(Baseball star David Ortiz, aka "Big Papi," just one of the millions of Afro-Latinos ignored - again - by the New York Times)
There are many things to admire about the New York Times. A complex and nuanced understanding of the vast diversity of Latino America is not among those things.
In a story on page A1 of the Times yesterday, reporters Adam Nagourney and Jennifer Steinhauer stated that Latinos are not going to support Senator Barack Obama in his bid for the White House because, “in Obama’s pursuit of Latinos, race plays a role.” In other words, they said that Latinos would not vote for a black man, and backed it up with nothing other than a couple of anecdotal quotes from random Latinos in Los Angeles.
The sloppy, inaccurate story goes on for 32 agonizing paragraphs, using the terms “black” and “Latino” as though they were mutually exclusive – which they are not. Historians estimate that 95 percent of the African slave trade to the Americas took place in Latin America.
To this day, the vast majority of people in the African diaspora live south of the U.S. border, in Latin American countries from Brazil to Colombia to Cuba and, yes, even Mexico. The song "La Bamba," in fact, was brought to the Veracruz region of Mexico by Africans enslaved to the Spanish. The song likely has roots in the Bembe (Bantu) culture from what is now the Congo. This is only a stone's throw, geographically, from the Kenya of Obama's father's birth.
How quickly we forget in this country. How brutally we refuse to learn.
The New York Times not only ignores completely the African history of Latin America by positioning "blacks" against "Latinos" as if none of us were both. To do so is enormously irresponsible because it dissolves from public consciousness the fact that African slavery was a crime committed all across this hemisphere, by colonial Europeans who spoke English, Spanish, Portuguese and French. The story also erroneously portrays Latinos as a race unto themselves - an error egregious enough to be stated in our own census bureau's definition of Hispanic as a person "of any race". Including "black".
The miserable Times story also uses “Latino” as a synonym for “Spanish-speaking,” which is as useless and ignorant as would be the assumption that all French-Americans speak French. Most Latinos in the US do not speak Spanish well. Many pretend they can, because they are afraid of being laughed at or called pochos by all those other Latinos pretending they speak Spanish. But the truth is: Most of us cannot speak Spanish after the second generation. This assimilation pattern is no different from that of the Germans, or the Italians. It's just that the Times, like the rest of Big Media, seems to have confused "immigrant" with "Latino" - another huge error. The Times story actually says Latinos are new to the American Southwest. Did they forget "Arizona" "Nevada" "California" "Colorado" "Montana" and even the city of the story's dateline, "Las Vegas" are SPANISH WORDS? Jesus Christ. New here? C'mon. Some of us are. Some of us, clearly, are not.
It is not difficult to find information about the long history of Latinos in America, or Afro-Latinos, or even on linguistic preference among Latinos in the United States; among those who will vote (citizens) the vast majority are English-dominant and do not speak Spanish well enough to consume media in that language.
Mysteriously, the story opens with Hillary Clinton eating a taco (at King Taco, with Villaraigosa, no less) in East Los Angeles. It is one of three taco references in the story. Need we remind the Times that tacos are no ubiquitous among the nation's diverse Latinos? Or that tacos are considered mainstream American fare? Or that tacos, if you trace their ethnographic lineage, are actually Native American in origins?
Tacos. Latinos. East Los Angeles. Villaraigosa. It's like a bad movie. I would laugh if it weren’t so pathetic. I wondered, and not for the first time, why it was that the New York Times chose, when writing about “Latinos,” to do so in the cliched barrio of East Los Angeles. After all, the nut-graf for the story states that Latinos will sway the primaries in California, Nevada, and New York.
New York.
Immigrants from the Dominican Republic made up the largest single immigrant block to the city of New York in the 1990s. Five out of every six Dominicans are of African descent. Many Puerto Ricans are also of African descent. There are great movements afoot in popular culture throughout the Americans to make the link between Africa and Latin America – from Grupo Niche singing of blackness in the salsa classic “Etnia,” to the Nuyorican Poets rapping about being BlackTinos.
How it is that the editors and reporters of the nation’s leading newspaper - located in the city where salsa was invented from the Afro-Caribbean beats of Puerto Rica and Cuba, where Dominican blacks have replaced American blacks in much of Harlem, where Washington Heights now goes by the name Quisqueya Heights, for the Dominican Republic, where Junot Diaz and his Afro-Dominican novelistic mojo dominated the bestseller list last year – can completely ignore the significant segment of this country’s Latino population that IS BLACK is beyond me.
Way beyond me.
The article quotes a random 20-year-old woman on the streets of Los Angeles as their only legitimate source for the headline screaming about Obama’s lack of support among Latinos, ostensibly because of his “blackness.” This is your source? Natasha Carrillo of East Los Angeles? Holy crap. Are you joking? Is this the best you can find? Why not go the CUNY, and talk to the Dominican and Puerto Rican studies experts there? Why send reporters to a freakin' taco stand in East Los Angeles? I'll tell you why: The story was written in the minds of the editors before it was reported; that's why it WAS NEVER reported. It was made up. And because it was on the front of the NY Times, you are going to have pundits from coast to coast quoting it as the gospel truth, all because Natasha Carrillo, 20, of East Los Angeles, said so.
Chinga.
I suggest the reporters and editors of the New York Times stop taking their cues on Latino identity and politics in America from the boxers on Resurrection Boulevard and other nonsense TV shows, and take the subway uptown for a spell. Walk around. Go to a bodega or two. Listen to people talk. All those “black” people you see in Washington Heights? They’re Latinos.
And many of them (us) will be voting for Obama.
You want a source on blacks and Latinos, New York Times? Call me, the Cuban woman whose father was dedicated to the Yoruba God Obatala when he was a child. Call me, who knows that the phrase “Fulano” comes from the Fulani people of Africa. Call me, who knows that the double-headed tambora drum of merengue music, the national music of the Dominican Republic, has roots in West Africa. Call me. You have my number. I'm the one who writes you an editorial every week that you ignore. I'm the one who is supposedly one of the most influential Latinos in America, but can't get your attention on this, or any other Latino issue. Yeah. Me. The one who busts all your stereotypes up into little gray flecks of newsprint.
You want to talk about blacks and Latinos? Then stop forgetting history.
Stop forgetting that millions of us are both black, and Latino. En punto, y ya.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Obama and the Latino Vote in the NY Times
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
44 comments:
"Tacos. Latinos. East Los Angeles. Villaraigosa. It's like a bad movie. I would laugh if it weren’t so pathetic."
My sentiments exactly. Hillary and her taco munchers have prescribed what is good for us, and unfortunately, a lot of Latinos are going to swallow it up. I’m not convinced that you can waltz into King Taco, throw back a few tacos, pose for pictures and call it a day with the Latino community.
We should be outraged that Villaraigosa and so many other Latino leaders (Dolores Huerta, Hilda Solis, Henry Cisneros, and highfalutin Fabian Núñez to name a few) have decided to throw their support to her so early in the game. What she and her team insinuated with Barack Obama was horrendous, and I think that we, as Latinos, could easily be on the receiving end of such comments one day.
And thank you for once again pointing out that we aren’t a monolithic group. At some point, I hope that the media will get this and stop framing things in terms of black and white and think that we Latinos will fit nicely into one of these census designated boxes.
What do you say we start a letter writing campaign amongst ourselves and other people of color to denounce the Clinton teams dealing with the race and ethnicity issue? I would be more than happy to get other bloggers who feel similarly involved.
Amen to your perceptive comments, Adriana and Alisa. Especially this one:
'The Times story actually says Latinos are new to the American Southwest. Did they forget "Arizona" "Nevada" "California" "Colorado" "Montana" and even the city of the story's dateline, "Las Vegas" are SPANISH WORDS? Jesus Christ. New here? C'mon. Some of us are. Some of us, clearly, are not.'
Damn straight, and I'm so glad you point this out. If there's one thing that frustrates me tremendously about the immigration debate on both sides, it's the way that so many claim how "we're just immigrants" new to the land, fresh off the boat at Ellis Island. Bull. We were the founders of the cities and states that now constitute the Southwest, as well as Florida, which is why they have names like San Francisco, Arizona, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Los Angeles, Santa Ana, Colorado, Florida, San Antonio and of course, New Mexico itself.
In fact, the single quibble I have with this post (and it's a very minor quibble) is that, in fact, the rising group of second- and third-generation Latinos really is remaining fluent en español, as we should be-- español has long preceded English in Southwestern states as well as in Florida and, in fact, the treaties and statutes that came after the Mexican War give equality to español and English in these states, among other guarantees. Also the case in Florida for different reasons. With our increasing political and economic strength, we're finally making this a reality. The only reason that many previous second- and third-generationers lost Spanish fluency, is that it was beaten out of them-- Anglos in places like California and Arizona desperately wanted Latinos there to fail to notice what you pointed out, that is, to fail to notice our people's strong connection to the Southwest and our presence here well before the Anglos ever set in to make war against us in the Mexican War. So they punished our grandparents for speaking español, with the result that second- and third-generationers lost it. That's no longer the case-- with this new and very large wave of Latinos in the United States, especially in the SW and Florida, fluency en español is strongly emphasized for economic as well as cultural reasons. In fact, it's so strong that even many third- or more generation Latinos who had lost español before (such as yours truly, a fourth-generationer) have in fact, gone back and regained it.
De hecho, mi propia tía me enseñó el español, y me anima mucho finalmente hablarlo.
And of course, all of my kids and mis sobrinos y sobrinas are growing up speaking and writing español fluently. IOW we lost español by the third and definitely by the fourth generation, but it was retaught to me and my hermanos y hermanas and fully regained by the fifth generation! All of my kids in fact are attending side-by-side immersion schools that teach partly en español into high school and increasingly even into college, so they learn professional and technical fluency en español in addition to conversational ability. (One of my neighbors is doing the same thing in a home-school context, so there are many ways to go about doing this!) I'm happy that this is occurring for so many of us advanced-generation Latinos, because we are not merely coming as guests on a boat from far away, forced to "assimilate" to the "Anglo-Protestant" norm which is supposed to push away the other cultures responsible for founding this land. We are instead, ourselves the founders of close to 1/3 of the territory of this country and the entire Southwest, having long preceded the Anglos, and we are reclaiming our rightful place and our cultural rights to co-exist side-by-side in equality with that of the Anglos, as protected by law.
I'll also say here-- thank you, so much, for finally writing such an excellent article that casts aside this dumb myth that Latino culture and African-American culture are supposed to be in conflict. As you say, the African cultural heritage is a powerful element in Latino culture as well. We are not rival ethnic groups fighting each other,
sino hermanos y hermanas unidos!
I note this b/c as you point out with Hillary Clinton's typically dumb and condescending "taco" or "guacamole and chips" attitude toward minorities, her campaign with the help of a complacent media is happily fanning the flames of a supposed "Latino-Black conflict" in the wake of the Clinton campaign's repulsive innuendos toward Obama.
Me enoja tanto escuchar estas tonterias!
The Clinton campaign said many things inexcusable towards Obama, but the worst by far were those arrogant comments by Hillary's own campaign manager about Obama resembling a "drug dealer" or how he had that "Muslim middle name Hussein" and "went to a Muslim madrassah" and some people would think he was a "Manchurian candidate and terrorist sympathizer" as a result. And then, when Obama was too smart to take the bait and start whining, they still slapped the "race card" label on him! Oh, the nerve of the Clinton campaign to play that sick, twisted little kind of scheme, on top of trying to close down voting places in Nevada and stop people from exercising their right to vote!
And now on top of this idiocy, there's this talk about "Blacks and Latinos at loggerheads" with Latinos supposedly approving of these crypto-racist attacks by the Clinton campaign, if the idiotic media were to be believed!
Just like you say, African culture and heritage perfuses our Latino culture, and when African-Americans are attacked like this, so are we as Latinos. And we won't stand for it.
Yo y todos mis amigos no vamos a perdonar la campaña de Hillary para sus ataques racistes y arrogantes contra Obama!
No way! If we were to condone the Clinton campaign for doing this and still vote for them in spite of the disgusting way they're baiting Obama, then we'd just be opening the door for similar such attacks against Black and Latino candidates in the future. Simply because other candidates in the Bill and Hillary Clinton mold, could just say, "well, we can sink down to any level, sling crypto-racist muck at our opponents and, no problem, because come November, we could just brush it off in the name of party unity, even pit Blacks and Latinos against each other!" Especially the drug-dealing innuendos against Obama, you just know that if we let that slide, it'll be used against Latino candidates as much as African-American ones. No way.
No vamos a aguantarlo, y lo lucharemos con nos hermanos y hermanas Africano-Americanos!
Blacks and Browns stand together here.
What makes me sick and sad, is the way too many people don't think or pay attention, and just assume, based on media obfuscation, that Latinos aren't in danger or targeted by these repugnant campaign tactics by the Clintons-- no, it's "just African-Americans," which is more fodder for this idiotic meme about Latino-African-American conflict. Our heritage is shared as you say, and in the United States, Blacks and Browns were both fighting the good fight for our civil rights during the same time period. Cesar Chavez was changing the country at the same time as Martin Luther King. We fought arm-in-arm for our rights, and it's because we are tied together by history.
Blacks and Latinos as you point out, unlike people who arrived at Ellis Island, were not people invited into the country or even accepted in-- Blacks and Latinos, in contrast, were among the "targeted people" who had to be pushed out of the way, or exploited, for Anglos to get rich. Blacks were worked to exhaustion as slaves in the field, then brutalized under Jim Crow. While Latinos were attacked in the Mexican War and the wars in Florida, massacred and expelled to "make room" for the Anglos who were supposedly "entitled" to the lands of our homes based on the Manifest Destiny doctrine.
It's bull and always has been, and now people like Hillary Clinton are trying to pit our two peoples, African-Americans and Latinos, against each other for political gain? Grrrr, makes me so angry! Our history is joined together,
así como nuestra lucha en este país para nuestros derechos!
Blacks and Browns have been fighting this together for our rights, and we'll continue to do so. And I will never, ever vote for the likes of a Hillary Clinton, in a primary or a general election, because I will never excuse the way she and the race-baiters like her try to suppress voters, make humiliating crypto-racist attacks and especially the way they try to pit Blacks and Latinos against each other! Much better for the Clintons to lose big in the general election so that future campaigners get the message that we won't stand for such tactics!
Me anima mucho que la mayoría de mis amigos y amigas Latinos estan de acuerdo con estas creencias, y apoyan mucho a nuestros hermanos y hermanas Africano-Americanos. Y vamos a seguir apoyarlos!
Alisa wrote: All those “black” people you see in Washington Heights? They’re Latinos.
um... except... uh... just don't tell them that they're "black" cuz they just might cut you.
well... not all of them. just most of them. okay - maybe 3 of them might not cut you. Just Kidding... except - I'm really not.
Of course, I can't speak for EVERY Hispanic/Latino member of the African Diaspora. I do know that in 2008 I continue to be ridiculed by a large proportion of my Puerto Rican, Dominican and Cuban brethren when I claim my blackness. If I had a penny for every time I heard an exasperated sigh followed by "But you're not Black, You're Puerto Rican!" (actually - my father was 1/2 black so na nee na nee boo boo.)
Perhaps when the latinos in the bodegas y beauty salons stop forgetting history, then they can challenge the NYTimes to do the same. In the meantime, they continue to leave their grandmothers in the back room...
=)
Moka,
Wow. What you say is true in many instances. Sadly, there has been no "black pride" movement in most of Latin America. Cuba, post-revolutionary Cuba, is the exception. When I go there, the pride in African heritage is quiet strong. You might recall that Cuba was the only nation to fight Apartheid, with Angola; they called their war "Operation Carlota," in honor of the woman who led the first slave rebellion in the Western Hemisphere, a black African in Cuba. She died fighting for her freedom, at the Triumvarate Mill in Matanzas, Cuba.
I think there is a bit of a flow of black awareness and pride in the world of music, with Dominican rappers like Fulanito taking the civil rights message of the US back to the DR. It will be a long battle, though. Racism and self-loathing are strong in the Caribbean, and people need to be educated.
It's similar, I suppose, to the denial of indigenous roots and heritage among mestizo Latinos from Mexico and the US and elsewhere. My son's paternal great-grandfather has photos of himself as a boy, with long braids on either side of his head, clearly an Indian child, but he does not discuss it openly.
We have a lot of work to do!
Un abrazo,
Alisa
Your dad was dedicated to Obatala? Quisa te puede ayudar con the New York Times! Light them candles girl!
Thank you, thank you! And especially thank you for the link on the spanish-speaking stats. As a non-spanish speaker, I so get laughed at. Gracias!
Thank you thank you THANK YOU so much for this post, Alisa. Jesus, that needed to be said!
Of course the NYT's ignorance is classic media silencing of brown folk, but I also think it reflects the general ignorance of most US-ers about race and history. I mean damn---how many gringos know that MOST of Latin America is Black/Native?
"Tacos. Latinos. East Los Angeles. Villaraigosa. It's like a bad movie. I would laugh if it weren’t so pathetic."
Yeah, but the Times made no gratuitous reference to Edward James Olmos. You gotta give 'em *some* credit for that.
Roxanne,
JAJAJAJAJAJAJA!!!!
I love you!
Cubans, Puerto Ricans and Dominicans are CARIBBEAN.
That NYT article was bullshit, but you do all of us a disservice by soft-pedaling the deep and abiding color consciousness - actually, lets call a spade a spade - racism that permeates the "Latino" community. The places you cite so proudly - Brazil to Colombia to Cuba and, yes, even Mexico are countries where people of African descent occupy the lowest rungs of society and have endured the same systematic deprivation that African Americans face here. To be dark skinned and latino is to be double a minority, shit upon and denied by their lighter skinned brethren, discriminated against by white America. Forget about being a dark skinned latino woman, as Moka mentions.
You cite the article's lack of clue, but don't really have much to say on its underlying premise: what we commonly refer to as the "latino community" holds negative views of dark skinned people, be they African American or Afro-Columbian. Studes like this one consistently bear witness to the fact that Latino immigrants, especially Mexicans, bear highly negative views of black people that would on a par with your average racist Irish cop's:
Researchers found that 58.9 percent of Latino immigrants -- most Latinos in Durham are from Mexico -- feel that few or almost no blacks are hard-working. About one-third, or 32.5 percent, of Latino immigrants reported they feel few or almost no blacks are easy to get along with. More than half of the Latino immigrants, or 56.9 percent, feel that few or almost no blacks could be trusted.
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/07/racialpolitics.html
We all know and understand why things are the way they are, but ignoring these kinds of complexities in the name of rote notions of "unity" won't get us anywhere.
Agreed that many Latinos are racist - against other Latinos of darker skin tones. Never disputed that. Never said a word about it. Doesn't change a single bit of my argument here.
Sadly, no "group" has a monopoly on stupidity.
But to assume Latinos are separate from blacks, when many Latinos are black, is simply inaccurate.
That's all I'm saying.
It is like saying not all Americans are white with blue eyes and blonde hair. That assertion, the assertion of the nation's diversity, is not a comment on the racism that does or does not exist here. Ditto for my essay here.
I value your input, and will mull over a race piece with regards to Latinos only.
Thanks for reading.
What a bunch of B.S. Not all latinos are black and some latinos
are not even latinos and don't want to be called Latinos because we nor our ancestors were ever in Latin America. Latinos is a political term and a stupid one
at that. I will call myself a Tejana. That's about it.
Dear Alisa,
Your article and comments on the NY times article, if I´m not worng comes from pure good intentions -obviously based on real facts- Biologically "latinos" are not a monoethnic group because of the whole interbreeding that has taken placen in "LatinAmerica" But sadly the author of the article of the Ny times is right in some many things... all the latino states are runned by mestizos or the white minority that remained in thoses countries (excepting nowadays Cuba, Peru and venezuela lately)so state, society and culture are created (and remain that way) on the foundations of denial of all Native (indigenous) and African heritage....even though its presence its so strong and obviouss. It´s so sad to see a mestizo claiming his/her whiteness as well as a mulato claiming whiteness too. You seem to be Puerto Rican or Nuyorican...if so... just check the attitudes of PuertoRican towards Dominicans, or the attitudes of Dominicans towards Haitians... the puerto Rican that understand a bui their blackness are those born and raised in New York... perhaps you are one of those....so that´s why I understand your cooments on the NY times articel...but I wouldn´t expect that from a "latino" or "Hispano"
Hey just for the record, even the word "latino" exclude natives and african descendent people in the Americas. Latino comes from Lascio, one of the founders of the Rome Empire (correct me if I´m wrong) and "Hispano"... guess is used because of Spanish a language that was brutally imposed.
Just to illustrate, look my case I´m a person of African descent born in the Americas (my grand mother on my father side was a native american)... it comes to be that I speak Spanish as mother tongue, that´s that fact make me a hispano??
Another example, one of the hardest thing from a Latino is when he arrives to the USA, and is confronted with his/her autoimpossed or autoassumed whitness .... as the US society regard him/her as hispano and not as white.
And we do suffer lots of racism by the hispano (same as from the white) comunity throghout the whole Americas (in the sense of continent).
Could be going over and over on case to illustrate my point... because I understand the phenomenon from the NorthAmerican perspective as well as from the Caribbean, Central and SouthAmerican perspective.
Wow. I will comment back at everyone when I've got a little more free time and a lot more patience. For now, I just stand in stunned silence at the statement "not all Latinos are black". WTF?
A.
Well said, amiga!
I couldn't agree more with you, Alisa. A couple of weeks ago, something very much along these lines - and very disturbing - happened to my friend who is trying to sell her first novel.
My friend - let's call her Ivalys - wrote a book w/ a Latina protagonist. Her agent (who is white) takes Ivalys' book to a Latina/o publishing imprint. Editors are interested. They ask what Ivalys' ethnicity is. The agent does not ask Ivalys for a response. Instead the agent assumes (incorrectly) based off her dark skintone and Anglo name, that my friend is "black, not Latina." And she (the agent) tells the editors as much.
And yep, you guessed it, Ivalys actually is Latina. But because of the misinformation, the editors immediately dropped the manuscript like a hot potato.
Does this happen a lot?? Where people in the publishing industry does don't get it? Your thoughts?
"Not all latinos are black and some latinos are not even latinos and don't want to be called Latinos because we nor our ancestors were ever in Latin America."
Some people want to deny that the Spanish brought slaves with them to the New World.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Mexican
I think that our blood lines as humans are more mixed than we would like to believe. You can just as well tell many of us with Spanish surnames that we have Arab and Jewish bloodlines as well. We all should face the music that Africa was the birthplace of civilization... so once up on a time, we were probably black.
You can call yourself Tejana, Chicana, American or whatever, but deliberately chosing to ignore history is like burying your head in the sand and floating up the river "denial."
For me, I'm bothered that the political campaigns in both major parties are playing the race game. I can see it with the conservatives making a big deal about the confederate flag. And then you have the Clintons pandering to us with tacos and then Hillary supports the border wall and calls the gambling industry "economic development." I'm sickened by it all.
-A
I'm not surprised by the publishing industry thing. That said, however, there are a couple of well-known black Latina authors. One, Sofia Quintero, has published her work under the pseudonym Black Artemis; she might be a good person to ask about this. The other is Panamanian Veronica Chambers. I would encourage your friend the writer to keep pushing; it could be that she stumbled across a bad agent. I had to dump my very first agent (Betsy Amster, I'm not afraid to name her) because she said The Dirty Girls Social Club was not "Latin" enough. I was similarly dismissed by Sandra Cisneros's agent. I imagine they are both sorry at this point that they did not listen to me. Sometimes, creative and unorthodox people have to stand their ground and be strong. It has worked for me, and I believe it will continue to work.
Adriana - thank you for having my back. You always do. I knew you would. Besito!
i'm really enjoying reading these comments - including some of the serious WTF moments.
ConsioussMind wrote: the puerto Rican that understand a bui their blackness are those born and raised in New York...
May I be so bold as to say that for the most part Nuyoricans are a different breed? If not - too bad... I said it. =)
I think there is some truth to CM's statement. While i think this is true of a lot of Ricans in NYC from the civil rights era & forward, it is CERTAINLY not generically true of my grandparents' generation.
We in NYC have the advantage of the Arturo Schomburg Center (part of our public library system) & the legacy of the Young Lords (CUNY's Black & Puerto Rican Studies dept among others).
But more than anything else, I would have to imagine that the straight up claustrophobically close living conditions were a major contribution to the alliances of blacks & PR in NYC.
Alisa-
Hello from a recent j-school alum (class of '07) who cringes when she reads crap like this in the NY Times.
Could they have gotten some actual, legitimate sources? No, cause then they wouldn't have had a story.
(And to think that NYTimers occupy the halls of Columbia's J-School like rats inhabit the subway--no wonder I want nothing to do with that kind of snobby, ill-informed journalism that only discusses people of color when convenient post-grad.)
Always enjoyed your work thoroughly. Sending my love to you in Arizona from California (gotta love those Spanish word/states, right?)
:)
-Ashley
No problem mujer.
I agree w/ a lot of what you write when you get political.
You could probably write something political to appeal to the masses beyond chica lit to promote some of your opinions. I would love to read something that is very real and raw, like that book on poverty that you have pondered. I'm thinking something that will inspire some action or at least make you question the status quo.
Hey, have you read Brother, I'm Dying by Edwidge Danticat? It will tug at your soul.
Ah, but the chica lit I write is filled with politics. Haven't you read it, baby?
;-)
Being a mommy taught me something important: medicine goes down best with something sweet...
I'm black and I like tacos. :) Plus, the Latino people I grew up with (before I knew "Latino" was a word) in elementary, middle and upper school in St. Thomas were mostly white.
I'm also an Afro-Latino blogger and I thought this was a great article. I added a link on my own blog.
The story was written in the minds of the editors before it was reported; that's why it WAS NEVER reported. It was made up.
Bingo! So many news articles and segments on TV are like this, it's crazy-making. Imagine if scientists (as a rule, of course *some* do, being only human) started out their papers with their conclusion predetermined and cherry-picked their evidence to "prove" it! Phlogiston and terracentric cosmology would still be taught in schools, instead of history classes.
And because it was on the front of the NY Times, you are going to have pundits from coast to coast quoting it as the gospel truth, all because Natasha Carrillo, 20, of East Los Angeles, said so.
Ayup. Thank goodness for blogs and the web, finally letting us talk back to the Minitrue machine.
I live in New England, in a state (NH) which has a recent, increasing and thriving Latino population, and I've seen everything you describe, and tried to explain it to people who Just Don't Get It, both that "Latino" and "Black" are not absolute categories (having been involved helping a little with our local Latin Cultural Festival in past years), *and* that (having lived in a mixed-Latin/Anglo neighborhood in Texas where my neighbors were more thoroughly mainstream American than my WASP-descended parents were, having been transferred all around the world in the Air Force as kids) the idea that Mexican-American or other Latin American families were less able to assimilate than Italian-, Franco-, Polish-, Irish-, German-, or other hyphenated-Americans who were the subject of No-Nothing panic in the past, was just capital-S Stupid...
I always love reading your rants on the media. I keep a link to your blog on mine for that very reason. I agree with you on so many issues. I personally learned a lot from reading Dirty Girls. How there are so many shades of the latino,hispano,caribean,native american...people. How some are rediculed for not being able to speak spanish. All things I never really thought about before. I also agree that if people knew just how mixed up all of our bloodlines were most would probably faint. Africa is the motherland. The darker brother, no matter what the race, is always looked down upon. By whites and even more so by their own people. It's sad but it's been that way for thousands of years.
Que Viva la Raza Cosmica!!!!
Thank you so much for this completely on-point essay. Let's wait and see if anyone from the Times picks up the phone and tries to talk...
BRAVO!!
All I can say is thank you.
this whole article and blog just reminds me of so many things at once.
1. americans need a course a course
on latin american history.
2. MEXICANS are not the only
hispanics in this country and
all people who speak spanish
arent mexican.
3. If you want to get anti black
attitudes from a hispanic ask
los angeles hispanics mostly of
central american and mexican
descent. they come from places
were being black is "TABOO" and
there is virtually no current day
african influence.
4. MY EXPERIENCES BEING BLACK
AMERICAN AND FLUENT IN SPANISH
LIVING IN LOS ANGELES AND
DEALING WITH L.A. HISPANICS WHO
TYPICALLY "Distrust" "dislike"
and avoid blacks.
5. HOW DIFFERENT MY EXPERIENCES
WERE IN MIAMI WITH BLACK CUBANS
DOMINICANS AND PUERTO RICANS.
6. MOST PEOPLE IN THE U.S. DON'T
KNOW WHAT LATINO OR HISPANIC
REALLY IS AND THINK MEXICANS
PUERTO RICANS, DOMINICANS ETC
ARE ALL THE SAME.
7. EVEN HISPANIC IMMIGRANTS IN
COUNTRY ACT LIKE BLACK LATINOS
DON'T EXIST. THE MEXICANS IN L.A.
ARE SURPRISED EVERY TIME THEY
HERE ME SPEAK SPANISH.
THIS IS JUST ALL PART OF THE STUPID AMERICAN CULTURELESS MENTALITY THAT UNFORTUNATELY DOESN'T SEEM TO EXTEND BEYOND MTV AND VH1. IF IT ISN'T WRITTEN IN A POP SONG OR ON MTV PEOPLE ARE CLUELESS. THE GOOD OLE' U.S.A.
The New York Times article on Black-Brown relations is just sensationalistic, simple and irresponsible: It’s the familia, stupid!
In response to Adam Nagourney New York Times article noting how Latinos and Latino families would not vote across ethnic lines which is both unfounded and irresponsible journalism. Unfortunately, it is this unfounded reporting which is often portrayed in the media in a very negative light and on dangerous grounds for “Black and Brown” relations.
Latinas/os, just like other voters, often vote out of ethnic and racial lines for common interests and the betterment of their families. As Latinas/os voter files grow, they continue to become more informed and better educated voters who understand more nuanced and complex issues, Latinas/os have often voted and crossed party interest, racial and ethnic lines to vote for the non-Latino candidate when it better suits their common goals, interests, and for frankly, those they care about, like their family members.
In the late 1990’s East LA Latinos voted for a non-Latina/o Jewish-American Lesbian instead of a gay Latino for the state Assembly because of her strong background in education and the support of the Latino establishment. Education continues to be a very important issue in the Latino community. Similarly in 2003, East Angelinos elected another non-Latina Chinese-American woman legislator into office instead of “the Latino candidate” because she was also a trusted candidate supported by the Latino establishment. She to, possessed a strong background in education.
On CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 Assistant Professor of Political Science, Matt A. Barretto further highlights this point “There have been a lot of black candidates that have received a lot of support from Latino voters, David Dinkins [NYC], Harold Washington [Chicago], Wellington Web [Denver], Ron Kirk [Dallas]. These four black mayors all got over 70 percent of the Latino vote.” The majority were elected in the Southwest states also indicating an older Southwestern sensibility of acceptance and choice for diversity, as Latino families are often quite diverse themselves. Often times, it’s the African-American community like other minorities who live, shop and attend school along with Latinos and eventually find them marrying one another. Assistant Professor, Matt A. Barretto of Washington University reminded us how the Latino electorate voted and elected African-American congress members such as Maxine Waters in South LA-Watts area California (now a Latino majority) and congress member Rangel in New York City (also Latina/o in majority).
Similarly to Latinas/os, African-Americans have voted across ethnic lines for a Latino mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigoza who built a diverse coalition like the one Senator Obama often mentions in his eloquent and evocative speeches. Villaraigoza connected with African-American leaders and voters who understood the needs of families, like Latino families; for a better education, housing, health care and a higher quality of life. In California, as across the nation a barrage of Latina/o elected officials have been elected from these coalitions indicating that African American come together with and like Latinas/os vote in their best interests even if that means crossing the race, ethnic and party line.
Mr. Nagourney’s focus on the New York Times might have better served the American electorate if the article had looked into how Latinas/os cultivate relationships and how the family plays a central role. Like any other group, Latino families are loyal and care deeply about their families. Always remember and never forget who has established a relationship with and cared about reaching for and connecting with Latina/o interests. Again, Prof. Barrett reminded us of the Clinton legacy, “If you think back to the 1990s, Clinton appointed a lot of Latinos to his cabinet, appointed Latinos to Federal Appellate courts. And the 90’s were also a time of economic boom.” Latinos have not forgotten the great era under the Clinton administration and the solid relationships established then and many are still loyal and respect those forged relationships similary the way African-American leaders cared and continue to care about the Clintons. Similarly, Latinos never forgot that amnesty was signed into law by the Reagan administration, a Republican. This serves as a reminder to Democrats who since have carried favor with Latino families, a reminder to look at the big picture. Just don’t cross the family line.
Unfortunately, if you cross the Latino family, chances are they will never forget it either. Democrats have been extremely careful about the plight of Latinas/os and not to cross nor be perceived of coming between them and their undocumented family members. California Democrats still cautious of the “Reagan Democrats” phenomenon, also understand the state backlash and wrath brought on by Latinas/os who resented the anti- immigrant baiting and resorted to this by punishing Pete Wilson and the Republican party dearly. California Latino families never forgot this; Pete Wilson and the California Republican Party became synonymous with being anti-Latino and yet worse, anti-familia.
Today, it is the new and very young college-age Latinas/os voters who do not have a relationship with the Clintons as my generation did or that which my parents enjoyed; one of economic growth, surplus and Latino appointees. Many young Latinas/os, not surprisingly, have been inspired and moved by the evocative speeches of Senator Obama, many have been brought into the activism fold, we pray, into the voting box and hopefully into a newer Latino voting block that looks beyond race and gender. Like the voters of yesteryear it’s the relationship to the family and not just simply race nor gender which will determine the elections.
So munching tacos at King Taco in East LA reminds Latino voters of their own family-time, taco-time, munch-time, and it’s good thing. Not too long before Senator Clinton munched on tacos in East LA with Mayor Antonio Villaraigoza and State Speaker Fabian Nunez. Senator Obama was also in East LA with State Senator Gloria Romero and a few Latina/o activist and Democratic leaders. Obama convened a town hall meeting in the fall of 07 at the East LA’s very dear Alma Mater, Garfield High School, touching on themes important to Latinos and Latino families: a quality education, where the legendary math teacher, Jaime Escalante was a faculty.
Plus, a plurality of the electorate remember the Clintons’ well established relationship with Latinas/os as other minorities, as was evident in Nevada and even in South Carolina where still, even 1 out 4 African-Americans voted for Clinton. Come the primaries in California, New Jersey, New York, Texas and Florida the election will be about connections, established relationship and not simply about race nor racism, gender nor machismo; as Latinos are often and unfortunately painted and caricatured by mainstream media.
We all know New York as the center of the universe has been debunked time again, once and for all. However, I am still not fully convinced that East Los Angeles isn’t the new found center for the Nation. Remember it’s this heavily Latino Democratic-leaning state of California with its so many early-prized delegates with a newer and more relevant primary after being bumped up some. And, don’t forget, we are no longer just the cash-loaded white-liberal ATM state. We are the taco capital a bastion of Latina/o democratic-leaning liberal taco-munchers in Los Angeles and quite similar popusa-munchers San Franciscans/Bay Area voters who will carry the state of California on any given election day. And don’t you forget it, as California goes, so goes the rest of the Nation. And as East LA goes, so does the rest of my family!
Felipe E. Agredano, MTS
Taco-Muncher and Commissioner
Los Angeles County Human Relations
I agree with the previous commenters that emphasizing the cluelessness of these NY times writers ignores the underlying issue of black-brown tension.
But I enjoyed your piece. It underscores my problem with the Times and with mainstream white liberals in general: their condescension toward people of color. White liberals like to pat themselves on the back because they address us sometimes. They never, however, give us anything but cursory treatment--no nuance, no input from more informed people. They'd never run a similarly shoddy and stereotypical piece about white women voters or Jewish voters. Not in a million years.
Mexican-Americans have a long hisotry of voting for African-American candidates such as Tom Bradley and Denver mayor Wellington Webb. Furthermore, the three black members of Congress in Los Angeles depend on Latino voters to keep their seats.
Obama is doing poorly with Latino voters because his campaign ignored Latinos until recently. Now he's trying to play catch up in a few days with some big name endorsements.
It's not our fault that he's not on top of his game.
Res ipsa loquitur:
Let's take an objective look at the data up to this point. Based on exit polls from the Nevada primary, voters who characterized
themselves as "Hispano/Latino" voted overwhelmingly in favor of
Hillary Clinton (64% vs. 26% for Obama). This contrasts greatly with the white vote overall (52% for Clinton and 34% for Obama) and the white female vote (55% for Clinton and 31% for Obama). The only group to exceed the Hispanic 64-26 split were Jewish voters (67% for Clinton and 25% for Obama). Even a higher percentage of the poorest of whites (earning less than $15,000 per year) voted for Obama (36% vs. 54% for Clinton).
The level of support for Obama by Jewish and Hispano voters in Nevada is similar to the level of support that Obama obtained from white voters in South Carolina.
If Hispanic voters are as likely to vote for a black candidate as
whites in South Carolina and Jews, how can you conclude that it is
important to examine the "complex and nuanced understanding of the
vast diversity of Latino America" to undedrstand how they will vote?
Is it your view that the Hispano/Latino voters in Nevada are not Afro-Latino? What percentage of the Latino community would you characterize as Afro-Latino? Are Afro-Latinos more likely to vote for Obama than non-Afro-Latinos? If you do believe that Afro-Latinos are more likely to vote for Obama than non-Afro-Latinos, does that not also support the view that race is an important factor in determining
the Hispanic vote? And if you conclude that Afro-Latinos are not more likely to vote for Obama, does that not also support the view that Hispanic voters in general are as likely to vote for Obama as Jewish voters and white voters in South Carolina and less likely to vote for Obama than any other group (including, without limitation, white women, white men, catholics and voters that are 60 and over).
I admit that the data is limited, but I am skeptical that Hispanics
(whether "black" or not) will vote for Obama in much greater numbers
than in Nevada. How many "black" leaders are there in Spanish-speaking countries in Latin America? Are there any Barack Obama's who have been elected there?
However, in the future, let's try to use objective data in reaching
conclusions. To me, your recital of random historical facts
fundamentally misses the point. Hispanics, like many other immigrant groups in the United States, are generally more anti-non-immigrant-black than the majority white population. This
conclusion appears to be borne out by the exit poll data in Nevada.
Let's see how the rest of the states go.
Alisa, I really enjoyed your article, I don't only feel that the NYTimes should read it but also many of your fellows latinos from all countries. My grandmother is from Cuba and moved to Jamaica where she met my grandfather who is a native Jamaican. On my father's side, my grandmother is from Venezuela and migrated to Trinidad where she met my grandfather who is a native Trinidadian. They are both black and from Latin countries (Cuba and Venezuela). I have heard the sad stories of the discrimation that they each faced. It is a fact that Latin America isn't fair to their brothers and sisters who are of strong African descent. Growing up in the Bronx, I heard enough of the racists rants from my mostly Puerto Rican friends against Dominicans that were "nappy-headed", "ugly" etc... Their families would often treat me inferior. I came to realize after looking into the histories and literature of Latin America especially by black latinos (the only ones willing to admit it) that my personal experiences and the experiences of my grandmothers is an all too real actuality in all of Latin America. A great article to read is one with Tego Calderon in the New York Post from two years ago. The article talks about the tribulations of being a black latino through the experiences of Tego Calderon. Go to Google and type in Tego Calderon and Black Pride. Its a good read.
Much luv,
Rhonda M. Smith
Thank you to the 'anonymous' writer who posted the objective exit polling data. We can all talk a good game about unity, but the data says what it says. Obama is more likely to receive support from Southern White men than from those who identify themselves as Latino.
I am a long-time African American community activist from the midwest, and we have worked for years to try and build alliances with the Latino community but seemingly to no avail. We've tried to explain that our issues are similar, but there has been no real willingness on their part to work with us.. Year after year we keep on trying, but now I'm starting to wonder what it was all for...
I know that the Social Changes brought about in America have never been the result of numbers. I know that the Black community built the Civil Rights movement and changed the nation while numbering only 10% of the population. So I know the fact that Latinos 'outnumber' African Americans is largely irrelevant in the context of social and civic change movements; but damn... Last night was a real wake up call. I almost feel foolish for going out and supporting causes and issues in the Latino community when apparently the 'larger context' I thought I was working in, may only exist in the minds of black folks.
This needs to change. It really does.
This is a problem that has been festering for a long time but is only now getting a big spotlight shined on it because of the presidential race.
I think we need to re-visit teaching racial tolerance in our schools and making it mandatory. Not just for Latino children, but for all our children.
As a black man, this whole issue really does sadden me.
It's hard to believe many people worked so hard in the past just to see all their sweat, blood and passion squandered by people today because of racism, elitism and extreme culturalism.
WE are the NEW MAJORITY
and Obama is for us!
Thank you for your post. It was dead-on. Although I'm not Latino, I am black and I can empathize with a lot of the points you made. I'm Haitian-American and I can't tell you how many times some of my co-workers (both white and black) ask me questions about black American culture and when I tell them I don't know about this type of food or I'm not Baptist, or the language I'm speaking is not Spanish but Haitian Creole, they're stumped.
And with some who do realize that blacks aren't a monolithic group will ask me if I hate Dominicans because "they say" (I'm always curious to know who "they" are) Haitians and Dominicans hate each other. I tell them it's ignorant to make blanket generalizations.
Americans like to have everything in a nice, neat checkable race/ethnicity box and when people don't play along, they get bent out of shape.
Hell, when the media describe's Obama, they describe his as the "black" candidate, when, in fact, he's only half black. But it underscores this superficial category fixation people here and in other countries have.
But the Times isn't solely guilty of this type of shallow journalism. The media in general — TV, print and radio — are all guilty. I should know because I work in media. A few years ago, I, along with a bunch of other reporters were assigned to get reactions from all walks of life to something the president was doing.
I thought: "Great. We're going to get voices reflective of the communities we serve." Well, I thought that until I was told by my editor at the time: "We need you to talk to a Hispanic."
Because I can't let stupidity go unchallenged, I asked her did she want me to get a Cuban or Colombian who are more likely to be conservative politically or do you me to find a Mexican or Puerto Rican or Guatemalan. And did she want me to find a Hispanic who was white, black or mixed?
She asked why couldn't I follow simple directions? "Just find a Hispanic interview them."
Marina said...
Amen to your perceptive comments, Adriana and Alisa. Especially this one:
'The Times story actually says Latinos are new to the American Southwest. Did they forget "Arizona" "Nevada" "California" "Colorado" "Montana" and even the city of the story's dateline, "Las Vegas" are SPANISH WORDS? Jesus Christ. New here? C'mon. Some of us are. Some of us, clearly, are not.'
Damn straight, and I'm so glad you point this out. If there's one thing that frustrates me tremendously about the immigration debate on both sides, it's the way that so many claim how "we're just immigrants" new to the land, fresh off the boat at Ellis Island. Bull. We were the founders of the cities and states that now constitute the Southwest, as well as Florida, which is why they have names like San Francisco, Arizona, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Los Angeles, Santa Ana, Colorado, Florida, San Antonio and of course, New Mexico itself.
^^^^^those names are spanish, created by spanish colonist,spanish people were the 1st colonizers in north america.
i dont get how you gonna bash that florida was a spanish colony not an afro-latino colony, the spanish killed natives in florida. the truth is anglos(british) purchased or took the various regions from other europeans(french, spanish, dutch, etc.
latinos have just gotten here except for mexicans i thought the issue was for recognition of latinos who are black but yet your ranting about areas spanish people conquered long before americans overthrowed britian.
Thank you thank you thank you for writing such an intelligent and impassioned critique of what passes for political and social commentary these days. I am a Masters student currently writing a paper on minority group relations in the US. I have family in Cuba, and my husband is Afro-Cuban. I too am becoming increasingly incensed by the refusal, even among academics, to recognize that there are BLACK LATINOS. In an article entitled "Reinventing the Colour Line," for example, Frank Bean and Jennifer Lee attempt to answer the misguided question: "do Latinos more closely resemble whites or blacks in the United States?" Based on a series of interviews with Americans of mixed Anglo-Saxon / Mexican heritage, they conclude that Latinos are seen as white by others and are in fact "becoming white," which means that they are unlikely to sympathize with blacks. What the f*ck??? Last time I checked, my Cuban family is still visibly black, even in the winter!
Post a Comment