Why are Hispanics counted as white in crime statistics?

the San may very well be the oldest society/people anywhere...

 

Exactly, San are a mystery. .they are probably the older modern human in the world. By other way, I have not read anything about the Mediterranean origin of Hispanics.. the Haplogroup R1b exactly R1b1a2 (R-M269) is not from Mediterranean.. and it is the most important haplogrupo in Spanish population...

The frequency is about 82% in Ireland 70% in Scotland, 68% in Spain, 60% in France (76% in Normandy), 45% in Eastern England, 50% in Germany, 50% in the Netherlands, 42% in Iceland, and 43% in Denmark.
(From Wikipedia) In fct the comunitie with more R1b1a2 in the world are in Wales (92,3%), Spain (87,1%) and Ireland (85,4%)..in the link I posted yesterday you can find the European population by Halogroup...the Celtic haplogrupo ir R1b and slavic are R1a.
In fact, It is more correct to say that western Europe is mainly R1b and therefore most Celtic peoples of Western Europe were R1b.

An the question was why in USA confused Hispanics with American Indians...Hispanics are Celtic (70%) and indian (0%)... In South Africa they knew more about "race" than in the U.S. (I know race does not exist) hispanics were white: the Spanish inmigrants in South Africa during Aparthedi were white. (black people from USA or Japanese, or chinese or arabs weren´t white for the South African
authorities...Japanese investor or Michael Jordan or Michale Jackson were banned to be in white hotels or Gandhi..

So, the South African perfectly knew the difference between Hispanics, Spaniards, Hispanii and "aztec", "yanomani" and other american indian...!!!!

Boers from Spanish origin: South African people of Spanish descent: Rowen Fernández (Do you think he was an "aztec" for South African authorities)...Christopher-Lee Dos Santos or the old Boer general and heroe of war: Koos de la Rey a Spanish Boer general...

A photo general De la Rey... do you think this Boer general was "indian"...



I personally think that only in the U.S. (probably due to the general ignorance) can think that Spaniards are "Indians" ... or "mestizos" ... only happens in the U.S. ... the world knows the difference between an Indian in Guatemala and a Hispanic....or really they can prove that Koos de la Rey was "aztec"...

 

E

mediterrean doesnt refer to origin but to when they arrived in europe, mediterrean and sw asian genetic arrival coincided with the arrival of agriculture in europe about 8k yrs ago....northern european represents the oldest arrivals R1 about 35k yrs bp,descendent R2 made its appearance 30k yrs ago...concentration in spain represents the southern refuge during the ice age, as temps climbed they expanded outward...

you're getting into questionable ground, netherlands was long a refuge for political and religious groups, de la ray was as spainsh as I am, not very...his grand father was born only a few kilometers from where I was, koos was only fractionaly spanish, mostly his name and not a lot more...his spanish dna would decrease by 50% with each generation, my melanesian dna contribution is down to 2%, I'm as melanesian as koos was hispanic, we're both both overwhelmingly dutch ancestry...

 

Okl,so all the Western European came from Mediterranean Anatolia. In any case, the origin of Hispanics is common to the British, Belgian and French. It is true that the Spanish and British populations are less mixed than the Belgian and French, possibly because of its isolated geographical position.

People of Celtic ancestry were thought to have descended from tribes of central Europe. Professor Sykes, who is soon to publish the first DNA map of the British Isles, said: "About 6,000 years ago Iberians developed ocean-going boats that enabled them to push up the Channel. Before they arrived, there were some human inhabitants of Britain but only a few thousand in number. These people were later subsumed into a larger Celtic tribe... The majority of people in the British Isles are actually descended from the Spanish."

If the Spaniards were "aztec" like say american here.. british would be aztec too... but only a not very intelectual man has the silly idea to write (like in this section of the forum) Hispanics (that is to say, people from Hispania, Spanaan, Ispanaan) are "indian" or "nonwhite"....

The mitochondrial DNA of if you prefer the "fingersprint" doesn´t disappear in 100 years, not even in 10.000 years... And yes, De la Rey was Spanish, French and Dutch DNA ..(not only the "surname" but blood, by father line, he came from Spain). Althought Boers were dutchmen maybe in 80%, another 20% afrikaners came from France, Germany, Italy, Portugal and Spain...

Spanish influence in the Boer-Afrikaner culture was residual but one of the most important Boers of all time, Generaal Koos De la Rey had Spanish ancestry as his surname indicates. Probably he was a descendent of a Spanish family that flee to Holland to escape the inquisition and then to the Dutch Cape Colony to create a new live.

So, his family was spanish in XVII century... he was born in XIX century... not enough time to dissappear his spanish DNA, I think..The question will be solved as easy as to make an Mitochondrial DNA.. with the remains of De La Rey (or progeny) ... do not be surprised if there are Spanish DNA in his blood.

Another DNA from Hispania are the Afrikaners came from Portugal (more important in number than spanish afrikaners):

The Portuguese influence in the Boer-Afrikaner people is uncertain but probably gets back to the XVIII century when begin to exist some Boer-Afrikaners with the surname Ferreira which is a very common Portuguese surname that is also an important Afrikaner surname. They are probably descendent of João Ferreira de Almeida a Portuguese man that go to Holland with just 14 years old and then go to Batavia and India where he became a pastor of the Dutch Reformed Church and translated the Bible to Portuguese. The surname Ferreira is relatively common in Boer-Afrikaners

The question is not if De la Rey was Spanish in 20%... the question is that in South Africa.. the Boers, the Afrikaners regarded Hispanics (Portuguese and Spaniards) WHITE .. not "mestizos", or "Aztec" or "Indian" or "zulues" or "Bantu" ... the Hispanics were white for the Boers, in 1690, in 1790, in 1890 or 1970...I think, the forum members who argue that Hispanics are "Indians" who have to prove what they say .. don´t they?

Regards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtKKJSfYraU&list=PLj-5UxZkLgY2-eoL5shVJ-B7uW5e3yHgo (a polemic song about Koos de la Rey)

 

Agreed. But for the purposes of debate... Hispanic is a term used to describe ALL Latinos and that includes very dark skinned Mexicans.

 

That is all swell but the simple fact is that whatever term is used to describe Latin Americans is irrelevant to the fact that they are included in the terminology used by the American government for census purposes, by Mexicans themselves and by average people that states that Mexican of dark skin are also known as Hispanic.

One could simply call them mestizo or Native Americans and your argument is moot.

 

which highlights that continually labeling people by physical appearance is futile, it just perpetuates racism...

 

Not, It isn´t swell but essential...it proves to be a FALSE concept ... that does not exist in history, or anthropology, genetical or culture or anything, lack of reality ... in the same way that the German concept "Untermenschen" to describe Jews, Slavs and Gypsies is also a FALSE concept ...

LATIN AMERICA doens´t exist... It is a wrong concept invented by Napoleon III in the year of Fort Sumter with the only political goal to justify the french intervention in America in the “panlatinism”, like “pangermanism” and “panslavism”... So Latino america doesn´t exist in History, anthropology, culture, society, genetics, etc etc If there was a “Latin America” would be Canada or La Nouvelle Orléans (a French Dominion with french settlers)..

American government is irrelevant in this question... Can american government prove...

1.- that Mexican population DNA matches with the Lazio population DNA? Answer: Not
2.- that Hispanics aren´t from Spain/Hispania/Spanaan/Ispanan... but from Mexico? Answer: Not
3.- that the mexican population mithochondrial DNA and spanish population mithochondrial DNA matches? Answer: Not
4.- like there is more GENETIC relationship between Spaniards and British that between Spaniards and Mexican.. and British and Swedish... ergo... if Spaniards are “aztecs”... the British population are also “Aztec”...Answer: Not

Latin America is a fallacy... It doesn´t exist, hasn´t existed and never will exist

EXACTLY.. that´s the right answer, the reality from a social, anthropology, historical and cultural ...In this answer, I agree with you... they are Mestizo or American native... but there are not Latin (from Lazio) nor Hispanics (from Hispania). Of course in Mexico, like in USA there are hispanics, but they are only people came from Spain or Mestizos when one of them came from Spain... Hispanics are Martin and Charlie Sheen, Gloria Estefan, Bill Richardson, Don Carlos Buell, David Farragut, Lea Michele, Paul Morphy, Salma Hayek, Rita Hayworth, Eva Longoria, David H, Bieter (De Boise, Idaho, Mayor), Raquel Welch etc. They aren´t indians...they are hispanics or mestizo with father/or mother lines from Spain.

So the question Why are Hispanics counted as white in crime statistics? Is “out of question”... Hispanics are counted as white because they are white..

Are you talking about people waste time in front of a T.V. set? Not even they know where´s Delaware, so... What people know about Hispanics!! Nothing... remember.. a lie multiplied a million times… still It is a lie ...

No moot, you can discuss about something is empirically unprovable.. for example: if USA is liberal or not, if the liberalism was changed in 1861 by Lincoln, or in 1932 by Roosevelt, or if the liberalism has never been destroyed etc...

But the question Hispanics is scientific. .Can you prove, can the American Government prove the indian mexican Mitochondrial DNA is matched with Spanish Mitochondrial DNA? Can American government prove Mexican indians speak in Latin? Can you prove Mexican indians came from Spain? From Lazio? No, like you well said.. they are AMERICAN NATIVE... or MESTIZO... but not Hispanics.

My question: Are there non-white anglosaxon? So, there aren´t non-white Hispanics... a negro can speak in english but he is not anglosaxon.. the same happen with a negro or a indian speak in Spanish... he is a Spanish Speaker but not an Hispanic... It is very easy.

Regards

 

Why are Hispanics counted as white in crime statistics?

Cause we are too damn lazy to do it ourselves?

 

Wyly,

You are a cultured and know about what you are writing.. so I don´t understand what you wrote:

Of course, I used the geographical name of Iberia or Hispania or Spanaan Ispanaan or, as you prefer, without any national concept.. exactly the same you are using the name Europe, name not even existed 100 centuries ago...You are using the geographical name, I guess.. Spain was the last European place to have modern humans... but however, all the modern humans in West Europe came from Spain.. the relation between british and spanish are very old and can be proved by Mitochondrial DNA, by archeology and by historical texts in Greek, Roman and in the Bible, So if the Spaniards are “indian”, British are also “indian”...
Spain/Hispania/Iberia like you well said It was the “genetical bank” a”genetical pool” for the european populations...

I would like to ask what do you think about the question? Do you think an Aztec is a Hispanic? Do you think a Guatemalan Indian is a “latin”? do you think the Spaniards aren´t “hispanics”? You often write with knowledge about issue.. I would like to know your point of views..

The mine one is very clear.

regards

 

I do agree with you mexicans for the most part are not hispanic, they're mostly native americans as are central americans....

As for europe iberia wasn't the only refuge in the ice age, the Apennine peninsula and the balkans also harboured todays european ancestors...

We're in agreement and only debating the small details...

 

That is just Circular Reasoning because your premise is wrong. It only perpetuates racism amongst racist people... those using it for other reasons are not perpetuating racism.

 

You are going off the deep end and over thinking this to death. Latin America is just some term that is applied to the Central and South American regions, and many Caribbean Islands. For a long time "Indians" stuck describing Native North Americans and it was found culturally insensitive and incorrect as well. Nobody cares that Latin Americans is factually incorrect regarding lineage. Well, apparently you do...

Take out Latin American from the following definition and replace it with Native American and it applies fine because today we use the term Spanish to describe a person from the previously known Hispaniola and Hispanic is a term derived from the Spanish conquest of Central and South America AND NOTHING MORE. Like I said, you are trying to argue a false negative.

Your description of a black person not being an Anglo Saxon is really good, though you don't see why. The same black person is not Anglo Saxon, but he is British from even though Britain (Britannia) is a term supplied by the Romans to the native Britons... none of whom were black.

2: of, relating to, or being a person of Latin American descent living in the United States; especially : one of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican origin

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hispanic

 

of coarse it does, insisting on applying labels of race even when unintentional perpetuates the ignorance...

 

Now you have changed the goal posts... you said racist. Now you say ignorant. Neither apply anyway. If I point out a black guy and a white guy that is not racist. Next you will tell me that pointing out a female from a male is sexist or a homosexual from a heterosexual is gender phobia! LOL

 

I agreed with you. On the other hand, there are no races, but ethnicities .. and of course the skin color is not an important feature in an ethnic group ... against what a red neck from Alabama can think... the color of the skin is not a "racial" feature, in fact depends on the adaptation to the environment.
Even the mitochondrial DNA is something less important (there are more genetic relationship between Spaniards and Britons between Spanish and Italian or British and Swedish) and however there are more similarities between Spanish and Italian (Catholic worldview) that between Spanish and English... the important thing to set up an ethnic community is the culture, the physical environment and historical development, but DNA is one element more but not the most important or most determinant.



Regards

 

BodiSatva was a man interested in the essence of things, not by the appearances, He was an example of the mattress of meditation and, I think, the sword of wisdom ...

Well, what you come to say it´s not matter the essence, not matter the reality,but only the appearance, the delusion... words are not innocent, they are the way we talk, how we THINK...It is very important to have a logical, formal, able to speak properly thought.. You say: Well, Latin America doesn´t exist... and what? Who cares? Hispanics are from Hispania (Spain and Portugal) not from Guatemala... but What? Who cares? Untersmeschen doesn´t exist... but nazis thinks the Untersmeschen are jews... and What? Who cares?

Not, to think well, We have to use the concepts in their real meaning .. not like It´s said by a manipulator mass medium or a politician with ambitions ...any anglosaxon can be black like any Hispanic can be black or american native..Latin America” is an intellectual false concept. (Don´t exist in Reality) It’s like an communist ideology. I lived under communist, one was the Reality and other the Party reality...It was like Matrix...Latin America is exaclty like that... Not real...but with the appearance of reality thanks to mass media or manipulation art.. like in the communist good times...There is not a “Latin-American” community, people, region, continent or culture, or linage or DNA or nothing...It is so difficult to somebody in USA to understand the reality? I don´t think so...An australian is an australian... a guatemalan is a guatemalan.. not a latin not a hispanic... It’s incredible the incapacity of USA press and government to understand the Reality... Only It is necessary to see in google Where is Hispania to see the Hispanics aren´t from Arkansas... not even from Mexico...!


to call things by their name, is not a nonsense ... it's actually the only way to learn. The only way to have a right thought.

Is New York in Illinois? According with you... if the people say It is in Illinois, New York is in Illinois.. but not... no matter what "average" people think, no matter TV, radio, or Movie... The reality is the reality... and New York is not in Illinois...

Regards.

 

where is the evidence that all Hispanics are counted as White, for crime stats?

 

But the question is all the hispanics are WHITE...like all the anglos... Hispanics are people from Hispania (a Peninsula in the Southwest Europe, in fact It is the westernmost point in Europe, save Iceland, an Island in the northwest)... Hispanics are Celts and Iberian. from a genetical point of view are most celts than iberian... but both DNA you can find in Hispania... so, Hispanics are WHITE...

I´ll show you where´s Hispania/Spanaan/Iberia/Ispanaan...



(In a german map made in 1542)...


blessed the day one man learns something... today ... you have learned that Hispania and Hispanics don´t come from Guatemala ....

Regards

 

Who cares, as in why get your panties twisted over a term that is used world wide but not historically or geographically accurate regarding the people living there? Native Americans are not actually Native Americans... they were the Sioux, Detroit, Apache and Cherokee, but we use the term anyway. I accept that they are not Latin. I accept that Mexicans are not truly Hispanics unless there ancestors came from Spain. That said, so what? Most people world wide, Mexicans and Central Americans themselves, refer to people of that region as Hispanic. Don't like it then don't use it. Big deal.

Talk to some Mexicans. I have having lived in Southern California. It is even in New Zealand.

This is "Auckland's Latin Dance Community"

http://www.hispanicclub.co.nz/

Go for it. Change the world!

No offense... but that is simply stupid.

 

To me, Because I care to know the truth… who seeks the truth deserves the punishment to find it. It is not possible to sustain arguments on false assumptions.

It is not the same, Sioux is the word used by frenchmen to name a group of tribes speak in Santee, the Yankton-Yanktonai, and the Lakota. Apache is the name given by Spaniards to a group of tribes speak atapascano, apaches named to themselves like “dine” or “tinde” but in any case, Sioux or Apache are form to name something is real... a group of tribes... It´s like to say Nouvelle Orléans insted of New Orleans, or Nieuw Amsterdam instead of New York or Cayo Hueso instead of Key West.

Exactly It´s so. You are right.

I know

It would be acceptable if we were in a frienship talking between drunken people or at home, to talk informally.. like If I say New York is in Illinois... It would be possible if we are drunk or at home but not to put a new thread about Why New York is counted like a New York state city?

Hispanics are white.. nobdoy can ask why are they counted like “white”...like nobody ask why anglos are counted like “white”...

If we don´t speak with sense, properly etc... the thought raves... I am sure you have listened that Shoah is false, “a zionist invention”... I am sure you have listened that September 11/2001 is “false” or still worst,, It was planned, prepared and executed by the U.S. secret services... As false as to name Hispanics people are not Hispanic... as false as to write Spaniards aren´t Hispanic...


Like It was written by one more clone June 24, 2014

hispanics are descended from aztecs, mayans and the incas,

A bad Joke... Aztecs are a group in Mexico...but not even in the most land of Mexico... Mayans are in part of Mexico, Guatemala, Chiapas, Honduras etc... and Incas... please... a minimum of Knowledge... Inca is A MAN... a KING, Inca means THE ONE... to say hispanics came from Incas (Ingas) is as nonsense as to say the german came from KAISER or russian from TSAR..or british came from the KING... the inga/Inca is the King of a human peoples: Quechuas...and not, Hispanics are not came from the civilizated Quechuas...Hispanics came from Celts and Iberian tribes..mostly celts.

It is was necesary to appear a pole living in Britain, Mr snakestretcher to discover in this forum that Hispanics CAME FROM SPAIN (and PORTUGAL, I add)

To say New York is in Illinois is less stupid than to say Hispania is in Guatemala... if the stupidity depends of miles away ....

I am sure you have read the Thread

You have noticed that one american who is not precisely... Ernest Hemingway or John Dos Passos like intelectual wrote June 25, 2014

Spaniards are not Hispanic though.

and the guy is so quiet!!!!!! Spaniards aren´t “hispanics”.. and Shoa is a “zionist invention”.. and 9/11 was did by CIA.....

Who can seriously write SPANIARDS (people from HISPANIA) are not HISPANICS!!!!!!!!

all I ask It is a little serious when we are writing and with a minimal basis... Yes, Spaniards aren´t Hispanics...and swedish came from New Caledonia and Chicago is in Congo...

I think it's time to finish, I have stated my arguments, who were holding that Hispanics are Indians they have preferred to remain silent ... I understand perfectly.

Bye.

 

Hispanics are counted as White here in California too. Someone had suggested that maybe it has to do with the census. Counting Hispanics as White downplays the influence of Blacks, Asian, etc. Does anyone agree?