The Invention of Hispanics: What It Says About the Politics of Race (2023)

America’s surging politics of victimhood and identitarian division did not emerge organically or inevitably, as many believe. Nor are these practices the result of irrepressible demands by minorities for recognition, or for redress of past wrongs, as we are constantly told. Those explanations are myths, spread by the activists, intellectuals, and philanthropists who set out deliberately, beginning at mid-century, to redefine our country. Their goal was mass mobilization for political ends, and one of their earliest targets was the Mexican-American community. These activists strived purposefully to turn Americans of this community (who mostly resided in the Southwestern states) against their countrymen, teaching them first to see themselves as a racial minority and then to think of themselves as the core of a pan-ethnic victim group of “Hispanics”—a fabricated term with no basis in ethnicity, culture, or race.

This transformation took effort—because many Mexican Americans had traditionally seen themselves as white. When the 1930 Census classified “Mexican American” as a race, leaders of the community protested vehemently and had the classification changed back to white in the very next census. The most prominent Mexican-American organization at the time—the patriotic, pro-assimilationist League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC)—complained that declassifying Mexicans as white had been an attempt to “discriminate between the Mexicans themselves and other members of the white race, when in truth and fact we are not only a part and parcel but as well the sum and substance of the white race.” Tracing their ancestry in part to the Spanish who conquered South and Central America, they regarded themselves as offshoots of white Europeans.

Such views may surprise readers today, but this was the way many Mexican Americans saw their race until mid-century. They had the law on their side: a federal district court ruled inIn Re Ricardo Rodríguez(1896) that Mexican Americans were to be considered white for the purposes of citizenship concerns. And so as late as 1947, the judge in another federal case (Mendez v. Westminster) ruled that segregating Mexican-American students in remedial schools in Orange County was unconstitutional because it represented social disadvantage, not racial discrimination. At that time Mexican Americans were as white before the law as they were in their own estimation.

Half a century later, many Mexican Americans had been persuaded of a very different origin story. Among the persuaders-in-chief was Paul Ylvisaker, head of the Public Affairs Program at New York’s wealthy Ford Foundation during the 1950s and ’60s. Though little-known today, he wielded great power and influence to advance a particular vision of social justice inspired partly by socialism and its politics of resentment. Ylvisaker hoped, as he later put it in a 1991 essay, “The Future of Hispanic Nonprofits,” that Mexican Americans could be organized into a “united front.” That concept, formulated in 1922 by the Comintern, implied a union of disparate groups on the Left into what the Comintern’s 4th World Congress called “a common struggle to defend the immediate, basic interests of the working class against the bourgeoisie.”

Ylvisaker, who saw philanthropy as “the passing gear” of social change, set off to find out if something similar was possible with Mexican Americans. In 1968, he poured $2.2 million in seed funding into the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), a national advocacy conglomerate whose headquarters still buzz with activity in Los Angeles today.

He built on foundations laid by the organizing guru Saul Alinsky, who had begun the effort to consolidate the Mexican-American vote during Ed Roybal’s 1949 L.A. City Council election. Roybal, an army veteran and distant descendant of New Mexico’s Spanish settlers, was one of many Democrats at the time whose success in local politics owed much to Alinsky’s organizing tactics. Alinsky’s groups also trained men like Herman Gallegos, Julian Samora, and Ernesto Galarza—Chicano Movement intellectuals who used Ylvisaker’s Ford Foundation money (starting with a one-year grant of $630,000) to found the interest group La Raza in 1968.

What all these radicals sought—and were quite successful at eventually achieving—was to analogize the experience of black Americans to that of Latinos. The term La Raza, literally “the race,” by itself epitomized this process of racialization. Ylvisaker was direct on this point. In 1964 he handed UCLA researchers the then-goodly sum of $647,999 for a deep survey of Mexican Americans in the Southwest. One of the things he wanted this survey to find out was in what respect the Mexican-American experience was comparable to that of “Negroes today.”

Peter Skerry, a political scientist at Boston College, discussed this movement in his 1993 book,Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority. The idea, Skerry wrote, was to convince people that “like blacks, Mexican Americans comprise a racial minority group. This abstraction poses no problems for the ideologically oriented Chicano activists who see the world in such terms.”

The process would only work if Mexican Americans “accepted a disadvantaged minority status,” as sociologist G. Cristina Mora of U.C. Berkeley put it in her study,Making Hispanics(2014). But Mexican Americans themselves left no doubt that they did not feel like members of a collectively oppressed minority at all. As Skerry noted, “[the] race idea is somewhat at odds with the experience of Mexican Americans, over half of whom designate themselves racially as white.” Even in the early 1970s, according to Mora, many Mexican-American leaders retained the view that “persons of Latin American descent were quite diverse and would eventually assimilate and identify as white.” And yet “Spanish/Hispanic/Latino” is now a well-established ethnic category in the U.S. Census, and many who select it have been taught to see themselves as a victmized underclass. How did this happen?

Assimilation and Its Discontents

(Video) Why Latino Voters’ Political Shifts Could Decide 2022’s Key Races | WSJ

Assimilation has been a goal of Mexican Americans for most of their history. One hundred fifteen thousand or so former citizens of Mexico chose to stay north of the Rio Grande after the 1846-48 Mexican-American War. They occupied a territory much like many others that America obtained either through purchase or at the point of a sword. Like the Dutch of New York, or the Cajuns and Spanish of the Louisiana Purchase, Mexican Americans freely intermarried with the Scottish, Irish, Scots-Irish, and German Americans who populated the Southwest.

Well into the 1960s, a desire to be absorbed into the great American melting pot made many Mexican Americans suspicious of continued immigration, which was high from the 1890s on. Mexican Americans concluded that “the needs and interests of American citizens simply had to take precedence over the problems faced by the growing Mexican immigrant population,” according to the U.C. San Diego social scientist David G. Gutiérrez in his bookWalls and Mirrors(1995). For most community leaders, “Mexican Americans were in fact Americans and therefore should make every effort to assimilate into the American social and cultural mainstream.”

Two organizations stood out for their support of assimilation. One was LULAC, created in 1929 to help Latinos improve their lot through education and employment; by the early 1940s, LULAC had 80 chapters in several states. The other was the Mexican American Movement (MAM) and its monthly newspaper,La Voz Mexicana(theMexican Voice), which ran between 1938 and 1944. A MAM editorial in theVoicedeclared: “If you desire to remain here, if your future is here, you must become a citizen, an American.”

Continued immigration made this process harder. Eminent social scientist George I. Sánchez of the University of Texas told theNew York Timesin 1951 that illegal immigration in large numbers could transform “the Spanish-speaking people of the Southwest from an ethnic group which might be assimilated with reasonable facility into what I call a culturally indigestible peninsula of Mexico.”

After World War II, however, activists started to become very critical of such assimilationist tendencies. Roybal’s election campaign drew attention to the criticisms, as did the 1948 presidential run of Henry Wallace, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s former vice president. Wallace often spoke to crowds in Spanish while on government business. Scholar Kenneth C. Burt does not exaggerate when he writes in U.C. Berkeley’sPublic Affairs Reportof 2002 that these races were “a turning point in American politics.” They opened a new era of identitarianism for those who wished to win the Mexican-American vote. At the same time, sympathetic groups emerged like the Community Service Organization (CSO), financed by Alinsky and supervised by one of his top lieutenants, Fred Ross, from 1947 onward. What the CSO wanted was votes, and thus the politicization of a Mexican-American bloc.

Ross, dubbed “Red Ross” by his critics, feared Mexican Americans lacked “civic organization that could provide a base for people to work on their own problems and to cooperate with other groups that shared similar goals.” Other activist organizations agreed with him. Ross’s initiative soon began to pay dividends, however. The CSO registered 15,000 new voters for the Wallace campaign, especially in places like L.A.’s Boyle Heights. In that same article from thePublic Affairs Report, Burt calls Boyle Heights “a cauldron of leftist political activity” where residents were “radicalized by events in their home countries (including the Russian Revolution and the Mexican Revolution).”

Within a decade, there had emerged what sociologists Edward Telles and Vilma Ortiz described in their bookGenerations of Exclusion(2008) as “an explicitly nonwhite racial identity…which provided fertile ground for progressive political activism, including the Chicano movement.” Carmen Samora, daughter of La Raza’s Julian Samora, argued in her 2011 doctoral thesis for the University of New Mexico that “The CSO effectively politicized the community of Mexican immigrants and Mexican Americans in Los Angeles after WWII.”

To the CSO and its new wave of activists, assimilation as embraced by older groups such as LULAC implied a degrading concession that Mexican culture was inferior. “Americanization came to embody the Anglo majority’s attitudes,” wrote George J. Sánchez, a professor of American studies at the University of Southern California, inBecoming Mexican American(1993). For the new generation of activists, identifying with America felt uncomfortably like disowning Mexico.

Indeed, one of the sustaining creeds of U.S. politics since the founding has been that America’s republican form of government and the culture that support it aresuperiorto others. Why else would millions of settlers and immigrants over hundreds of years be drawn so steadily to America? Seeking to explain America’s distinctive attraction, the social scientist Louis Hartz in his classicLiberal Tradition in America(1955) noted (not without some consternation) that America lacked a feudal tradition, and that this made the U.S. uniquely impervious to both socialism and reactionary conservatism. Both those movements thrived in Continental Europe and its colonial offshoot, Latin America, where theyhadexperienced feudalism. American liberalism, by contrast, bred an individualistic ethos and an attachment to natural rights and private property.

In other words, a distinctive set of beliefs, customs, and habits supported the American political system. If the Cajun, the Dutch, the Spanish—and the Mexicans—were to be allowed into the councils of government, they would have to adopt these mores and abandon some of their own. It is hard to argue that this formula has failed. Writing in 2004, political scientist Samuel Huntington reminded us that “Millions of immigrants and their children achieved wealth, power, and status in American society precisely because they assimilated themselves into the prevailing culture.”

(Video) What Being Hispanic and Latinx Means in the United States | Fernanda Ponce | TEDxDeerfield

Mexico has a history of feudalism and a tradition that de-emphasizes private property. Itsejidosystem consisted of communally owned lands that were tilled by individuals, but to which those individuals had no title. Americans desiring the assimilation of Mexican Americans into the national polity might encourage the retention of, say, strong family units that transmit a robust work ethic to new generations. At the same time, they would be loath to see them import other mores that would weaken America’s attachment to private property and civic spirit.

So when the activist-scholar Ernesto Galarza complained in his 1973 essay “Alviso” that assimilation made Mexicans in America lose their collectivist traditions, so that “[b]y the beginning of the 20th century these traditions had been replaced by a characteristic version of [W]estern, individualistic society,” he was definitely on to something. That was the idea.

Galarza cut his political teeth during the Wallace and Roybal campaigns. Both candidates attracted support from radical elements, including Communists and community organizers who increasingly saw Mexican Americans as a potential source of political power—if only they would consent to being organized around feelings of racial grievance.

Playing the Race Card

The activists who fomented such grievances had two weapons at their disposal: ideology, and the economic incentives that government and private actors soon began offering to members of groups who claimed to be as oppressed as blacks had been.

On the ideological front, the activists had realized that the vehicle for radical change would not be the workingman, but the identity group. They were influenced by European Communist thinker Antonio Gramsci, who in the 1930s had a transformative epiphany: Marx had promised that the working class would overthrow the bourgeoisie, but the working class had been astonishingly bad at achieving revolution. He and others later, particularly the German-American Columbia University Professor Herbert Marcuse, agreed that it was nearly impossible to instill into the proletariat the feelings of resentment that would conduce to mass organization. Man can aspire to improve his economic condition, after all. What he cannot change is his race or sex.

These weren’t just theories: Marcuse took a personal hand. He directly shaped the worldview of the future Black Panther Angela Davis, to whom he taught philosophy at Brandeis. His exhortations to destroy the patriarchal family were repeated nearly verbatim by the feminist theorist Kate Millet, with whom Marcuse held a famous “Dialogue on Feminism and Socialism” at U.C. San Diego in 1975. “All liberation depends on the consciousness of servitude,” wrote Marcuse in his 1964 book,One-Dimensional Man. The working class, however, had no interest in such self-realization. “[T]hey find their soul in their automobile, hi-fi set, split-level home, kitchen equipment,” Marcuse despaired. The vanguard of the revolution therefore had to come from “the substratum of the outcasts and outsiders, the exploited and persecuted of other races and other colors.”

Thus, whatever their individual aspirations, Mexican Americans (and later Hispanics) had to begin accepting their new status as substratum outcasts. The critical theorists saw the division of the country as a propitious opportunity to create a “counter-hegemony” and upend America’s value system. President Lyndon B. Johnson’s press secretary, Bill Moyers, recounted years later (1978) in theNew Perspectives Quarterlythat he would send LBJ essays by Marcuse on how the Great Society “requires the transformation of power structures standing in the way of its fulfillment.” It is hard to believe that Johnson read Marcuse’s abstruse writing, but obviously those around him did.

Which brings us to the economic incentives. Activists saw a pot of gold when Johnson decided in the mid-1960s that the government was going to spend lots of money on the Great Society. Benefits such as quotas in government contracts, electoral redistricting, and affirmative action would eventually be dangled as the wages of minoritization. To be able to tell a tale of oppression and discrimination would help get intended beneficiaries anything from a Small Business Administration loan to a spot in the incoming class at Princeton.

The husband and wife duo of Frances Fox Piven (a prominent socialist) and Richard Cloward (then a professor at Columbia University) sounded almost giddy when they wrote in theNationin 1966, “Whereas America’s poor have not been moved in any number by radical political ideologies, they have sometimes been moved by their economic interests.” Cloward was no mere bystander. His research in 1960 with his fellow professor Lloyd Ohlin had led to the idea of creating local neighborhood organizations to organize and radicalize minorities. That study was then used by the Ford Foundation to justify its “Gray Areas” project, an initiative that got the ball rolling with grants to community organizing groups in Boston, Philadelpiha, Oakland, New Haven, and Washington, D.C. When Johnson launched his Great Society, a major source of inspiration was Gray Areas. It was founded and funded by Paul Ylvisaker.

(Video) A Conversation With Latinos on Race | Op-Docs

Broadening the Horizons

It remained a problem, however, that most Mexican Americans simply did not think they had suffered oppression akin to that of blacks. This actually became clear in Ylvisaker’s 1966 Ford Foundation-funded mega-study, which revealed a deep ambivalence on the topic. Based on interviews with 1,550 residents of Los Angeles and San Antonio, the findings were published by UCLA researchers Leo Grebler, Joan Moore, and Ralph Guzman under the titleThe Mexican-American People: The Nation’s Second Largest Minority.

As the title suggests, the study was designed to prove that Mexican Americans constituted a racial minority whose grievances raised (or lowered) it to victimhood and therefore entitled it to benefits. The new leaders that had emerged from the L.A. cauldron “were beginning to recognize that the ‘national minority’ definition would ease rather than aggravate the group’s problems,” wrote the researchers. “The concrete gains that would result from a joint classification with other disadvantaged national minorities were increasingly seen as more than offsetting a possible loss.”

But even the study’s authors admitted that the narrative was flawed. “Prejudice has been a loaded topic of conversation in any Mexican-American community,” they wrote. “Indeed, merely calling Mexican-Americans a ‘minority’ and implying that the population is the victim of prejudice and discrimination has caused irritation among many who prefer to believe themselves indistinguishable [from] white Americans…. [T]here are light-skinned Mexican-Americans who have never experienced the faintest…discrimination in public facilities, and many with ambiguous surnames have also escaped the experiences of the more conspicuous members of the group.”

Even worse, there was also “the inescapable fact that…even comparatively dark-skinned Mexicans…could get service even in the most discriminatory parts of Texas,” according to the report. These experiences, so different from those of blacks in the South or even parts of the North, had produced

a long and bitter controversy among middle-class Mexican Americans about defining the ethnic group as disadvantaged by any other criterion than individual failures. The recurring evidence that well-groomed and well-spoken Mexican Americans can receive normal treatment has continuously undermined either group or individual definition of the situation as one entailing discrimination.

It is incumbent on us to pause and note exactly what these UCLA researchers were bemoaning. Their own survey was revealing that Mexican-Americans’ lived experiences did not square with their being passive victims of invidious, structural discrimination, much less racial animus. They owned their own failures, which—their experience told them—were remediable through individual conduct, not mass mobilization. Their touchstones were individualism, personal responsibility, family, solidarity, and independence—all cherished by most Americans at the time, but anathema to the activists.

The study openly admitted that reclassification as a collective entity serves the “purposes of enabling one to see the group’s problems in the perspective of the problems of other groups.” The aim was to show “that Mexican Americans share with Negroes the disadvantages of poverty, economic insecurity and discrimination.” The same thing, however, could have been said in the late 1960s of the Scots-Irish in Appalachia or Italian Americans in the Bronx. But these experiences were not on the same level as the crushing and legal discrimination that African Americans had faced on a daily basis. That is why the survey respondents emphasized “the distinctiveness of Mexican Americans” from blacks and “the difference in the problems faced by the two groups.” The UCLA researchers came out pessimistic: Mexican Americans were “not yet easy to merge with the other large minorities in political coalition.”

With the help of the Ford Foundation, however, that would soon change. The crucial breakthrough came in the 1970s, when it dawned on the leaders of radical groups that “Mexican American” was too limited as a racial category. That community’s concentration in the Southwest meant that its issues would not get the national attention activists wanted. Thereafter, militants from La Raza, MALDEF, and other organizations put pressure on the Census Bureau to create a Hispanic identity for the 1980 Census—in order, as Mora puts it, “to persuade them to classify ‘Hispanics’ as distinct from whites.”

The Hispanic category was a Frankenstein’s monster, an amalgam of disparate ethnic groups with precious little in common. The 1970 Census had included an option to indicate that the respondent was “Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, [or] Other Spanish.” But re-categorizing Mexican Americans and lumping them in with other residents of Latin American descent under a “Hispanic American” umbrella was a necessary move, Mora writes, because “this would best convey their national minority group status.”

(Video) Castro Calls Out LA-Based Latino Dems Who Made Racist Comments In Leaked Tapes

La Raza executive director Raul Yzaguirre made it clear why the Census should reject the questions it had used for decades, which gathered objective information about respondents’ national origin. “There is a difference,” Yzaguirre wrote in the 1974 records of La Raza’s National Council, “between a minority group and a national origin group—a difference recognized in terms of national economic and social policies as well as a lengthy, broad ranging legal history relative to civil and minority rights.”

On the legislative side, Alinsky’s launch of Ed Roybal ended up paying huge dividends. In 1975, by then a leading member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Roybal authored Public Law 94-311, which mandated special collection of unemployment data for Americans who “identify themselves as being of Spanish-speaking background and trace their origin or descent from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central and South America, and other Spanish-speaking countries.” This remarkable piece of legislation goes on to agglomerate descendants from all these many nations into one category of “Americans of Spanish origin or descent,” making PL 94-311 the only law on the books that defines an ethnic group in the United States. Much more importantly, what the law regards as essential to this super-coalition is not actually race, but victimization. The law states that “a large number of Americans of Spanish origin or descent suffer from racial, social, economic, and political discrimination and are denied the basic opportunities that they deserve as American citizens.” The very thing that defined Hispanics was victimhood.

Changing the Narrative

But why have so many people been co-opted into believing in the validity of this invented racial category? Mora explains: “A sort of collective amnesia sets in as organizations begin to refer to the new category’s long history and develop narratives about the rich cultural basis of the classification. By then, the category is completely institutionalized, and the new classification is, like other classifications, assumed to have existed” since time immemorial.

That this amnesia has prevailed is still surprising. In the 1950s, when a young Julian Samora was at university, he experienced pushback on the idea of a pan-ethnic identity. His academic mentor, George I. Sánchez, then at the University of Texas at Austin, told Samora, “For gosh sakes, don’t characterize the Spanish-American with what is obviously true of the human race.” According to the historian Benjamin Francis-Fallon in his 2012 Georgetown dissertation,Minority Reports, Sánchez wrote to Samora in the early ’50s that it takes “a veritable shotgun wedding to make Puerto Ricans, Spanish-Mexicans, and Filipinos appear to be culturally homogenous.” Sánchez was preaching the individual aspiration that the activists loathed: as Francis-Fallon puts it, “Material improvements in jobs, housing, and schools would not only allow [Mexican Americans] to live better but would reveal their fundamental similarity with other Americans.”

Sánchez lost the argument. Samora and radical groups like La Raza made sure that victimhood became the rationale for group formation. Along with fabricating the Hispanic identity, equating the unparalleled suffering of blacks to the condition of Latinos has been one of the activists’ greatest triumphs. We have Spanish-language ballots today, for example, because the Ford Foundation’s grant recipients at MALDEF were able to convince Congress in 1975 that English-only ballots were the equivalent of Jim Crow poll taxes.

Absent these converging phenomena—the ideology, the funding, the advantages of “compensatory justice,” the emergence of determined individuals in powerful positions—Mexican Americans could not have been abstracted into a racial minority, let alone formed into the nucleus of a larger pan-ethnic group. The success of that project inspired other disparate groups—foremost among them the innumerable distinct ethnicities and nationalities which are now classed as “Asian”—to rally behind massive super-ethnicities in the name of victimhood.

Grievance-mongering created for a vast array of American institutions what sociologists Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning callVictimhood Culture—the title of their 2018 book on America’s current oppression fetish. Victimization, they write, becomes “a way of attracting sympathy, so rather than emphasize either their strength or inner worth, the aggrieved emphasize their oppression and social marginalization…. People increasingly demand help from others, and advertise their oppression as evidence that they deserve respect and assistance.”

This paradigm is predicated on a collectivist understanding of society, rather than the individualist striving that Alexis de Tocqueville identified as the hallmark of early America. Had these groupthink tactics not been so effective, we might not have identity politics today. There was a different path available, and Mexican Americans seemed eager to follow it. As Mora stresses: “It did not have to happen.”

Those of us who believe that individual responsibility is a far better route to success than racialization can still reverse what Ylvisaker, Samora, Alinsky, and the rest have wrought. Our first enemy is ignorance. The radicals who victimized America have done their best to cover their tracks: general unawareness of how, and why, the U.S. today is mired in identity politics makes the victimhood narrative harder to defeat. That is the reason the myths still exist, and why we must dismantle them.

(Video) Addressing Anti-blackness In Latino Communities

FAQs

What is my race if I am Hispanic or Latino? ›

People who identify themselves as Spanish, Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Hispanic or Latino refers to people whose ancestors or descendants originated in Central and South America and in the Caribbean, who follow the customs and cultures of these areas and who may speak Spanish.

What race is Hispanic origin? ›

Hispanic or Latino origin includes people of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central and South American, Dominican, and other or unknown Latin American or Spanish origin. People of Hispanic origin may be of any race.

What are some of the important contributions that Hispanics have made to our country? ›

Hispanics not only contribute to the economy, but also have contributed to history, politics, medicine, zoology, entertainment, sports, gastronomy, and social aspects.

Is Hispanic race or ethnicity? ›

Federal policy defines “Hispanic” not as a race, but as an ethnicity. And it prescribes that Hispanics can in fact be of any race. But these census findings suggest that standard U.S. racial categories might either be confusing or not provide relevant options for Hispanics to describe their racial identity.

What is my race if I am white? ›

White – A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.

What is the race code for Hispanic? ›

A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. The term, "Spanish origin," can be used in addition to "Hispanic or Latino."
...
Current CodeNew Code
3 - Hispanic19 - Hispanic or Latino, Race Unknown
5 more rows

What are the types of races? ›

Categorizing Race and Ethnicity
  • White.
  • Black or African American.
  • American Indian or Alaska Native.
  • Asian.
  • Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
4 Aug 2021

How many races are there in the world? ›

Most anthropologists recognize 3 or 4 basic races of man in existence today. These races can be further subdivided into as many as 30 subgroups.

What is your race? ›

The Census Bureau defines race as a person's self-identification with one or more social groups. An individual can report as White, Black or African American, Asian, American Indian and Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, or some other race. Survey respondents may report multiple races.

What is the most important Hispanic influence in our community? ›

Among the most important Hispanic cultural influence is the world of entertainment. Salsa, merengue, Latin rap, Latin songs and today, Reggaeton, consolidate a stable market not only for the Spanish natives but for the Americans as well.

How does Hispanic culture impact society? ›

The Latino population has had an impact not only on the demography of the U.S. population, but also on other aspects of U.S. society. This can be seen, for example, in the increasing popularity of Latin American food and music and in the prevalence of Spanish-language signage, advertisements, and media.

What is the most important thing in Hispanic culture? ›

Latino families show warmth through hugs and this extends beyond just family members but to anyone who is invited to their home or their social circle. Family is the most crucial above all else and Latinos put family ahead of just about everything else.

How is race different from ethnicity? ›

Race refers to the concept of dividing people into groups on the basis of various sets of physical characteristics and the process of ascribing social meaning to those groups. Ethnicity describes the culture of people in a given geographic region, including their language, heritage, religion and customs.

What is the difference between ethnicity and race Examples? ›

For example, people might identify their race as Aboriginal, African American or Black, Asian, European American or White, Native American, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Māori, or some other race. Ethnicity refers to shared cultural characteristics such as language, ancestry, practices, and beliefs.

What is the difference between Hispanic and non Hispanic? ›

Hispanic refers to individuals who are Spanish-speaking or have a background in a Spanish-speaking country. Latino refers to those who are from or have a background in a Latin American country. These terms encompass culture, ethnicity, and identity and are rooted in shared cultures and not racial categories.

Why do they ask if you are Hispanic? ›

We ask a question about whether a person is of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin to create statistics about this ethnic group. Local, state, tribal, and federal programs use these data, and they are critical factors in the basic research behind numerous policies, particularly for civil rights.

When was race defined? ›

At the beginning of the story, we have the invention of race by European naturalists and anthropologists, marked by the publication of the book Systema naturae in 1735, in which the Swedish naturalist Carl Linnaeus proposed a classification of humankind into four distinct races.

How does race and ethnicity affect society? ›

Racial and ethnic prejudices affect the distribution of wealth, power, and opportunity, and create enduring social stratifications. Racial pride can foment racial prejudice, as in the case of white supremacists.

What does race code mean? ›

A coded value specifying a self-declared racial origination, independent of ethnic origination. ( NCI Thesaurus)

What does U mean for race? ›

U Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

What are the 3 races on earth? ›

Abstract. Using gene frequency data for 62 protein loci and 23 blood group loci, we studied the genetic relationship of the three major races of man, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid. Genetic distance data indicate that Caucasoid and Mongoloid are somewhat closer to each other than to Negroid.

What are the 5 races called? ›

OMB requires that race data be collectd for a minimum of five groups: White, Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.

What is the biggest race in the world? ›

The world's largest ethnic group is Han Chinese, with Mandarin being the world's most spoken language in terms of native speakers.

What race are humans? ›

Today, all humans are classified as belonging to the species Homo sapiens. However, this is not the first species of homininae: the first species of genus Homo, Homo habilis, evolved in East Africa at least 2 million years ago, and members of this species populated different parts of Africa in a relatively short time.

What are the 7 main races? ›

Definitions for Racial and Ethnic Categories
  • American Indian or Alaska Native. ...
  • Asian. ...
  • Black or African American. ...
  • Hispanic or Latino. ...
  • Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. ...
  • White.
8 Apr 2015

Where do human races come from? ›

Humans first evolved in Africa, and much of human evolution occurred on that continent. The fossils of early humans who lived between 6 and 2 million years ago come entirely from Africa. Most scientists currently recognize some 15 to 20 different species of early humans.

How do you answer race on a form? ›

Race (select all that apply):
  1. American Indian or Alaska Native.
  2. Asian.
  3. Black or African American.
  4. Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander.
  5. White.

Why is it important to know the difference between race and ethnicity? ›

Centrality of Racial-Ethnic Identity

The importance of race and ethnicity to an individual's identity, which is referred to as centrality, represents a relatively stable perception of the significance one attributes to one's racial-ethnic background.

How do you ask about race? ›

First ask, “Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or of Spanish origin?” (ethnicity), followed by a race identification question like, “How would you describe yourself?” The first question can be a simple Yes/No radio button; the second should include these commonly accepted options: American Indian or Alaska Native. Asian.

What is something important about Hispanic culture? ›

Hispanic families instill in their children the importance of honor, good manners, and respect for authority and the elderly. Preserving the Spanish language within the family is a common practice in most Hispanic homes. Spanish speakers tend toward formality in their treatment of one another.

What are the values of Hispanic culture? ›

Hispanics come from a collectivistic culture where group activities are dominant, responsibility is shared, and accountability is collective. Because of the emphasis on collectivity, harmony and cooperation in the group tend to be emphasized more than individual function and responsibility (Gudykunst, 1998).

Why is the Hispanic culture important? ›

Hispanic traditions help keep them connected to their roots and form their identity as part of a larger community. It allows for parents to teach their children the differences between the way of life in the US and their country of origin.

How do you show respect in Hispanic culture? ›

Show heightened respect to those that are noticeably older than yourself. Give way to them in public, and allow them to be served first or take your seat if all are full. Do not toss someone an object to pass it to them. Hand it to them directly and respectfully.

How can we improve the Hispanic community? ›

Key Points
  1. Consider the opportunities that Latinos really want. ...
  2. Visit Latino communities across the country. ...
  3. Promote strategies that better civically engage Latino millennials and all Americans. ...
  4. Improve the growth rates of Latino owned businesses.
27 Jan 2017

Where did the Hispanic culture come from? ›

Hispanics/Latinos can trace their ancestry back to the indigenous people of North America as well as to Spanish/European, Asian and African roots. The heterogeneity among these groups is significantly based on their historical existence in this country.

What are things that Hispanic invented? ›

7 Groundbreaking Inventions by Latino Innovators
  • Color TV. ...
  • Earthquake Sensing Technology. ...
  • CAPTCHA. ...
  • 8 Black Inventors Who Made Daily Life Easier.
  • Stent. ...
  • X-Ray Reflection Microscope. ...
  • Contraceptive pill. ...
  • Artificial Heart.
15 Oct 2021

Who are some Hispanics that have made an impact difference in the community? ›

Take a look at our list of 7 Hispanic Americans who have made their mark on the world.
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Kicking off our list of influential Hispanic Americans is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. ...
  • Lin-Manuel Miranda. ...
  • Ellen Ochoa. ...
  • Cesar Chavez. ...
  • Dolores Huerta. ...
  • Sylvia Rivera. ...
  • Roberto Clemente.
16 Sept 2021

What is Hispanic culture called? ›

Hispano-Roman is used to refer to the culture and people of Hispania. Hispanic is used to refer to modern Spain, to the Spanish language, and to the Spanish-speaking nations of the world, particularly the Americas, Pacific Islands and Asia, such as the Philippines.

Is race related to DNA? ›

The completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 confirmed humans are 99.9% identical at the DNA level and there is no genetic basis for race.

Is DNA and race the same? ›

As for whether race can be found in our genes, the answer is no. Biological ancestry, however (which is distinct from race), is real. Where our forebears came from can be seen in our DNA (to a certain degree), but ancestry does not map onto race, not even close.

Can ethnicity and race be the same? ›

While race and ethnicity share an ideology of common ancestry, they differ in several ways. First of all, race is primarily unitary. You can only have one race, while you can claim multiple ethnic affiliations. You can identify ethnically as Irish and Polish, but you have to be essentially either black or white.

How are race and culture related? ›

Description: While race is ascribed to individuals on the basis of physical traits, ethnicity encompasses everything from language, to nationality, culture, and religion. We generally assume that people see our race, ethnicity, and culture the way we see ourselves.

What is the difference between Latino and Hispanic? ›

Hispanic and Latino are often used interchangeably though they actually mean two different things. Hispanic refers to people who speak Spanish or are descended from Spanish-speaking populations, while Latino refers to people who are from or descended from people from Latin America.

Is race a social construct? ›

The genetic diversity that exists across the entire human race is very, very small, and race isn't even a good proxy for what diversity does exist. That's why we say race is a social construct: it's a human-invented classification system.

What is my race if im mexican? ›

Hispanic or Latino

Chicano – Includes people born in the United States with Mexican ancestry.

What did Hispanics do for America? ›

With earnings of more than $1 trillion each year and tax contributions of more than $252 billion, Hispanics not only add significant value to the U.S. economy but they also support and help fund social services and infrastructure that ultimately benefit all Americans.

Who are some Hispanics that have made an impact in the community? ›

Take a look at our list of 7 Hispanic Americans who have made their mark on the world.
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Kicking off our list of influential Hispanic Americans is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. ...
  • Lin-Manuel Miranda. ...
  • Ellen Ochoa. ...
  • Cesar Chavez. ...
  • Dolores Huerta. ...
  • Sylvia Rivera. ...
  • Roberto Clemente.
16 Sept 2021

What contributions has Mexico made to the world? ›

From Mexico To The World
  • Color Television. This one is perhaps the most popular and one Mexicans are very proud of. ...
  • Tortilla Machine. ...
  • Toilet Float. ...
  • Antigraffiti Paint. ...
  • Earthquake resistant foundations. ...
  • Popcorn. ...
  • Tequila. ...
  • Tridilosa.
21 Aug 2015

What was the goal of the Hispanic movement? ›

The Hispanic community embarked on a social movement aimed at combating institutional racism, increasing cultural hegemony, and guaranteeing equal labor and political rights. The Chicano Movement sparked national conversations on the political and social autonomy of Hispanic groups everywhere in the United States.

Who was the first Hispanic in America? ›

Some Hispanics emigrated to some of the future British colonies of North America in the early of the 17th century. Among these immigrants was the Dominican Juan Rodriguez, who arrived in present-day New York City in 1613, as he was a member of the crew of a Dutch ship, and lived there for some time.

Who was the first Hispanic to come to America? ›

Early Spanish Explorers Reach America

Spanish admiral and explorer Pedro Menendez de Aviles lands at what will become the settlement of St. Augustine, Florida, near the spot Ponce de Leon reached 52 years earlier.

Why is it important to learn about Hispanic heritage? ›

Most importantly, though, learning about Hispanic Heritage Month can teach tolerance and acceptance of someone who may not speak the same language, practice the same religion, or follow the same cultural practices as you. And in today's world, learning to accept and appreciate one another is reason enough to celebrate.

What Hispanic people invented? ›

Below are a list of inventions by Latinos in the United States and those born in Latin America.
  • Color TV. ...
  • Earthquake Sensing Technology. ...
  • CAPTCHA. ...
  • 10 Native American Inventions Commonly Used Today.
  • Stent. ...
  • X-Ray Reflection Microscope. ...
  • Contraceptive pill. ...
  • Artificial Heart.
15 Oct 2021

How does Mexico benefit the United States? ›

Mexico also donated vaccines to other countries in the hemisphere. In 2021, U.S. goods and services trade with Mexico totaled $725.7 billion, making Mexico our second largest trading partner.

How did the Mexican Revolution impact the world? ›

The Mexican Revolution sparked the Constitution of 1917 which provided for separation of Church and state, government ownership of the subsoil, holding of land by communal groups, the right of labor to organize and strike and many other aspirations.

Why is Mexico important to the world? ›

Mexico is among the world's largest producers of oil, silver, copper, gold, lead, zinc, natural gas and wood. Other minerals, such as mercury, cadmium, antimony, manganese, iron and coal are also found. Mexico borders the Pacific Ocean, the Caribbean Sea, and the Gulf of Mexico.

Videos

1. Hispanic voters' support for GOP is increasing
(CBS News)
2. Hispanic Heritage Month: How A Law Could Impact How Educators in TX Teach History And Race
(MSNBC)
3. These Latina Republicans say 2022 is the year to flip South Texas
(CNN)
4. What's the Difference Between Latino and Hispanic?
(WonderWhy)
5. What is systemic racism in America?
(KING 5)
6. Former Pres. Obama trolls Pres. Biden
(ABC News)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Kerri Lueilwitz

Last Updated: 02/12/2023

Views: 6487

Rating: 4.7 / 5 (67 voted)

Reviews: 82% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Kerri Lueilwitz

Birthday: 1992-10-31

Address: Suite 878 3699 Chantelle Roads, Colebury, NC 68599

Phone: +6111989609516

Job: Chief Farming Manager

Hobby: Mycology, Stone skipping, Dowsing, Whittling, Taxidermy, Sand art, Roller skating

Introduction: My name is Kerri Lueilwitz, I am a courageous, gentle, quaint, thankful, outstanding, brave, vast person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.