dark-skinned person who manages to acquire educatiohn or wealth. During the era of Trujillo, joining the military became a major means of upward mobility, especially for dark and light skinned Dominicans-the white elite would not permit its sons to join). Social characteristics focusing on family background, education, and economic standing are, in fact, more prominent means of identifying and classifying individuals. Darker-skinned persons are concentrated in the east, the south, and the far west near the Haitian border. The population of the Cibao, especially in the countryside, consists mainly of whites or mulattoes.
Dominicans traditionally prefer to think of themselves as descendants of the island's indians and the spanish, ignoring their African heritage. Thus, phenotypical African characteristics, such as dark skin pigmentation, are disparaged. Trujillo, a light-skinned mulatto who claimed that he was "white" (French and Spanish), instituted as official policy that dominicans were racially white, culturally spanish, and religiouly Roman Catholic. Balaguer continued this policy until the 1980s when he openly recognized African cultural and social influences. He made the change because, first he followed two opposition party governments, those of presidents Guzman(1978-82) and Jorge Blanco (1982-86), who had officially recognized the country's African roots. Second, he was appealing for votes as he prepared for his reelection campaign in 1986. Because of Trujillo's and then Balaguers racial conditioning, emigrants and visitors to the United States are often shocked to discover that they are viewed as "black". However, they and many back home welcomed the civil rights and black pride movements in NOrth America in the 1960s and 1970s. Those returning brought a new level of racila consciousness to the republic because they had experienced both racial and prejudice and the black pride movement. The returning emigrants who broughtt back Afrom hairstyles and a variety of other Afro-Nort Americanisms received mixed reatios from their fellow dominican, however."

Mr.nalowh are you happy i Quoted the thing for you
and Mr Dr I never said that people from la vega are not really Dominican....MY father side of the family are all from La Vega........I just like posting facts like the above to get people like Nalowh (who has never been to dominican rep. ones) mad to the point that he gets these fabricated information to justify his racism.......

oh and ps.... Mr Dr i was born in Dominican Republic are you dominican????

 

[NALs]

Mr.nalowh are you happy i Quoted the thing for you

That's not what I meant. You need to post the source (ie. author, book, and page or website address, etc) of where ever you copied that information you posted here.

I did not told you that for my own sake, I simply told you that to help YOU avoid being banned or having one of YOUR posts eliminated for plagiarizing.

I just like posting facts like the above to get people like Nalowh (who has never been to dominican rep. ones)

What an interesting concept you have about me. Here, click on this and learn who is a Dominican and who is not, etc.

http://www.dr1.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38749

 

[FuegoAzul21]

First, i have an extensive expeirience with mexicans , i ve been to Mexico (Cancun), Los Angeles , San Diego , and Houston . I used to work with mexicans , my parents rent to some mexicans who live above us , i ve had alot of mexican friends, i dated a mexican girl for a while. One thing i've noticed is that they dont differ racially by region (the same mexicans in cali are the same ones in Texas,florida,and the rest of the states) now i know mexicans come in differant shapes and sizes ,but they do have a certain look that might seperate them from say a ecuadorian(at least i do becuase i come in contact with them alot)Also, most mexicans in the states have come within the last 35 years, i dont beleive being here thirty years is gonna make you white , when you came in as a mostly indian desent meztizo or just plain indian(native american) . as for the 4th and 5th generation mexicans you maybe right but they dont make up 70% of all mexicans ,30 percent maybe. The same would go for most latinos , most have them have come within the last thirty years (central ,south americans ,as well as Dominicans) most of these people are meztizo and indian(native americans),how living in the states makes you white ,i dont know ,I guess you and Matos can figure out a way to prove how indians are just red skinned white people,becuase last time i checked indians arent white and a white + indian ,meztizo +indian , black + white,black + indian,Black + meztiso, do not make white either . Also , if i , a person of mixed race and i say that im white , it doesnt change the fact that IM NOT WHITE , but i guess to you two, it does .

Also,As for Pr,i was talkin about real PRs not half PRs or quarter PRs , from what you said i can see that you do agree that they are mixed poeple not 80% white like Matos likes to beleive.Pr has always had a history of racial mixing just like the rest of the spanish caribean , so its almost imposible that 80% of the population is white , unless a 4 million spaniards and other europeans have moved in, which is not true .I can remember reading an article sayin that most prs marked white for the plain fact that they werent pure black or pure indian .(the same reason most hispanics marked white on the census even alot of dominicans).

 

[FuegoAzul21]

Deelt....
YOU preatty much said what i was going to say....However,,,I also want to add that FuegolAzul is a bit Naive and maybe he has not traveled or done enough researh for him to really understand this arguments.....Anyhow,,,please don't get offended bro this is just a debate....but you really need to researh and not deprive yourself from the truth,,,just because you've met a few black wanna be Puerto Ricans LOL!!! or seen a couple that are have black and half Puerto ricans and they just don't want to tell you that there are half african american,,,,does not give me or anybody in this chat room enough scientific evidence to agree with you....

Ps....the American CIA is a Great organisation......When they thought there where weapons of mass distructions in Iraq and how they where going to find them,,,they where right everybody is humen,,,,. people make MIstakes

Maybe YOU havent come in contact with enough people ,becuase i know very damn well what im talkin about , i ve done a good bit of travelin in my life . I ve been to mexico , cali , and texas and i ve been to neighborhoods that are 99% pr .I do research before i try to state anything that is fact. Now,you are not gonna convince anyone that most PRs are white becuase its just not the truth .Im actually in a computer lab with 6 prs from the island and none of them are white, some maybe light skinned , but that doesnt cancel out the big lips,chinky eyes, and the curly hair . The only thing deelt said was how i was wrong (which is just her opinion, so if anything she could be wrong) but she said nothin to support your arguement , so maybe you should do some more research and read closer

 

[deelt]

FuegoAzul

I am sure you feel that your travels and your (tenant, girlfriend, fly-by-night) exposure in your 19 years of life really qualify as "fact finding" expeditions.
However, a significant portion of the United States was in fact OWNED by Mexico. So for you to say most Mexicans have entered the country within the last 35 years shows the little you really DO know and reflects in fact the limits to your "exposure." 35 years is how long Dominicans have been in the US. To imply that Dominicans have been here the same length of time as Mexicans is just ridiculous.

I don't know where you find that only 30% of Mexicans are 4th or 5th generation, but based on numbers otained from www.census.gov here are my calculations, (based on a 2000 population estimate):

Total Mexican/Mexican-American Population in the US: 20,900,102.
Native born: 12,222,799 (58%) (here's 4-5 gen sec, 60% of the Mx pop!)
Foreign-born: 8,677,303 (42%)
Of these Foreign-born, 1,929,928 Mexicans are naturalized that is 9% of the total population. (These tend to be the "indigenous" looking folks)
The rest 6,747,375 of them, 32%, are not naturalized, again is out of the total population. (These tend tp be the "indigenous" looking folks)

Thus, based on this information, my estimates turned out to be more or less accurate than the numbers you present.

PS Cancun is a tourist town that's like saying that Caberete is reflective of all DR. I don't think so.

D

First, i have an extensive expeirience with mexicans , i ve been to Mexico (Cancun), Los Angeles , San Diego , and Houston . I used to work with mexicans , my parents rent to some mexicans who live above us , i ve had alot of mexican friends, i dated a mexican girl for a while. One thing i've noticed is that they dont differ racially by region (the same mexicans in cali are the same ones in Texas,florida,and the rest of the states) now i know mexicans come in differant shapes and sizes ,but they do have a certain look that might seperate them from say a ecuadorian(at least i do becuase i come in contact with them alot)Also, most mexicans in the states have come within the last 35 years, i dont beleive being here thirty years is gonna make you white , when you came in as a mostly indian desent meztizo or just plain indian(native american) . as for the 4th and 5th generation mexicans you maybe right but they dont make up 70% of all mexicans ,30 percent maybe. The same would go for most latinos , most have them have come within the last thirty years (central ,south americans ,as well as Dominicans) most of these people are meztizo and indian(native americans),how living in the states makes you white ,i dont know ,I guess you and Matos can figure out a way to prove how indians are just red skinned white people,becuase last time i checked indians arent white and a white + indian ,meztizo +indian , black + white,black + indian,Black + meztiso, do not make white either . Also , if i , a person of mixed race and i say that im white , it doesnt change the fact that IM NOT WHITE , but i guess to you two, it does .

 

[FuegoAzul21]

FuegoAzul

I am sure you feel that your travels and your (tenant, girlfriend, fly-by-night) exposure in your 19 years of life really qualify as "fact finding" expeditions.
However, a significant portion of the United States was in fact OWNED by Mexico. So for you to say most Mexicans have entered the country within the last 35 years shows the little you really DO know and reflects in fact the limits to your "exposure." 35 years is how long Dominicans have been in the US. To imply that Dominicans have been here the same length of time as Mexicans is just ridiculous.

I don't know where you find that only 30% of Mexicans are 4th or 5th generation, but based on numbers otained from www.census.gov here are my calculations, (based on a 2000 population estimate):

Total Mexican/Mexican-American Population in the US: 20,900,102.
Native born: 12,222,799 (58%) (here's 4-5 gen sec, 60% of the Mx pop!)
Foreign-born: 8,677,303 (42%)
Of these Foreign-born, 1,929,928 Mexicans are naturalized that is 9% of the total population. (These tend to be the "indigenous" looking folks)
The rest 6,747,375 of them, 32%, are not naturalized, again is out of the total population. (These tend tp be the "indigenous" looking folks)

Thus, based on this information, my estimates turned out to be more or less accurate than the numbers you present.

PS Cancun is a tourist town that's like saying that Caberete is reflective of all DR. I don't think so.

D

They have been here for a long time but thier population boom did not occur until 35 years ago.
native born = as in children of mexican nationals , Foriegn born mexicans tend to have alot of children(more than other hispanic groups) the mexican population in the U.S.A is very young, so a good portion,if not majority, of that native born are very young ( apple does not fall far from the tree) if thier parents are indigenous looking, they will look indigenous , just becuase they are born doesnt automatically make them 4th and 5th generation mexican-americans , dont get me wrong , i know they exist . However ,i think that in the last census they were put into the "other hispanic" category most likely in a Chicano category. so , idk.Also , you have to remember that this is the U.S.A , where racial mixing was not practiced as much as in other western hemisphere , U.S.A also, had a segregated society for a long time , so racial intergration was not that common .What im trying to say is that the mexicans that lived in U.S.A before it was the usa , most likely stayed mexican .Now im not saying that none of them mixed with other groups,i bet they did, but i dont think that they fully intergrated to the point that they would be considered white by thier red neck american cowboy counter parts.

 

[deelt]

Prove what you are saying. Show me your numbers and their source.

Here are mine.:

According to my sources only 1/3 of the population is under the age of 18. 31% are native born, 0.5% are naturalized foreign born and 5% are not citizens. This completely negates your statements.

My numbers don't even include the self-identified Chicano population. If I were to include them, this would completely blow your theory out of the water.

Your other comments just don't make any sense.

They have been here for a long time but thier population boom did not occur until 35 years ago.
native born = as in children of mexican nationals , Foriegn born mexicans tend to have alot of children(more than other hispanic groups) the mexican population in the U.S.A is very young, so a good portion,if not majority, of that native born are very young ( apple does not fall far from the tree) if thier parents are indigenous looking, they will look indigenous , just becuase they are born doesnt automatically make them 4th and 5th generation mexican-americans , dont get me wrong , i know they exist . However ,i think that in the last census they were put into the "other hispanic" category most likely in a Chicano category. so , idk.Also , you have to remember that this is the U.S.A , where racial mixing was not practiced as much as in other western hemisphere , U.S.A also, had a segregated society for a long time , so racial intergration was not that common .What im trying to say is that the mexicans that lived in U.S.A before it was the usa , most likely stayed mexican .Now im not saying that none of them mixed with other groups,i bet they did, but i dont think that they fully intergrated to the point that they would be considered white by thier red neck american cowboy counter parts.

 

[Mr_DR]

oh and ps.... Mr Dr i was born in Dominican Republic are you dominican????

I am more Dominican than Perico Ripiao and it just makes me feel very unconfortable when I hear someone trying to preach that the Tainos were all wiped out completely and that we have nothing that tie us up to them and that we don't carry the genes when the blood that runs through my vains is Taino which i am willing to prove if you are willing to pay the DNA.

 

[Matos]

I am more Dominican than Perico Ripiao and it just makes me feel very unconfortable when I hear someone trying to preach that the Tainos were all wiped out completely and that we have nothing that tie us up to them and that we don't carry the genes when the blood that runs through my vains is Taino which i am willing to prove if you are willing to pay the DNA.

If you are taino and dominicans have taino in them...Well, then that makes haitians taino as well,,,i mean after all is the same island...And if you want i could break down there history as well....HOwever , first learn about your history....tell you what who is Pedro Santana.....lol

Ps....F**k hipolito...!!!! The only could president my country has ever had was Juan Bosch and Guzman....Than every one else was gay....gay gay gay gay,!!!! LOL LMAO

 

[NALs]

If you are taino and dominicans have taino in them...Well, then that makes haitians taino as well,,,i mean after all is the same island...

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Ps....F**k hipolito...!!!! The only could president my country has ever had was Juan Bosch and Guzman....Than every one else was gay....gay gay gay gay,!!!! LOL LMAO

Wow, I thought we were out of elementary school to be able to have a good debate here.

Now even gays are being brought into this. My my my...

BTW, you have not backed up that info that I told you about. Come on, let everyone know the source.

It doesn't matter if the source is a website or not, let everyone know.

This should be in your best interest.

Also, here is a link about the Carib Indians Reservation on the island of Dominica (not DR) in the Lesser Antilles.

Hmm, these indians don't look like the Aztecs or Mayans. Isn't that something!

http://www.avirtualdominica.com/caribs.htm

 

[FuegoAzul21]

Prove what you are saying. Show me your numbers and their source.

Here are mine.:

According to my sources only 1/3 of the population is under the age of 18. 31% are native born, 0.5% are naturalized foreign born and 5% are not citizens. This completely negates your statements.

My numbers don't even include the self-identified Chicano population. If I were to include them, this would completely blow your theory out of the water.

Your other comments just don't make any sense.

well my numbers say that 41% of the Mexican population of the U.S.A is under the age of 19 (2000 estimate) and the population under 24 is 51.6%(this is the number i obtianed by adding the percentages of each age group inder the age of 24,the final sum of all the percentages is 100,so it should be correct) .Half of all mexican housholds(majority of them live in households) live with children of their own under the age of 18.The average family size is 4 ( as in mother,father, 2 child children).I beleive its very safe to assume that foriegn born mexicans are more likely to have more children than Native born mexicans due to economic, educational,and cultural differances ,the foriegn born population is also more likely to be younger as well.But a good portion if not ,most of the Native born mexicans just happen to be the children of the foriegn born mexicans.The median age is 24,(which is probably one of the youngest amongst most other ethnic groups ,hispanic as well as non-hispanic).so it just goes back to what i said in the previous post ,not to mention im using the same source you used ,the all sooo correct 2000 census that you defend so dearly , http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=DEC_2000_SF2_U_DP1&-reg=DEC_2000_SF2_U_DP1:001|401&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF2_U&-_lang=en&-format=&-CONTEXT=qt .here is all of it.


P.S in regards to half of the usa once belonged to mexico .One of the reasons the transactions went through (most of the land was bought from mexico) was because the land was sparsley populated by mexican nationals .so thier numbers were never really that great to begin with.

 

[deelt]

You are still blowing hot smoke. The child population is about a third (as I said) not the majority (as you said). Based on the sample I used it was 37%. You clearly used a different sample than I did (SF2). The scenario you were presenting is off.

The median age is 24. I'll give you that gladly. That doesn't make them any less native, meaning, US born...to correct you. That also makes them 2nd and third generation folks...longstanding members within the US. I would also would not be so quick to assume that the traditional household does not include an elderly....Actually this is the case in 96% of the households.

Peace

well my numbers say that 41% of the Mexican population of the U.S.A is under the age of 19 (2000 estimate) and the population under 24 is 51.6%(this is the number i obtianed by adding the percentages of each age group inder the age of 24,the final sum of all the percentages is 100,so it should be correct) .Half of all mexican housholds(majority of them live in households) live with children of their own under the age of 18.The average family size is 4 ( as in mother,father, 2 child children).I beleive its very safe to assume that foriegn born mexicans are more likely to have more children than Native born mexicans due to economic, educational,and cultural differances ,the foriegn born population is also more likely to be younger as well.But a good portion if not ,most of the Native born mexicans just happen to be the children of the foriegn born mexicans.The median age is 24,(which is probably one of the youngest amongst most other ethnic groups ,hispanic as well as non-hispanic).so it just goes back to what i said in the previous post ,not to mention im using the same source you used ,the all sooo correct 2000 census that you defend so dearly , http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/QTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=DEC_2000_SF2_U_DP1&-reg=DEC_2000_SF2_U_DP1:001|401&-ds_name=DEC_2000_SF2_U&-_lang=en&-format=&-CONTEXT=qt .here is all of it.


P.S in regards to half of the usa once belonged to mexico .One of the reasons the transactions went through (most of the land was bought from mexico) was because the land was sparsley populated by mexican nationals .so thier numbers were never really that great to begin with.

 

[NALs]

Um, is it just me or is this DR1?

Because if this is DR1, I don't know why this thread is turning towards Mexicans in the USA.

 

[deelt]

It's not about Dominica nationals either, but you didn't hear me complaining.

Um, is it just me or is this DR1?

Because if this is DR1, I don't know why this thread is turning towards Mexicans in the USA.

 

[NALs]

It's not about Dominica nationals either, but you didn't hear me complaining.

There is a big difference between pin pointing native peoples who most likely resemble the Tainos of the DR and Mexican immigrants and their decendants in the USA.

Anyways, let the thread continue on its course...