Question about Latin Americans?

 

Wrong with me my friend althought the two groups more importants of latinoamericans in Spain are from Ecuador and Colombia (not Guatemala), there are a lot of people from other countries specially here in Canary Islands.

 

See page 4:

 

 

I'm talking about people that i know personally from Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Cuba and M�xico, plus the people that i see in TV of course for example, people from Lima wich are mestizos have clearly a phisical type from amerindians and not europeans.

 

 

 

Now i see a mistake from my position: i was excluding Brazil from the analysis. The real reason why i put in doubt that white are the most important apportation was because historical reasons: M�xico, Colombia, Per� and in a second echelon Bolivia, Ecuador or Guatemala only received an important number of european inmigrants in XVI to XVIII centuries and in small numbers, so the changes until 1800 in the census from high percentajes of indians to mestizos must be explained because a direct transfer from the first to the second. The massive arrival of southern europeans to Latinamerica after 1800 was for Cuba, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and less to Venezuela regions where the migration really changed the demography; if we are talking about Hispanoamerica i think this work. If we take out Brazil:

 

Latinoam�rica without Brazil (following your table):

 

Mestizo: 176372490 (-21843912)

Whites: 76365186 (-80094346)

Amerindian: 62659534 (-10921956)

 

In this case whites and amerindias are far more close and because the historical reasons that i say before i'm sure that the transfer indian to mestizo work, Chile should be an exception because the mass migration of XIX and XX centuries. Althought Latinoam�rica without Brazil... With Brazil destination of millions of europeans after the independence white should be, yes, over amerindian as the basis gene pool of the latinamerican population.

 

 

 

Berbers people are present in Latin America through Spain. Remember than most Southern Spain has some Arab and Berber influence. And also remember that most immigrants to Hispanic America came from Souther Spain.

 

That's right another argument for a better attention in the studies about the genetic of americans. Althought after 1800 the spanish emigrants was from the north Galicia, Asturias, Pa�s Vasco y Catalu�a plus canarians, all in all according with a study wich now i don't find  the north african pool is presente specially where the canarians settled. 

 

regards

 

What is interesting is to know who have and who not, and in wich quantities. What can be wonderful is genetic map of mestizos for all Latinamerica.

 

Your thesis is not supported by genetics. In there you are assuming people reproduced at the same rate during the three centuries Spaniards dominated the Americas, which is not the case.   During the first century of colonization, Spaniards used to have several Native women, and from those unions large numbers of mixed people was born. Besides, it is also known that the fertility of Native women living with Spaniards was a lot higher than theirs sisters married with Indians. It was in those early days when quite early the mixed population surpassed the Native.   Curiosly, not always it was a male European with a female Indian. European women were sometimes captured by Amerindians in theirs rides, and that also contributed to the fusion of both populations. Today there are some Indians that look European and some "Whites" that look Indians.   Today, if you analyze the population found a genetical biass, where most of the Y-Chromosomes are European and most of the mtDNA es Amerindian, which just reflect this situation.   If for transffer you mean "passing" that also exist and quite often. The abusses against Amerindians were usually less marked in cities, so Indians used to migrate there. In cities Indians stopped to be servs, and that gave them the possibility to improve theirs lives. Unlike the stereotype, some merchants and artisans become quite rich people, so they got integrated to the Spanish society with full rights. When they assimilated and teach theirs kids in Western manners, sometimes purposely hidding theirs past and language.

 

Some genetic studies say a predominance of europeans in mestizos for certain regions, other the opposite. We should hope to more great and accurate studies.

 

By 1800 the demographic dates are with me, from the colonial census to modern authors passing by Humboldt:

 

See p.134 and following pages:

 

 

See p.57-406 and followign pages:

 

 

In the Spanish Empire, around 1800 the most important group was the Amerindians, followed by Mestizos and then whites. I have read about the "artificial" passing from the category of indian to mestizo not because a real mix but because acculturation, althought is possible the problem that you say about the natality in 1800 the dates are clear about a predominance of amerindian element. After that date the decrease of the relative number of amerindians and the increase of mestizos, should be explained again because acculturation or mixture with a more numerous base of amerindians. Like i said before a white migration wich could change this procces only arrived massivelly to specific countries.

 

 

 

The mass immigration of Europeans during the 19th and 20th century was a reality all over Latin America, and not only here. Argentina was perhaps the top receptor per capita. At beginning of the 20th century most population of Buenos Aires was foreign born. But there is also Germans in Bolivia, who produce quite a good beer.

 

No my friend, the well populated lands of Per�, Bolivia, Colombia and M�xico and the less populated but not appealing Central Am�rica weren't an special target of inmigrants, M�xico more but not massive. The migrations of the XIX and XX centuries affected heavilly to Cuba, Venezuela and Southern Cone, and Brazil, and far less to the other regions.

 

The immigration of Spaniards after Independence was a different matter. When they arrived to the Americas they found a population that was already mixed, and also other foreigners that came from Germany, Britain, Russia, Syria and Japan ....

 

That's right but they were so much that they alone changed radically the demography of Argentina and Cuba for example althought OK if northernafricans genes went to Am�rica in small numbers before 1800 they had time to multiply.

 

regards

 

 

 

What the hell is crucial for the science as crucial as any other genetic study in the world. Is important for us, and for latinos too, don't recognize but they are always so much worried about race questions...

 

 

They are not very realiable as sources of projection. Between 1800 and 1960 and depending on the region, our population increased 16 times! Between immigration, mixing and natural increase, the reality of Latin America changed radically.

 

You didn't see the point: it's very hard to explain a trully genetic change with those dates of 1800. In fact, anybody explain the increase of mestizos as mostly true mix but culturally, with the exceptions of mass migration countries.

 

 

Nah. Just read some studies about the genetics of Colombia or Mexico. Those studies exist in the web but I am too lazy to search them for you.

 

OK, i have not seen it yet, there is a genetic program for a national level in M�xico, any more but very local studies with the exception of Puerto Rico where the amerindian gene pool is greatest than thought before.

 

I don't think so.  Just get a phone book of Mexico city and see the last names there. Genetics studies do show a 50% European admixture in Mexico, no matter it can be hard to believe.

 

Irrelevant the first argument Pinguin, you can't compare the small (possibly no more than 100000 inmigrants) of M�xico between the independence and 1950 with the several thousands, millions, of other countries. Recently a lot of new inmigrants have go into M�xico but they are moving so much into and out for a true population change, we will see what about this new people in 50 years.

 

 

Originally posted by Ikki ..   That's right but they were so much that they alone changed radically the demography of Argentina and Cuba for example althought OK if northernafricans genes went to Am�rica in small numbers before 1800 they had time to multiply.

 

 

Well, Argentina almost got de-Hispanized. In fact, that country is more Italian that Andalucian. With respect of North Africans, there is no direct North African migration that I could recall. As I said before, those come by way of Spaniards and only them.

 

De-hispanized if you talk about the white minority, at all was "europeized" because when the independence most of the population was amerindian.

 

North Africans: agree, the northafrican genepool went to Am�rica indirectly through peninsular spanish and canarian islanders.

 

 

regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JAJAJA You are liying fellow, Latinoamericans are a sooooo much worried about race and what is worst, they don't recognice it:

 

1. Most of they don't agree about the amerindians features of their people; like said the guy of the first message if you talk with one latinoamerican with indian features and they are at least 50% (mestizos+amerindians), they take like an offense that you note these features and is a common, massive perception. They are white or latin but have not indian features.

 

2. All the latinoamerican societies have a strange admiration for White, what i say white, arian, people that is worry for all who see the problem from outside. Most of the movies that they do show only european latinos, in the case of "telenovelas" the thing is worst because the most important people are white, blond extremelly blonde people specially the women and in the other side don't show any people with amerindian features.

 

3. There are countries wich are directly racist: Cuba and Argentina. The first have a clear feelling of superiority over blakcs wich only have been diminished with the Revolution but not totally, the racism is under the appearence. The second is a more light racism but more expanded across the society: they are not indians, not blacks, they are italians and in the past better than anyother hispanic country.

 

Edit: 4. Of course all this, is the reflection of a society partially based on the race, with the whites on the upper echelon and blacks-indians on the lowest, mestizos and mulattos in the middle.

 

You have a serious problem if you don't see that racism was and is a real problem in Latinam�rica, in a less degree than Northam�rica but a real problem. Man, how do you want that the world look your region if yourself don't look carefully the region?

 

 

 

In that case, I will tell you just one thing. Iberia is also full of Indians, because many of your fellow people look quite similar to us

 

Of course, we have 90% of mestizo population and 8% amerindian. Er, was we talking about Latinoamerica?

 

 

 

 

Every single study in here, historical, genetical and anthropological shows admixture is clear and in the proportions I have mentions. Everything matches.   Now, if you want to believe passing is the only thing that matters, let be it. Your choice.

 

What the hell pinguin, read carefully again the thread. I have said that surelly amerindian is the most important element of the latinoamerican genepool. I have not negate in any moment that mixture happened, happened, massivelly, but i think is not all the explanation in fact the studies give me the reason for before 1800.

 

Fellow, you are talking with a guy that has lived all his life in Latin America. If you want to believe I am wrong, let it be.   You make me remember a group of dumb French tourists that once came to Chile to find Indians. They were put in a Mapuche community and they become very upset. They believed Mapuches were actors. They looked European to them, besides they didn't wear feathers .... Mapuches never did, and theirs hobby was to capture European women. A group of Mapuches that is quite famous are more blond than any Spaniard. Believe it or not.

 

In Canary Islands, the native population had a lot people of very white skin and blond hair. A lot of people today keep the same features. This was interpreted by nordic people like a heredity of germanic invaders and the poor local people, eager of a relation with the rich norther countries believe it until today. In fact, the blonde hair and pale skin is a legacy from the berbers of the near Atlas mountains where they today keep this features.

 

What think the people don't matter here, count only the science.

 

Edited by Ikki - 26-Feb-2008 at 23:12

 

The trees don't let you see the forest, when a latino feel offended by the "accusation" of to have indian features he is not offended by the inability of the other to recognize if he have incan or mayan ascendence, but by the fact that the other people have recognized amerindian, non european fashion in his face. That is the real offense for latinos and is clearly a racist reaction.

 

Note. Columbus and M�xico City are words wich can't stand in the same sentence.

 

Besides, you should know that the label "White" is used as synomim of Hispanized in Latin America. Nobody will confuse a blond "gringo" with a dark Spaniard, though. They look different. The later used to be quite poor before entering the EU, so people still don't admire them so much, to be sincere.

 

False, white, dark or blond, is clearly the epitome for latinoamerican societies like is clear when you look the cultural signs and the leaderships of these countries.

 

 

 

Is not "white", fellow. Is the American and British culture what impress us. We want to be as rich as gringos. Besides, people want to speak English, instead of the aboriginal language called Spanish. They usually target Hispanic culture and Catholicism as the reasons of the relative backwardness.

 

You are liying to your own people. The admiration for blond is the clearest sign of admiration to british and american wich is showed in many other fields, but the basis of this perception is a concept of white superiority over the society as prove very clearly the vast presence of whites, people clearly european, in the dominant positions of the society and in the products trough this society make the selfaffirmation like music, literature, cinema... Is a phenomenon wich have deepest roots than a recent fashion.

 

 

Not that I agree... However, to be sincery, Spanish society has been quite backwards in science and technology, up to recent times. Latin American even say all our troubles are rooted in the midiocre power than conquered us: Spain. No kidding.

 

As always, you use the attack to Spain as real argument in this discussion. 

 

 

Well, Political correctness is not very popular in these lands.   Latin Americans in general have another caracteristic: Xenophoby.

 

Agree point by point.

 

 

You are simply wrong. Your theory is crap. The more widespread genetics in Hispanic America is European. Even in Brazil, a country more heavily African, European genetics is also majoritary. Read the genetics studies available everywhere on Latin America.

 

Ah you mean, like this:

 

Chile a country affected by mass migration procces have at least 40% of amerindian admixture, Santiago the center of power of the spanish have a population with 84% amerindian inheritance by the female side, 22% by the male; more far from Santiago, less european influx:

 

 

Or Colombia, where some territories have different predominant influx:

 

 

Those dates don't refute my hypothesis.

 

 

I don't see what it has the Canary Island population has to do with the Americas.

 

Some people look the finger when the moon is indicated to they. You put an example of popular perception of race question, i put a counterexample where equally the popular perception is important. The point is that the relevance of non specialist people about this question is equal to: Zero. Only count the scientifical dates.

 

 

We preffer to be called by the name of the country we where born. For instance, I am not white or Latino. I am CHILEAN, and that's all that counts to me. The rest is baloney.   ...   Just keep researching if you are interested in that matter. Latinos won't help you much on that, really, because those research recall us the time of Nazi eugenics... We also don't like to be rats of laboratory for the enterteniment of foreigners. No sir.

 

Exactly, wich divine word made latinos in another category than the rest of common mortals? Genetics studies are crucials for the study of all populations, have been made and in far greatest numbers to europeans and this don't mean that europeans are rats of laboratory, or that this is only the idea of a nazi group

 

Note. Pinguin, have you really said that the concept of latino is a baloney??

 

 

In 1900 MOST people in Argentina was foreign. So, whatever population it has in 1800, the demography of that country changed.   Since the 1850 up to 1950 many countries applied the policy of whitewashing the country. Did you know that the relative percentage of Black population in Brazil, decreased from something like 50% Pure Black people, up today when only 5% is really pure Black, and the 40% has lot of admixture? Well, that was the policy of whitewashing by immigration in Brazil.

 

That's true and very interesting but don't reply my point here: according to Rosemblat and several stimations the amerindian population of Argentina was 200000 and the europeans was around 110000 over a population of 400000, in 1800. I said that the the mass migration changed the population, you that was a dehispanized procces, i that in general was europeized, you put the example of Chile, i said that Argentina was my point and that was correct my perception. Now you say that the population between 1800 and 1900 changed wich was my initial argument. I have not the exact dates for XIX century but is logical to think about a predominance of hispanics in the white group, and then a dehispanization because the italian inmgration like you said, at over a europeization procces.

 

Around 1900 the foreign population of Argentina was around 25%, all in all is sure that most of the native argentinians was of european ascendency by this time.

 

 

 

I don't know if this discussion go to anywhere, you said at the end that you are not interested so better we take off this waste of time. Better for both to take time for a more productive question.

 

regards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are so confused with me, opposite to Latinamerica where despective nickname in reference to spanish people are common, sudaka is only used by a small racist minority. I'm not of that minority.

 

 

 

Originally posted by Ikki ...      Now, you are the expert in Latin America?

 

Of course, i forget the divine destiny of latinos, that people sooo different from everybody, anybody can't talk about they, if we are in a world of information and where the people travel all around the world, don't matter, latino is the deepest mistery of Humanity. Please pinguin...

 

 

I don't deny many recent descendents of Northern European immigrants  ended in the upper class, and also you could find some private schools where people study only in German. However, we have more that a share of "brown power" in Latin America.   Look at this picture with former students of the Deutche Schule, for German immigrants. I count several with Amerindian features       By the way, Germans are a very admired minority in Chile. And we love theirs kuchen and beer, and some even love Polka . Oktoberfest in here is popular in Valdivia, for instance. Some German descendents are rich but many are not. They intermarry with us. Don't invent tales because here is not South Africa.   By the way, just tune CNN Spanish. I found that people very brown, indeed. Unlike Spaniards that all blond blue eyed. Don't fool me around.

 

 

 

Spaniards blond blue eyed?? Are you confused with actress of latino telenovelas?

 

Pinguin, try to deny the racist problem of Latinoam�rica and the huge difference between races, with the amerindians in all the lowest echelons of the society... No worst blind that who don't want to see.

 

 

You don't understand although I just say it once.   Read it carefully because I am not going to repeat. Otherwise I will acusse you of trolling.   Latin Americans consider Spanish CULTURE and ACHIEVEMENTS to be SECOND CLASS. Just consider Conquistadors that were pathetic fellows, and many ended dying of hunger! Or what about that pathetic nut that was Don Quixote Spain was a country where his most important scientist had to work abroad   There is people in here that blame SPANISH LANGUAGE as the cause or all our fatalities... There are even effort to teach English in mass to the people. At least some countries like mine are considering that possibility.

 

Trolling i? Trolling you my fellow, worst, you are closing the xenophoby here. The last time that i repeat this to you: we are not talking about Spain, or what is Spain, or what think latinos about Spain and the spanish. I'm talking about the upper class minority based on white-spaniard ancestry, if this is not well seen by latinos is irrelevant, the crucial point here is that this minority organize the society according with racial-groupal factors: you only need to see the politicians of these countries across two centuries and the unjust acces to the richness and opportunities of the societies.

 

Spain attack us first. Still today Spain's immigration police keep humilliating our tourists that still have some interest to visit that country. Anti-Spanish hate, that was very low during the time of the Spanish Civil War to not long ago, is rising again. I am afraid we will end hating Spain like in the times of Independence.

 

 

What the hell pinguin, YOU, in a debate about Latinamerica have attacked present Spain several times when was so much easy to close the discussion only to latinamerican questions...

 

 

Don't refute what I have said at all. You need a calculator to follow the arguments.   In the case of Chile, the fact that 70% of people have Amerindians mtDNA markers and 80% have European Y-Chromosomes is not contradictory with the fact that 70% of the genetics is European and 30% is local, because the three are different concepts. I am talking about autosomal DNA. In other words, counting the total number of genes in the genetic pool.   You must realize a person that carry an Amerindian DNA could look 100% European... whatever that means

 

Ah well, at the end you talk about concrete questions. Now show us those studies about the genetic of Latinamerica.

 

Latinos won theirs freedom by fighting. We have been pushed by "gringos" for a long time: Spaniards, British, Russians, other Europeans and U.S. people. We have 300 years of illegal Iberian occupation with levels of brutality you can't imagine. We have 200 years in between American invasions and fighting the Cold War for the interests of Americans and Russians.   People here is really feed up of foreigners. But they won't tell you directly, because you are a foreigner. It is a sort of a intimate felling we share. And that is understood only by the group of peoples in Latin America that know the same codes.   Have you never noticed that Latinos always put a barrier between you and them? And invisible barrier you can't understand why?   Well, we do. And is what I explained above. Latinos simply don't trust foreigners. The cause is our history, you know.

 

 

Oh my God pinguin, do you really believe all those tones of victimism???  

 

 

 

Do you really think so? Just ask the Nobel prize of genetics, Dr. Watson, if I am not wrong, and ask him about the inferiority of Black People. Don't you see these are the same people that worked for the Nazis?... Think about it.

 

Of course, if i use genetic studies is a nazi argument, if you use it you preserve the misterious essence of latinoamerican people, who anybody can understand.

 

Originally posted by Ikki ...   Note. Pinguin, have you really said that the concept of latino is a baloney??

 

 

Nope.

 

Explain me carefully this phrase:

 

 

Latino in this sentence is included in the baloney; now you say that you have not say that, i understand that latino is out of baloney. Chose option A or B, please.

 

 

 

 

Well, if you ask a question, I answer it and then you say I lie, I can't see how this discussion can continue.

 

Only two options are possible in a man who say that latinos don't care about race: Lie or Ignorance. I know that you are very intelligent, you have proved thousand times, so you only could be liying.

 

I tried to answer as sincerely as possible the feelings of the people of the region. It doesn't mean is my personal oppinion at all. However, I do understand why things are this way.

 

Thanks very much, now i have another direct experience in the political view of latinoamericans about Latinamerica.

 

See you in another place and time, good night.