Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is Latin America Indian?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Poll Question: Is Latin America Indian?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
4 [40.00%]
1 [10.00%]
5 [50.00%]
0 [0.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528 		  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is Latin America Indian?
    Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 02:50
Everyone seems to be hung up on genetics. Likewise, many are simplifying a complex region. I really enjoyed the original post, but Colombia is only a single slice of Latin America. So, my two shots:

First. Within a Latin context, "Mestizo" doesn't necessarily guarantee the the person has any Spanish blood. If someone of Indian blood speaks Spanish as the first language, generally lives away from a recognized Indian area, engages in an occupation that is not a traditionally recognized Indian occupation, and practices the national version of Roman Catholicism, then that person is a "Mestizo" even if they have a 100% Indian bloodline. "Indio" in much of Latin America is a perjorative term, used to designate those who are hopelessly stubborn, superstitious, and backward (or simply presumed to be so). 

Second. Latin America has European nations, Mestizo nations, Euro-Mestizo nations, Indian nations, and Caribbean Hispanic nations (White/Mulatto/Black with some Indian ancestry). Guatemala, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, and perhaps Paraguay are Indian nations (I would include Paraguay as a Mestizo nation, except they are unique in that the original Guarani language is alive and well, and spoken by the majority of the population, along with Spanish). Mestizo nations include Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, and Panama. Mestizo-European (Mestizo in the colonial period, but with later European immigration that has influenced their development and politics) nations are Colombia and Venezuela. And European nations include Costa Rica, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile.  Brazil is not included because that country's historical development, while similar, diverges significantly from the Latin model in that it fought no war for independence. The split with Portugal was amicable, and left in place a Royal family who still occasionally surface in the Brazilian press.

Of course, populations pertaining to each model exist within each latin country, but what differs is their representation with the total overall population, and their effect on the overall national culture. Someone mentioned that Uruguay has Blacks. Yes, they do. But you can live in Uruguay for years without ever seeing one. And the presence of a mere handful of Blacks does no render Uruguay a multi-cultural country. It is a European Latin-American country with far more in common with Spain or Italy than with Mexico. This despite the obvious parallels between Uruguayan Gauchos and Mexican Charros, the latter of whom were Mestizos (as were many, but not a majority, of the original Gauchos).
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 04:56
Originally posted by lirelou

 
Everyone seems to be hung up on genetics.


 
 
Well ... it begs the question on continuous unsubstantiated claim of 80%-90% of one-single European Y-chromosomes in Mestiso population for the entire multi-racial S America region.
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 06:54
Originally posted by pebbles

 
Not true ...
.... 
 
Regarding half-Amerindian mtDNA of Argentina's White-European population,prove it to us here !
 
 
I am starting to get upset with you, calling me a lier every single post. Please, learn a bit of western manners Angry; I have considered you a nice fellow so far. I don't want to change my mind.
 
Anyways. What has to do the Japanese Jomon culture with the history of the Americas ConfusedConfused. That surpases my comprension. Sorry.
 
Finally, the "proof" of the mtDNA of Argentina is everywhere. That's something Argentineans know. I will show a link here. If you don't agree, complain with the authors, OK?
 
This is the more important conclusion there:
 
Over 50% of the individuals tested carried either mtDNA or Y Amerindian markers, 10% both, 20% were of Amerindian patrilineage and less than 40% denoted non-Amerindian contribution in the uniparentally inherited markers
 
 
 
By the way, in my country, Chile, the Amerindian mtDNA is not 50% but 80%-
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 07:10
Originally posted by lirelou

Everyone seems to be hung up on genetics. Likewise, many are simplifying a complex region. I really enjoyed the original post, but Colombia is only a single slice of Latin America. So, my two shots:

First. Within a Latin context, "Mestizo" doesn't necessarily guarantee the the person has any Spanish blood. If someone of Indian blood speaks Spanish as the first language, generally lives away from a recognized Indian area, engages in an occupation that is not a traditionally recognized Indian occupation, and practices the national version of Roman Catholicism, then that person is a "Mestizo" even if they have a 100% Indian bloodline. "Indio" in much of Latin America is a perjorative term, used to designate those who are hopelessly stubborn, superstitious, and backward (or simply presumed to be so). 
 
A first misconception here. Mestizo is also a bad word in Spanish. And in second place, the idea there are pure Amerindians in Latin America must be taken carefully. It is true there are large Indigenous populations in the sense they are culturally Indigenous. However, that doesn't warranty they are pure Amerindian in blood. Large percentages of Amerindians today they are already mestizos, no matter they preserve theirs indigenous culture.
 
Complicated? Think a bit. In short: admixture not only affected to "Whites" but also to "Indians", both groups have some degrees of admixture of the other group already. Never wonder why Evo Morales is called "Morales" and not "Mamani"?
 
Originally posted by lirelou


Second. Latin America has European nations, Mestizo nations, Euro-Mestizo nations, Indian nations, and Caribbean Hispanic nations (White/Mulatto/Black with some Indian ancestry). Guatemala, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, and perhaps Paraguay are Indian nations (I would include Paraguay as a Mestizo nation, except they are unique in that the original Guarani language is alive and well, and spoken by the majority of the population, along with Spanish). Mestizo nations include Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador, and Panama. Mestizo-European (Mestizo in the colonial period, but with later European immigration that has influenced their development and politics) nations are Colombia and Venezuela. And European nations include Costa Rica, Uruguay, Argentina, and Chile.  Brazil is not included because that country's historical development, while similar, diverges significantly from the Latin model in that it fought no war for independence. The split with Portugal was amicable, and left in place a Royal family who still occasionally surface in the Brazilian press.
 
That classification of nations by race is an interesting exercise, but it is false. Uruguay has more than a few Blacks, for instance, and the people have quite a bit of Amerindian blood too, as Argentineans do. Of course not in the same extend than other Latin American countries, but they do. Actually, White Brazilians are a lot more European looking than Uruguayans or Argentineans.
Chile, my country, it is technically Castizo and not European. Even more, we are proud to be a warrior nation, product of the mixture between brave Indians and Spanish soldiers LOL
 
Brazil is not that different from the rest of Hispanic America. Brazil is a tri-racial country, with half its population European and the other mixed. A third of brazilians have Amerindian mtDNA and the other third have it African. In culture, Brazil is Portuguese rooted with strong Amerindian, African and other European influences. Although it is different than the rest, there is not country in Hispanic America that is identical to the next.
 

Originally posted by lirelou


Of course, populations pertaining to each model exist within each latin country, but what differs is their representation with the total overall population, and their effect on the overall national culture. Someone mentioned that Uruguay has Blacks. Yes, they do. But you can live in Uruguay for years without ever seeing one.
 
The only Hispanics in South America than celebrate Yemaya and love playing Candomble are the Uruguayans! Even more, my son went there not long ago and told me Blacks were quite numerous. I believe him.
 
Originally posted by lirelou

 And the presence of a mere handful of Blacks does no render Uruguay a multi-cultural country. It is a European Latin-American country with far more in common with Spain or Italy than with Mexico. This despite the obvious parallels between Uruguayan Gauchos and Mexican Charros, the latter of whom were Mestizos (as were many, but not a majority, of the original Gauchos).
 
Uruguay do have quite a bit of Europeans, but the suffer the Mestizo sindrome. I though an study not long ago that showed a percentage of Amerindian and African admixture in that population that don't match theirs dream of purity.


Edited by pinguin - 29-Mar-2009 at 07:14
Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 07:46
Originally posted by pinguin

Originally posted by pebbles

 
 
Regarding half-Amerindian mtDNA of Argentina's White-European population,prove it to us here !
 
 
 
 
I am starting to get upset with you, calling me a lier every single post. Please, learn a bit of western manners Angry
 
 
 
This is the more important conclusion there:
 
Over 50% of the individuals tested carried either mtDNA or Y Amerindian markers, 10% both, 20% were of Amerindian patrilineage and less than 40% denoted non-Amerindian contribution in the uniparentally inherited markers
 
 
By the way, in my country, Chile, the Amerindian mtDNA is not 50% but 80%-
 
 
 
 
Dude .. question & challenge are Western manners ! It's Orientals like Chinese and Japanese obey and follow.
 
This report still doesn't support 80%-90% European Y-chromosomes in Mestiso population of any Latin-American country.
 
* either mtDNA or Y Amerindian markers ( flimsy info )
* less than 40% denoted non-Amerindian
 
 
Then,prove it ?
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528 		  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 13:34
Hermano pinguino,

El unico pais latinoamericano en que no he ni trabajado ni vivido es lo suyo. Cuando mi compania queria mandarme a Chile en los anos 80, ya tenia un proyecto en Beni, Bolivia, y lastimamente tuve que mandar un amigo mio de Puerto Rico, quien si se enchulo de Chile!

Con respecto a la palabra "mestizo", francamente no comparto su opinion. Aun mas, cuando estamos tertuliando sobre la America Latina, donde la palabra esta fue entre las utilizadas por los espanoles para designar un estirpe de las gentes y culturas que alli habitaban, y siguen habitando. Me vas a decir que ni podemos hablar de "mestizaje"? 

(Bueno, para el beneficio de los angloparlantes) Sorry, mestizo may be a "bad word" in Chile, but it was not where I went to school. How about "mulato" and "sambo"? Have the politically correct pulled the Ecuadorian novel "Juyungo" (por Adalberto Ortiz, creo, pero ya ha sido anos que lo he leido) off the book shelves because it examines the question of colonial racial identities in emerging modern latin country, and freely uses such terms? Perhaps the whiter the country is, the more sensitive it gets. By the way, your comments of being a "warrior nation" sound almost like statements I heard in my university years from young idealists (Marxists in those days). Chile has the only real modern economy in Latin America. It may have taken some hits recently, but that was certainly an achievement to be proud of. Many Chileans may be able to trace ancestry to a "brave Indian and Spanish soldier", but I would bet that far more of their ancestors were later Spanish, German, French, Italian, and English immigrants (and a few Bluidy Scots).

En cuanto a sus comentarios sobre Brasil, ya he dicho lo dicho y no quiero inmiscuir el asunto. Sin embargo, en cuanto su aseveracion de que "there is not country in Hispanic America that is identical to the next." Claro, hombre. Tiene la razon. Sin embargo, entre ellos si hay paises y culturas que si se parecen. (Y, de nuevo, Brasil no es "hispano-americano" sino "lusitano-americano". Havia uma vez em meu vida Eo tambem falava portuges)

En cuanto a su hijo como testigo. Cuanto tiempo paso en Uruguay? "Many Blacks?" Debe haber quedado en un hotel lleno de clientela de Salvador de Bahia, o de turistas africanos.  Y celebran los "Uruguachos" Yemaya y juegen candomble? Ay, por Dios, Artigas debe estar dando vueltas en su tumba. Ni en Montevideo, ni Trenteitres, ni en Tacuarembo jamas oi a nadie ni mencionar Yemaya o candomble. Bueno, no he ido a Uruguay desde 1989, y siempre es posible que se fueron una ola de inmigrantes brasileros de Bahia. Pero tengo mis dudas. Oye, Santiago no es tan lejos de Montevideo. Porque no te vayas alla para averiguar el asunto po si mismo? Si un vuelo directo es costoso, tomalo por Buenos Aires, y por un precio modesto puedes coger un avion desde el aeropuerto de la ciudad de Buenos Aires, rumbo a Colonias (una media hora) para alli subir un autobus para Montevideo (Plaza Colon).
 

 

 
Originally posted by lirelou

 And the presence of a mere handful of Blacks does no render Uruguay a multi-cultural country. It is a European Latin-American country with far more in common with Spain or Italy than with Mexico. This despite the obvious parallels between Uruguayan Gauchos and Mexican Charros, the latter of whom were Mestizos (as were many, but not a majority, of the original Gauchos).
 
Uruguay do have quite a bit of Europeans, but the suffer the Mestizo sindrome. I though an study not long ago that showed a percentage of Amerindian and African admixture in that population that don't match theirs dream of purity.
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
lirelou View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 26-Mar-2009
Location: Tampa, FL
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 528 		  Quote lirelou Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 13:46
Sorry, I'll avoid Spanish in the future so everyone can read my reply. My point is that we are dealing in Cultural terms, not racial, though the particular racial makeup of a country, arising as it does from its history, gives rise to the culture. I have resided in Uruguay for short periods of time, all related to work, and requiring daily interaction with Uruguyans. I have done some travel in Uruguay, though over 70% of the population lives in Montevideo. I cannot agree with Pinguino that Uruguachos suffer "the Mestizo syndrome", though I note that our esteemed poster has also seen himself obligatted to use the term.

(note: Uruguachos is the nickname that Uruguayans apply to themselves.)
Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 15:52
Uruguayans are also known as Charruas. I think that name at least is more syncere, for them. With respect to the Blacks, I saw the pictures. They weren't Brazilians.

Edited by pinguin - 29-Mar-2009 at 16:00
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 17:52
Originally posted by pebbles

I am starting to get upset with you, calling me a lier every single post. Please, learn a bit of western manners Angry
 
Indeed. But calling people liers is not.  You may say I am wrong. I maybe actually wrong and I would accept it, if I found you the reason. However, when you call me a lier and you are assuming I am tricking you intentionally. That, seriously, offends me.
 
 
 
Originally posted by pebbles

   
Originally posted by pinguin

This is the more important conclusion there:
 
Over 50% of the individuals tested carried either mtDNA or Y Amerindian markers, 10% both, 20% were of Amerindian patrilineage and less than 40% denoted non-Amerindian contribution in the uniparentally inherited markers
 
By the way, in my country, Chile, the Amerindian mtDNA is not 50% but 80%-
 
This report still doesn't support 80%-90% European Y-chromosomes in Mestiso population of any Latin-American country.
 
* either mtDNA or Y Amerindian markers ( flimsy info )
* less than 40% denoted non-Amerindian
 
 
Then,prove it ?
 
OK, that's true. That only proves Argentineans have admixture of Amerindians as anyone else. Let me show you some other reports.
 
This comes from Ecuador. A very Amerindian country with an important Black minority.
See the results.
 
 
The more important there is the following:
 
Contributions to Mestizo Y chromosomes were estimated to be 70% European, 28% Amerindian, and 2% African, whereas in autosomes the contributions were 19%, 73%, and 8%, respectively, which underlines the sexual asymmetry in mating, with Europeans contributing mostly males. European Y-chromosome haplotypes in Mestizos were similar to those in Spain. Moreover, about 10% of European Y chromosomes were found in the Amerindian Kichwa
 
And this comes from Cuba. An "African" mulatto country:
 
 
The more important thing is the conclusion:
 
The Native American contribution to present-day Cubans accounted for 33% of the maternal lineages, whereas Africa and Eurasia contributed 45% and 22% of the lineages, respectively. This Native American substrate in Cuba cannot be traced back to a single origin within the American continent, as previously suggested by ancient DNA analyses. Strikingly, no Native American lineages were found for the Y-chromosome, for which the Eurasian and African contributions were around 80% and 20%, respectively.
 
So, it shows clearly that (unlike the myth say) Taino admixed in the Cuban population by the maternal line.30% of cubans carry Native mtDNA.
 
It also show that 80% of males of Cuba, independently on how they look, are descendents by the paternal of Europeans!
 
That's what I am talking about. All Latin American countries are highly European in the paternal line, and significatively Indigenous in the maternal lines.
 
 
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 29-Mar-2009 at 17:59
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 18:16
Originally posted by lirelou

Hermano pinguino,

El unico pais latinoamericano en que no he ni trabajado ni vivido es lo suyo. Cuando mi compania queria mandarme a Chile en los anos 80, ya tenia un proyecto en Beni, Bolivia, y lastimamente tuve que mandar un amigo mio de Puerto Rico, quien si se enchulo de Chile!

Con respecto a la palabra "mestizo", francamente no comparto su opinion. Aun mas, cuando estamos tertuliando sobre la America Latina, donde la palabra esta fue entre las utilizadas por los espanoles para designar un estirpe de las gentes y culturas que alli habitaban, y siguen habitando. Me vas a decir que ni podemos hablar de "mestizaje"? 
 
Por supuesto. Pero si le dices mestizo a alguien, lo más probable es que lo ofendas.
Of course. However, calling mestizo to somebody could offends.

Originally posted by lirelou


(Bueno, para el beneficio de los angloparlantes) Sorry, mestizo may be a "bad word" in Chile, but it was not where I went to school. How about "mulato" and "sambo"? Have the politically correct pulled the Ecuadorian novel "Juyungo" (por Adalberto Ortiz, creo, pero ya ha sido anos que lo he leido) off the book shelves because it examines the question of colonial racial identities in emerging modern latin country, and freely uses such terms? Perhaps the whiter the country is, the more sensitive it gets.
 
Indeed. Some Latin American writers like to use spicy words. Particularly communist writers like Garcia Marques and others.
 
Originally posted by lirelou

By the way, your comments of being a "warrior nation" sound almost like statements I heard in my university years from young idealists (Marxists in those days).
 
If you read the history of Chile you will find out about the War of Arauco that lasted 300 hundred years. You will find about this country that was the only in the Americas that was in deficit with Spain. And you will also find out that it was a military post during those times.
If you go further to the present you will notice we have had 2 wars we won, and you will also notice we are a country always ready to fight our neighbours.
 
Our foundational myth is we are a nation that was the result of the fusion of two warrior people.
 
As I said once, not all Latin American countries are pura vida like friendly Costa Rica, or easy going as Puerto Rico. We have a different mentality.
 
Originally posted by lirelou

Chile has the only real modern economy in Latin America. It may have taken some hits recently, but that was certainly an achievement to be proud of. Many Chileans may be able to trace ancestry to a "brave Indian and Spanish soldier", but I would bet that far more of their ancestors were later Spanish, German, French, Italian, and English immigrants (and a few Bluidy Scots).
 
Of course. We have other people as well. But Chileans preffer warrior people, like the Brits and the Germans. No wonder they were imported in the past to teach us the arts of war. We still play Wagner during our military marches Confused

Originally posted by lirelou


En cuanto a sus comentarios sobre Brasil, ya he dicho lo dicho y no quiero inmiscuir el asunto. Sin embargo, en cuanto su aseveracion de que "there is not country in Hispanic America that is identical to the next." Claro, hombre. Tiene la razon. Sin embargo, entre ellos si hay paises y culturas que si se parecen. (Y, de nuevo, Brasil no es "hispano-americano" sino "lusitano-americano". Havia uma vez em meu vida Eo tambem falava portuges)
 
Of course. However, Brazil is closer in culture to my country than Haiti, Japan or Britain. We even share the same bad words Confused

Originally posted by lirelou


En cuanto a su hijo como testigo. Cuanto tiempo paso en Uruguay? "Many Blacks?" Debe haber quedado en un hotel lleno de clientela de Salvador de Bahia, o de turistas africanos.  Y celebran los "Uruguachos" Yemaya y juegen candomble? Ay, por Dios, Artigas debe estar dando vueltas en su tumba.
 
God! Don't you know the 4% of the Uruguayan population is Black? There are as much Blacks in Uruguay than in Peru! That's something Uruguayans admit. I wonder how you didn't see them.
 
Originally posted by lirelou

Ni en Montevideo, ni Trenteitres, ni en Tacuarembo jamas oi a nadie ni mencionar Yemaya o candomble. Bueno, no he ido a Uruguay desde 1989, y siempre es posible que se fueron una ola de inmigrantes brasileros de Bahia. Pero tengo mis dudas. Oye, Santiago no es tan lejos de Montevideo. Porque no te vayas alla para averiguar el asunto po si mismo? Si un vuelo directo es costoso, tomalo por Buenos Aires, y por un precio modesto puedes coger un avion desde el aeropuerto de la ciudad de Buenos Aires, rumbo a Colonias (una media hora) para alli subir un autobus para Montevideo (Plaza Colon).
 
Umm. It is not in my plans yet. I would preffer to end to visit my country first. Living here is not easy to know it fully. My target is going to Punta Arenas and the Antartic, and probably to Easter Island in another opportunity. It is money though. People don't realize that for me going to those places of my own country as far away as an Scandinavian going to Spain!
 
 

 

 
Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 20:08
Originally posted by pinguin

 
  
And this comes from Cuba. An "African" mulatto country:
 
 
The more important thing is the conclusion:
 
This Native American substrate in Cuba cannot be traced back to a single origin within the American continent, as previously suggested by ancient DNA analyses. Strikingly, no Native American lineages were found for the Y-chromosome, for which the Eurasian and African contributions were around 80% and 20%, respectively.
  
 
 
 
This report is abviously flawed to note no Amerindian Y-chromosomes,and Eurasian is ambiguous as it conveniently excludes Mestiso category which has " hidden " indigenous origin.
 
Again,only 132 males individuals.
 
Yes,I know Cuba has some pure Spanish descendants but don't think they are @ 80% though.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Mar-2009 at 20:35
Originally posted by pebbles

 This report is abviously flawed to note no Amerindian Y-chromosomes,and Eurasian is ambiguous as it conveniently excludes Mestiso category which has " hidden " indigenous origin.
 
Obviously you didn't read the report fully or you didn't understand it. Obviously you just want to put your personal oppinions above science.
 
Originally posted by pebbles

Again,only 132 males individuals.
 
As far as I know, only male individuals carry Y chromosomes. With respect to the small numbers, at least they are more than a hundred... Your oppinion, on the other hand, only represents the view of one individual, yourself.
 
 
Originally posted by pebbles

Yes,I know Cuba has some pure Spanish descendants but don't think they are @ 80% though.
 
I am afraid you don't understand something obvious. Genetics simply shows a historical fact we are very clear. Most male lines in Latin America are of European origin, including in them people that may have Indian, Black or even Chinese phenotype.
Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2009 at 04:06
Originally posted by pinguin

 
Originally posted by pebbles

 
This report is abviously flawed to note no Amerindian Y-chromosomes,and Eurasian is ambiguous as it conveniently excludes Mestiso category which has " hidden " indigenous origin.
 
 
 
Obviously you didn't read the report fully or you didn't understand it. Obviously you just want to put your personal oppinions above science.
 
 
 
 
 
Apparently,you tried to emphasis on the 80% for Eurasian group as noted in bold print.Either you don't understand what the word Eurasian means or hope others are ignorant as you.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2009 at 04:35
I know what Eurasian mean. In the Latin American context, with the demographics we have, it means almost 99% of the times, European, Central or Western Asian. Our East Asian populations are too small to be significative. In Cuba, it is estimated 1% of the people has that last origin.
 
It is also true, not all the "European" genetics is Iberian. Perhaps close to 50% of that group is Iberian. Since the beginning, large numbers of non-Iberians (Germans, Italians, French and even Irish and other nationalities) settled in Latin America. 


Edited by pinguin - 30-Mar-2009 at 04:37
Back to Top
calvo View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 20-May-2007
Location: Spain
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 846 		  Quote calvo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2009 at 08:38
Originally posted by lirelou

Sorry, I'll avoid Spanish in the future so everyone can read my reply. My point is that we are dealing in Cultural terms, not racial, though the particular racial makeup of a country, arising as it does from its history, gives rise to the culture. I have resided in Uruguay for short periods of time, all related to work, and requiring daily interaction with Uruguyans. I have done some travel in Uruguay, though over 70% of the population lives in Montevideo. I cannot agree with Pinguino that Uruguachos suffer "the Mestizo syndrome", though I note that our esteemed poster has also seen himself obligatted to use the term.

(note: Uruguachos is the nickname that Uruguayans apply to themselves.)


As I mentioned in another thread before, "Mestizo" is a word used in academic, sociological circles, not in everyday life like "Black" and "White" in the USA.

Ethnically speaking, the only groups with a distinct identity are the indigenous nationalities; those who still belong to a determined indigenous tribe, practice the customs, and speak the language. The rest of the Spanish-speaking population is collectively referred to academically as "Mestizo" regardless whether they're 99% Indian or 99% European by blood. However, in everyday life, they simply identify themselves first and foremost with their nationality.

All this debate about blood purity doesn't make any sense in the original meaning of this thread, as to whether Latin American is "Indian".
If by having the blood of one ancestral nationality makes you a member of that nationality, then Rumanians would be Dacians, Tunisians would still be Carthaginians, Turks would be Hitites, Russians would be Finno-Ugrians, Spaniards and Portuguese would be Celtiberians, nothern Italians would be Etruscans, and Sicilians would be Greek.....
which of course is NOT the case.







Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Mar-2009 at 08:54
Originally posted by Jams

 
I voted "Both at once", since evidence pointing to that has been posted here.
 
 
 
I also voted " both at once ",Latin-European ( Western ) is a dominate force in socio-political-cultural  and Amerindian presence is more or less visible across the Southern Hemisphere.
 
 
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959 		  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Mar-2009 at 01:14
I am sure it depends on what country you go to or even region such as Argentina compared to Chile.

When I was in Mazatlan, Mexico a good portion of the population was of Spanish extract. I saw the divirsity in their faces and some were 100% Spanish while others varied. Then there were the Indians from the Sierra Madre Mountains who were 100% Native. Like the Gypsies in Greece/Turkey they were smaller than most Mexicans and darker and sadly the husbands sent their women and kids out to beg for money. I was told by our Mexican host that there was a large Spanish influence in Mazatlan but I have not been there in a while. When I was there it was over 800,000 and now it is slightly over 1 million so things have changed I am sure. I only met one girl who was half German and had blonde hair blue eyes and did not look Mexican at all so that is rare in Mazatlan or then.
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Mar-2009 at 03:16
Originally posted by pinguin

 
 
 
Cuba: An "African" mulatto country
  
It also show that 80% of males of Cuba, independently on how they look, are descendents by the paternal of Europeans!
 
 
 
 
 
Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies at the University of Miami says that 62% is Black.
 
Estimates of the percentage of people of African descent in the Cuban population vary enormously, ranging from 33.9 per cent to 62 percent
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Mar-2009 at 04:02
Originally posted by pebbles

Originally posted by pinguin

 
Cuba: An "African" mulatto country
  
It also show that 80% of males of Cuba, independently on how they look, are descendents by the paternal of Europeans!
 
 
 
Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies at the University of Miami says that 62% is Black.
 
Estimates of the percentage of people of African descent in the Cuban population vary enormously, ranging from 33.9 per cent to 62 percent
 
That's balloney. They are applying the White-African American criteria.
Please, try to READ what I write before bringing your oppinion.
 
Besides, you should realize that in genetics, the percentage of descendency don't had 100%. It is perfectly possible that in Cuba an average of 45% descend of Africans, while 80% descend from Europeans and 30% descend from Indigenous people Confused. That happens because many descend from two lines at once. They are mixed. Those percentages are genealogical and aren't very meaninful in scientific terms.
 
It is different if I say that 80% of chromosomes are European and 20% are African or Native, for example. Or if I give percentages in mtDNA or autosomal DNA. In that case we are talking about measure on the genetic pool in a country. That's scientific.
 
I say they are European in the parental line, which mean they carry European Y chromosomes. Please READ.
 


Edited by pinguin - 31-Mar-2009 at 04:12
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Mar-2009 at 04:07
Originally posted by eaglecap

...When I was in Mazatlan, Mexico a good portion of the population was of Spanish extract. I saw the divirsity in their faces and some were 100% Spanish while others varied. Then there were the Indians from the Sierra Madre Mountains who were 100% Native. Like the Gypsies in Greece/Turkey they were smaller than most Mexicans and darker and sadly the husbands sent their women and kids out to beg for money. ...
 
Indeed. That's a curious observation. Even in Pre-Columbian times, the Aztecs separated themselves from the nomadic tribes from the sierras. It was the sedentary natives who mixed with Spaniards, while those natives that once where outside the society they are still in the same condition today.
 
In Latin America, lots of native people mixed with Spaniards and lost theirs identity, becoming other Hispanics more. However, not all natives participated in that assimilation and integration, and the people that today we call Indians, are the descendents of those that lived outside the Spanish colonial societies.
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.