Another Race Thread! Latino/Black Problems
mannybolone
Los Angeles, CA 15,025 Posts
Call me skeptical, but I doubt this will be a 5-pager since it doesn't involve (formally) White people.http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-hernandez7jan07,0,3588783,print.story?coll=la-opinion-rightrailRoots of Latino/black angerLongtime prejudices, not economic rivalry, fuel tensions.By Tanya K. HernandezTanya K. Hernandez is a professor of law at Rutgers University Law School.January 7, 2007THE ACRIMONIOUS relationship between Latinos and African Americans in Los Angeles is growing hard to ignore. Although last weekend's black-versus-Latino race riot at Chino state prison is unfortunately not an aberration, the Dec. 15 murder in the Harbor Gateway neighborhood of Cheryl Green, a 14-year-old African American, allegedly by members of a Latino gang, was shocking.Yet there was nothing really new about it. Rather, the murder was a manifestation of an increasingly common trend: Latino ethnic cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods. Just last August, federal prosecutors convicted four Latino gang members of engaging in a six-year conspiracy to assault and murder African Americans in Highland Park. During the trial, prosecutors demonstrated that African American residents (with no gang ties at all) were being terrorized in an effort to force them out of a neighborhood now perceived as Latino.For example, one African American resident was murdered by Latino gang members as he looked for a parking space near his Highland Park home. In another case, a woman was knocked off her bicycle and her husband was threatened with a box cutter by one of the defendants, who said, "You niggers have been here long enough."At first blush, it may be mystifying why such animosity exists between two ethnic groups that share so many of the same socioeconomic deprivations. Over the years, the hostility has been explained as a natural reaction to competition for blue-collar jobs in a tight labor market, or as the result of turf battles and cultural disputes in changing neighborhoods. Others have suggested that perhaps Latinos have simply been adept at learning the U.S. lesson of anti-black racism, or that perhaps black Americans are resentful at having the benefits of the civil rights movement extended to Latinos.Although there may be a degree of truth to some or all of these explanations, they are insufficient to explain the extremity of the ethnic violence.Over the years, there's also been a tendency on the part of observers to blame the conflict more on African Americans (who are often portrayed as the aggressors) than on Latinos. But although it's certainly true that there's plenty of blame to go around, it's important not to ignore the effect of Latino culture and history in fueling the rift.The fact is that racism ??? and anti-black racism in particular ??? is a pervasive and historically entrenched reality of life in Latin America and the Caribbean. More than 90% of the approximately 10 million enslaved Africans brought to the Americas were taken to Latin America and the Caribbean (by the French, Spanish and British, primarily), whereas only 4.6% were brought to the United States. By 1793, colonial Mexico had a population of 370,000 Africans (and descendants of Africans) ??? the largest concentration in all of Spanish America.The legacy of the slave period in Latin America and the Caribbean is similar to that in the United States: Having lighter skin and European features increases the chances of socioeconomic opportunity, while having darker skin and African features severely limits social mobility.White supremacy is deeply ingrained in Latin America and continues into the present. In Mexico, for instance, citizens of African descent (who are estimated to make up 1% of the population) report that they regularly experience racial harassment at the hands of local and state police, according to recent studies by Antonieta Gimeno, then of Mount Holyoke College, and Sagrario Cruz-Carretero of the University of Veracruz.Mexican public discourse reflects the hostility toward blackness; consider such common phrases as "getting black" to denote getting angry, and "a supper of blacks" to describe a riotous gathering of people. Similarly, the word "black" is often used to mean "ugly." It is not surprising that Mexicans who have been surveyed indicate a disinclination to marry darker-skinned partners, as reported in a 2001 study by Bobby Vaughn, an anthropology professor at Notre Dame de Namur University.Anti-black sentiment also manifests itself in Mexican politics. During the 2001 elections, for instance, Lazaro Cardenas, a candidate for governor of the state of Michoacan, is believed to have lost substantial support among voters for having an Afro Cuban wife. Even though Cardenas had great name recognition (as the grandson of Mexico's most popular president), he only won by 5 percentage points ??? largely because of the anti-black platform of his opponent, Alfredo Anaya, who said that "there is a great feeling that we want to be governed by our own race, by our own people."Given this, it should not be surprising that migrants from Mexico and other areas of Latin America and the Caribbean arrive in the U.S. carrying the baggage of racism. Nor that this facet of Latino culture is in turn transmitted, to some degree, to younger generations along with all other manifestations of the culture.The sociological concept of "social distance" measures the unease one ethnic or racial group has for interacting with another. Social science studies of Latino racial attitudes often indicate a preference for maintaining social distance from African Americans. And although the social distance level is largest for recent immigrants, more established communities of Latinos in the United States also show a marked social distance from African Americans.For instance, in University of Houston sociologist Tatcho Mindiola's 2002 survey of 600 Latinos in Houston (two-thirds of whom were Mexican, the remainder Salvadoran and Colombian) and 600 African Americans, the African Americans had substantially more positive views of Latinos than Latinos had of African Americans. Although a slim majority of the U.S.-born Latinos used positive identifiers when describing African Americans, only a minority of the foreign-born Latinos did so. One typical foreign-born Latino respondent stated: "I just don't trust them???. The men, especially, all use drugs, and they all carry guns."This same study found that 46% of Latino immigrants who lived in residential neighborhoods with African Americans reported almost no interaction with them.The social distance of Latinos from African Americans is consistently reflected in Latino responses to survey questions. In a 2000 study of residential segregation, Camille Zubrinsky Charles, a sociology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, found that Latinos were more likely to reject African Americans as neighbors than they were to reject members of other racial groups. In addition, in the 1999-2000 Lilly Survey of American Attitudes and Friendships, Latinos identified African Americans as their least desirable marriage partners, whereas African Americans proved to be more accepting of intermarriage with Latinos.Ironically, African Americans, who are often depicted as being averse to coalition-building with Latinos, have repeatedly demonstrated in their survey responses that they feel less hostility toward Latinos than Latinos feel toward them.Although some commentators have attributed the Latino hostility to African Americans to the stress of competition in the job market, a 1996 sociological study of racial group competition suggests otherwise. In a study of 477 Latinos from the 1992 Los Angeles County Social Survey, professors Lawrence Bobo, then of Harvard, and Vince
nt Hutchings of the University of Michigan found that underlying prejudices and existing animosities contribute to the perception that African Americans pose an economic threat ??? not the other way around.It is certainly true that the acrimony between African Americans and Latinos cannot be resolved until both sides address their own unconscious biases about one another. But it would be a mistake to ignore the Latino side of the equation as some observers have done ??? particularly now, when the recent violence in Los Angeles has involved Latinos targeting peaceful African American citizens.This conflict cannot be sloughed off as simply another generation of ethnic group competition in the United States (like the familiar rivalries between Irish, Italians and Jews in the early part of the last century). Rather, as the violence grows, the "diasporic" origins of the anti-black sentiment ??? the entrenched anti-black prejudice among Latinos that exists not just in the United States but across the Americas ??? will need to be directly confronted.
nt Hutchings of the University of Michigan found that underlying prejudices and existing animosities contribute to the perception that African Americans pose an economic threat ??? not the other way around.It is certainly true that the acrimony between African Americans and Latinos cannot be resolved until both sides address their own unconscious biases about one another. But it would be a mistake to ignore the Latino side of the equation as some observers have done ??? particularly now, when the recent violence in Los Angeles has involved Latinos targeting peaceful African American citizens.This conflict cannot be sloughed off as simply another generation of ethnic group competition in the United States (like the familiar rivalries between Irish, Italians and Jews in the early part of the last century). Rather, as the violence grows, the "diasporic" origins of the anti-black sentiment ??? the entrenched anti-black prejudice among Latinos that exists not just in the United States but across the Americas ??? will need to be directly confronted.
Comments
Unlike this article, I would say that the conflict has many roots in economics, political power, and privilege.
There's an article I use from 1989 about Compton that talks about how Latinos became the majority in the city, but that all the politics and patronage are controlled by blacks. At the time of the article there was not a single Latino elected representative. Part of this was because so many of the Latinos were immigrants they weren't citizens yet, while others were too young to vote. On the other hand, Latino political leaders were saying that blacks were being racist by shuting them out of patronage and voting opportunities. To which some of the black leaders told them they had to go out and vote, while a few implied that since the Latinos were immigrants, they werent' really "Americans" and shouldn't complain about being shut out.
There's another article that I used that argues that economic competition and racism against blacks are fueling the problems. The author argued that those with money in CA, meaning whites and Asians, didn't consider Latinos a threat and therefore were more willing to hire them and have them around then blacks. He brought up an anecdotal story of how he saw an unknown Latino man walk down his driveway into the backyard and just thought the guy was a gardner, while if that man had been black he would've gone back to ask who he was or even call the cops on him. He went on to argue that blacks and Latinos were in direct competition for many low waged jobs and because Latino immigrants have a competitive advantage, willing to work for less than the average black American citizen, and the preference of white and Asian employers to hire them, blacks were being shut out of opportunities and building resentment against Lations.
Another piece that I heard on NPR when the new Mexican mayor of LA was elected also showed the growing divide. They interviewed a couple black men who said that the new mayor wasn't going to give blacks their due in the city because he was Mexican and they expected him to only take care of his own kind.
Anyway, I think it's definitely a growing issue that's just under the surface that needs to be talked about, especially here in CA and other western states where Latinos are soon to be the largest group, surpassing whites.
I'd be curious to see numbers about how exaggerated this phenomenon is in LA compared to say, St. Louis or Chicago, or whether it holds true in smaller migrant communities where there is a significantly smaller black population.
As a side note, I turned in my late pass this weekend for Crossing Over, a phenomenal book about migrant workers, the U.S. Mexico border, and the sociological and economic changes that have ensued in recent years.
A good contribution. It amazes me when I look back on my California History & Social Studies classes from high school how little time we spent on what will be one of my generation's most crucial issues.
Not to state the obvious, but I think the language barrier is an extraordinarily significant force in this as well, because it complicates the racism that the author brings up by preventing many forms of positive communication. Even though there are many Latino and Black people who do not share these racist sentiments, many of them cannot speak each others language, and it becomes the de facto norm for the two groups not to communicate with one another. As a result, most of the communication that occurs is negative stereotypes being reinforced, not real diologue.
quick question: if Mexico had the highest concentration of Africans in Latin America around 1800, why do citizens of African descent now only make up 1% of the population?
my aunt is another story, she was mugged by two young black kids. she became increasingly vocal about her feelings towards blacks, her daughter who was a total rebel had a kid with a black guy. the mother tried making her give it up for adoption! she moved and we don't talk to her anymore.
peace,xavier
Yeah that caught my eye too.... If they are going to throw that figure in there I'm suprised that they didn't take the time to explain how it happened... I'm curious now.
The black vs. latino thing really bothers me. I've heard that what bothers black folks about illegal mexicans screaming for civil rights now is that mexicans had a choice whether or not to come here... Black folks on the other hand, well.....
quick question: if Mexico had the highest concentration of Africans in Latin America around 1800, why do citizens of African descent now only make up 1% of the population?
theyve merged through breeding into the largely mestizo population...the closer you get to the Caribbean, the more likely you will come across Mexicans with clearly African features...
theyve merged through breeding into the largely mestizo population...the closer you get to the Caribbean, the more likely you will come across Mexicans with clearly African features...
BREEDING? Whats up with that shit?
um, not for nothin, but in 2 weeks im gonna kidnap yo azz and drop u off at a bar in culver city...
odub. welcome to LA! ha!!!
Is there any race/religious group/culture in the world that isn't guilty of this???
Eskimos?
Ain't the devil happy
Fuck you Aleutian
BREEDING? Whats up with that shit?
its a synonym for mating, copulation, sex...you are familiar with this process, yes??
its a synonym for mating, copulation, sex...you are familiar with this process, yes??
yeah. when your talking about domesticating animals.
So when my black students were complaining about Mexicans taking over Oakland a couple years ago it was because the Mexican and black prison gangs are going to war with each other?
The Forbidden Racial Zone
By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, AlterNet
Posted on January 3, 2007, Printed on January 11, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/46233/
There's no physical sign, barrier, or even a chalk line that marks the zone where a black can't enter at the risk of grave harm. But the zone is there, and blacks know that if they enter it, they can be beat, shot at, or killed. The twist is that the forbidden zone is not in a redneck, backwoods, and Deep South town during the rigid and violent Jim Crow segregation era.
The bigger twist is that the Klan, Neo-Nazis, racist skinheads, and bikers didn't establish the racially restrictive zone. Purported Latino gang members established it. The forbidden zone is in a small, mixed ethnic bedroom community in Los Angeles. The year is 2007, not 1947.
A black family that recently fled the community in fear for their lives bluntly told a reporter that they left because blacks there are scared to death. In the past year, the hate terror escalated to the point where blacks tell tormenting tales of being harried when they leave their homes, or their children walk to school. They say that they are forbidden to go into a park, and a convenience store.
This is not a bad case of racial paranoia run amok. Blacks have been taunted, harassed, beaten and shot at in this community. But the tragic murder of a 14-year-old black girl and the wounding of two other young blacks in the forbidden zone sparked anguish, rage, and finally drew some local media attention.
The murder drew gasps of disbelieve that in America in 2007 in a big, Northern cosmopolitan city, with a Latino mayor, and that routinely back pats itself for its ethnic diversity, there is an entire area that blacks are banned from on pain of injury or death at the hands of other non-whites. And city officials seem powerless to do anything about it.
Though two reputed Latino gang members are charged with the teen's murder, and were slapped with a hate crime charge, the arrest and the hate charge didn't calm the jitters and fears of blacks that live there. Even after the arrests, a number of blacks still said that they planned to get out of the area as soon as they could.
Latino on black (and black on Latino) violence is hardly an aberration in Los Angeles (and other places). According to police reports, there have been more than a dozen murder attempts in other parts of Los Angeles by alleged Latino gang members on mostly young blacks that have no known gang involvement in the latter part of 2006. A Los Angeles County Human Relations Commission report on hate violence in 2005 found that overall Latinos committed nearly half of the hate attacks in the County, while blacks committed thirty percent of the hate attacks. But when it's Latino and black violence, the figure for hate violence soars. Latinos and blacks committed the bulk of the racially motivated hate attacks against each other.
The easy explanation for the hate terror is that the perpetrators are bored, restless, disaffected, jobless, untutored, violence prone gang members, and the violence is a twisted response to racism and deprivation. The attacks no doubt are deliberately designed by the gang hate purveyors to send the message to blacks that this is our turf, and you're an interloper. But despite arrests, police crackdowns, gang injunctions, assorted anti-violence marches and rallies, and community peace efforts, the black and Latino low intensity battle has shown no sign of abating.
Then there's the vehemence of the racial hate. The dirty, and painful secret is that blacks and Latinos can be racist, maybe even more racist than whites, toward each other. It's easy to see why. Many Latinos fail to understand the complexity and severity of the black experience. They frequently bash blacks for their poverty or type them as clowns, buffoons and crooks. Some routinely repeat the same vicious anti-black epithets as racist whites. The color complex reinforces the notion that blacks are a racial and competitive threat, and any distancing, ostracism, avoidance, and even violence is a rational response to keep blacks at arms length.
On the other side, some blacks feed the same myths and racial stereotypes, and bash Latinos as anti-black, and violence prone, gangsters that are a menace, as well as ethnic and economic competitors. The warped misconceptions and fears have so far trumped the loud calls and efforts by black and Latino activists and many residents for unity and peace. The murder of a black teen, and the gradual dawning that racially motivated hate attacks are happening right under the noses of a slumbering, maybe indifferent public, and impotent city officials, in a modern-day city like Los Angeles, did touch a mild nerve of disgust and ignite faint demands for action.
But that's not nearly enough to erase the shame that, in America, in 2007, there is a zone in a big city where blacks can only enter at mortal peril. And that zone isn't marked by a burning cross or guarded by men in menacing white sheets and hoods.
ok, so i only half read that la times article, but the fallacy in his argument is that he uses examples of clearly gang motivated crimes to further his argument of some sort of deep seeded historical prejudice. in which case, yes, it is a prison thing. im not saying that the historical documentation of the prejudices the author discusses arent true. but the current increase in black/latino violence, though possibly seeded in some deeper prejudices, has more to do with gang [business] activities, than with some sort of underlying history. if you look up each of those examples that the author uses, you will clearly see that they are all gang affiliated, and thusly prison affiliated.
ed power
yoigotbeats
reynaldo
drewn
soulman
bigstacks
faux_rillz
WHAT!?!??! STEP TO ME!!!!!!
hahahahahahahahaha
Casta paintings:
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu/laberinto/fall1997/casta1997.htm
"The Spanish prelate's emphasis on social heterogeneity was not meant to imply a harmonious coexistence of the diverse races, but instead to remind both colonial subjects and the Spanish Crown that Mexico was still an ordered, hierarchical society in which each group occupied a specific socioeconomic niche defined largely by race. Throughout the colonial period Spanish civil and ecclesiastical authorities emphasized racial differences as a way of exerting their control over the population. "
Xzibit: Black and Brown
http://www.wowlyrics.com/read.php?wow=1830829
There it is...
This part cracked me up... dude needs to step his clarity game.
Seriously I wont comment on any of this...I am to busy criticizing established shcolars (real world academical moves;))
I hate it when journalists take up socio-political subjects from a soc.science perspective "social distance is the...
seriously this is the equivalent of a wikipedia essay in 9th grade
FOOD RELATED!