From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I wrote this article and posted an older version to 07:31, 21 September 2008 (EDT)

I made the map larger and dropped the image of a coach in Spain. The article is only about latinos in the US.RJJensen 21:31, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
please stop messing with the article. The opening sentence is full of little errors and the picture is all wrong and should be erased. I clarified the definition to make it clear this "Latino" is an English language word and in English it refers to Hispanics living in the U.S. RJJensen 21:42, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
A good source will be needed to change the meaning of that word. By the way. I think this is not an article to be readed only in the US. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 22:02, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
I provided a very good source: Gutiérrez, ed. The Columbia History of Latinos in the U.S." (2005) pp 1-2 those pages are online at How is "Latino" actually used in Spain these days? RJJensen 22:11, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
here is the complete entry from the Oxford English Dictionary on "Latino":
A Latin-American inhabitant of the United States. Also attrib. or as adj. 1946 G. PEYTON San Antonio xxi. 232 The first program on the University's list is an exchange of students with Latin America. That in itself would be a fresh intellectual experience for Texas, where Latinos are usually looked on as sinister specimens of an inferior race. 1966 MRS L. B. JOHNSON White House Diary 2 Apr. (1970) 377 Six young girls, all Latinos, had encased themselves in cardboard boxes. 1972 Listener 9 Mar. 310/1 meant to be a great melting-pot... Its racial componentsBlacks, Latinos, Chinese, Japanese, [etc.]. 1973 Black Panther 17 Mar. 5/3 A program was drawn an..action group composed of Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. 1974 Ibid. 19 Jan. 5/1 Mr. Rhodes' home was broken a man who appeared to be of Latino origin. RJJensen 22:14, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
from a British dictionary: "noun [C] plural Latinos MAINLY US; someone who lives in the US and who comes from or whose family comes from Latin America." from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary. Here's a very good usage note from American Heritage Dictionary:see dictionary
Though often used interchangeably in American English, Hispanic and Latino are not identical terms, and in certain contexts the choice between them can be significant. Hispanic, from the Latin word for “Spain,” has the broader reference, potentially encompassing all Spanish-speaking peoples in both hemispheres and emphasizing the common denominator of language among communities that sometimes have little else in common. Latino—which in Spanish means "Latin" but which as an English word is probably a shortening of the Spanish word latinoamericano—refers more exclusively to persons or communities of Latin American origin. Of the two, only Hispanic can be used in referring to Spain and its history and culture; a native of Spain residing in the United States is a Hispanic, not a Latino, and one cannot substitute Latino in the phrase the Hispanic influence on native Mexican cultures without garbling the meaning. In practice, however, this distinction is of little significance when referring to residents of the United States, most of whom are of Latin American origin and can theoretically be called by either word. •A more important distinction concerns the sociopolitical rift that has opened between Latino and Hispanic in American usage. For a certain segment of the Spanish-speaking population, Latino is a term of ethnic pride and Hispanic a label that borders on the offensive. According to this view, Hispanic lacks the authenticity and cultural resonance of Latino, with its Spanish sound and its ability to show the feminine form Latina when used of women. Furthermore, Hispanic—the term used by the U.S. Census Bureau and other government agencies—is said to bear the stamp of an Anglo establishment far removed from the concerns of the Spanish-speaking community. While these views are strongly held by some, they are by no means universal, and the division in usage seems as related to geography as it is to politics, with Latino widely preferred in California and Hispanic the more usual term in Florida and Texas. Even in these regions, however, usage is often mixed, and it is not uncommon to find both terms used by the same writer or speaker. See Usage Note at Chicano.
As far as I see, this place is worldwide consulted and its definition should not be only for the US use. I have to prefer this meaning: "Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. latino = noun, plural -nos. a person of Latin-American or Spanish-speaking descent. Origin: 1945–50, Americanism; [1]
For many years, the predominantly liberal media discussed Latino/Hispanic people will soon be the majority of Americans in terms of racial/ethnic composition. The article's map of the percentage of Latinos in the Southwest USA makes it appear that they dominate the western half of the country, but emphasized the reason was from the historical Mexican cession of 1848 to the U.S. explains why such a high Latino population exists in the region.

I recall reading a part of National Geographic magazine, from the articles on Los Angeles in the January 1979 issue, referenced to the rise of immigration from Mexico to Southern California. What was a trickle became a flood as the tiptoe invasion of Latin American newcomers into Los Angeles is turning the US' 3rd largest city into a Spanish-speaking majority city by the end of the century (year 2000). The development is called "another Quebec" named for the Canadian province where today French is the sole official language. + Getitstraight 11:08, 14 December 2009 (EST)

There is no comparison to Quebec. The immigrants to the US learn English quickly--faster than the Germans, Poles and Italians did a century ago. 1848 does not really play a role today--it's geographical nearness to Mexico that is most important, and that is changing. The 2010 census map will show a large Latino presence in most states. RJJensen 11:16, 14 December 2009 (EST)
I think the writer described Los Angeles and California was once Mexican land (which is true) inhabited by Spanish-speaking residents when the U.S. acquired the region. It was based on the Chicano movement at the time when some activists called it their homeland Aztlan, a mythological land of the Aztec and Mexican Indians in the 5th to 9th centuries AD thought to been located in the desert Southwest US.

The uncanny resemblance of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and southern Colorado have a long history of "localized native" Latino/Hispano culture, is alike the Francophone presence in Quebec, parts of New Brunswick, Ontario and other Canadian provinces as a result of the British takeover of New France (part of the French empire). Quebec and Aztlan (the Southwest US) are two similar kinds of ethnic enclavism from a previous colonial era and high cultural expansion.

You're correct on the majority of Latinos are recently-arrived legal (in most part) immigrants in the late 20th century from other nations besides Mexico. The Puerto Rican experience in New York City, Cuban refugees fleeing from Castro in Cuba, and the Central American exodus from civil war in the 1980s & again 2000s for economic reasons, is akin to the classic American experience of immigrants from Europe resettled in the new country and their families adapted our culture. That can mean Latinos will assimilate to the point they won't be monolingual Spanish-speaking, when over 80% of Latinos are bilingual or English-dominant like most 3rd generation Mexican-Americans. + Getitstraight 15:32, 14 December 2009 (EST)

Hispanic vs. Latino

Just something that's good to know, Hispanic people in the U.S. (or at least conservative Hispanics) prefer the term "Hispanic" to describe their ethnicity over "Latino" because they would rather associate their ancestry with Spain rather than Mexico: [2] --1990'sguy (talk) 07:55, 19 September 2019 (EDT)