Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to our census, Europeans, Arabs, and Northern Africans are White. Geez... Anglo is an incorrect use of the term to refer to people from the U.S. who is light skinned.
How do you differenciate a light skinned South American of Italian or Spaniard ancestry from a light skinned North American of Italian or Spaniard ancestry?. How do you differenciate a Brazilian of German ancestry from a U.S. American of German ancestry?
So by the bizarre use of the term "Anglo" in this country... a U.S. American of Israeli (jew) ancestry is an anglo and an Argentine from Patagonia of British/Irish/Scottish ancestry is Latin?
This country has such an incorrect usage of the Anglo term. The population in the U.S. is far from being 100% Anglo (English) blooded. The U.S population is not even European homogenous. The U.S. population is multiracial. Who are we trying to fool by using the Anglo term? the average U.S. American does not look at all like a true Anglo (A Briton). I would love to see the expression of the British people when U.S. Americans (who self identify themselves as Anglos) travel to England to self identify themselves as anglos over there. The British must
BTW how do refer to light skinned U.S. Americans who are multiracial (European/native Americans)? the majority of the light skinned U.S. citizens from Oklahoma, California, Arizona, Alaska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Montana, and North Dakota have Native American genes mixed with European.
BTW, light skinned (white) U.S. Americans are not 100% unmixed European. White here means light skinned and the U.S. census uses a self-identification method to label people. The Average "Anglo" in the U.S is not Anglo, and many of those "Anglos" are not even 75% European blooded... they are just light skinned.
Anglo is a person of English ancestry. It is simply stupid to refer to a U.S. Americans of Jew/Arab/Italian/french/Spanish/etc ancestry as an Anglo.
Any person of a background from Latin Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Romania, Greece, Portugal, etc) is NOT anglo, IS Latin.
Any person of a background from Latin Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Romania, Greece, Portugal, etc) is NOT anglo, IS Latin.
Sorry, Eduardo, the Greeks would not like to be lumped among the rabble you mentioned, still referring to them as the Franks (they use the term to refer to western Europeans in general).
And Romania, who are the Romanians anyway? Fiery debate among eastern European scholars on that one, even to the point of duking it out amongst themselves, seriously.
Personally, when I hear the term Hispanic, unfortunately even Latin, and the term Anglo, I think simply of first or native language, not race, not even necessarily culture.
To me, Latin refers to the language spoken by a certain tribe on the Lateran hills around the mouth of the Tiber which spread to the rest of Italy by virtue of the sword, a repeated sequence in history, and much of western Europe for a time. The true Latins are the Romans.
But that's me.
The Romans had all kinds of names for supposed tribes, even as designations for the terrorist group of the day (sound familiar?), when the sword started faltering.
In any case, to be sure, for reasons of distributive politics and other, people in the US, the ruling classes in particular, are, after more than a century, still sickly obsessed with race, obsession which seems to be a human condition.
Back on topic, I am classified as non-Hispanic white, though I married a native Spanish speaker/Hispanic/Latina and I speak fluent Spanish, learned it for that specific purpose. We speak mostly Spanish in the home, though that may change going forward.
Now, help me, by US racist politics on its racist census forms in reference to family race, what do I put? It's as if the assumption of the ruling class is that people of different languages/race/culture do not mix. Why? Possibly because the average idiot is incapable of learning another language? Maybe. But maybe it is for the purpose of maintaining a seat on this or that local or national government board, receiving this or that amount from the public dole, proportioned on the basis of racist politics, as opposed to meritocracy, the ability of the individual.
Sometimes I put one in the hopes of gaining some subsidy, sometimes the other in a vague and ambiguous sense of telling the truth, sometimes I leave it blank out of protest. Any which way, ridiculous and divisive, also by design, as well as potentially destructive, by design or not.
Finally, good people, perhaps, by interlingual/racial/cultural dating and marriage can contribute to overcoming this divisiveness, but then, even if so, some rabble will come along and find reasons to introduce new excuses for divisiveness, for reasons we by now all understand, part of the human condition.
According to our census, Europeans, Arabs, and Northern Africans are White. Geez... Anglo is an incorrect use of the term to refer to people from the U.S. who is light skinned.
How do you differenciate a light skinned South American of Italian or Spaniard ancestry from a light skinned North American of Italian or Spaniard ancestry?. How do you differenciate a Brazilian of German ancestry from a U.S. American of German ancestry?
So by the bizarre use of the term "Anglo" in this country... a U.S. American of Israeli (jew) ancestry is an anglo and an Argentine from Patagonia of British/Irish/Scottish ancestry is Latin?
This country has such an incorrect usage of the Anglo term. The population in the U.S. is far from being 100% Anglo (English) blooded. The U.S population is not even European homogenous. The U.S. population is multiracial. Who are we trying to fool by using the Anglo term? the average U.S. American does not look at all like a true Anglo (A Briton). I would love to see the expression of the British people when U.S. Americans (who self identify themselves as Anglos) travel to England to self identify themselves as anglos over there. The British must
BTW how do refer to light skinned U.S. Americans who are multiracial (European/native Americans)? the majority of the light skinned U.S. citizens from Oklahoma, California, Arizona, Alaska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Montana, and North Dakota have Native American genes mixed with European.
BTW, light skinned (white) U.S. Americans are not 100% unmixed European. White here means light skinned and the U.S. census uses a self-identification method to label people. The Average "Anglo" in the U.S is not Anglo, and many of those "Anglos" are not even 75% European blooded... they are just light skinned.
Anglo is a person of English ancestry. It is simply stupid to refer to a U.S. Americans of Jew/Arab/Italian/french/Spanish/etc ancestry as an Anglo.
Any person of a background from Latin Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Romania, Greece, Portugal, etc) is NOT anglo, IS Latin.
Why the long winded response to a simple question from the OP .... who cares , stay on topic .... reading these long rambling posts is tiresome .
friends yes...male to female and female to male. Dating however, I have noticed that most hispanic girls stick with hispanic guys and that some hispanic guys date anglos...but still prefer hispanic girls.
According to our census, Europeans, Arabs, and Northern Africans are White. Geez... Anglo is an incorrect use of the term to refer to people from the U.S. who is light skinned.
How do you differenciate a light skinned South American of Italian or Spaniard ancestry from a light skinned North American of Italian or Spaniard ancestry?. How do you differenciate a Brazilian of German ancestry from a U.S. American of German ancestry?
So by the bizarre use of the term "Anglo" in this country... a U.S. American of Israeli (jew) ancestry is an anglo and an Argentine from Patagonia of British/Irish/Scottish ancestry is Latin?
This country has such an incorrect usage of the Anglo term. The population in the U.S. is far from being 100% Anglo (English) blooded. The U.S population is not even European homogenous. The U.S. population is multiracial. Who are we trying to fool by using the Anglo term? the average U.S. American does not look at all like a true Anglo (A Briton). I would love to see the expression of the British people when U.S. Americans (who self identify themselves as Anglos) travel to England to self identify themselves as anglos over there. The British must
BTW how do refer to light skinned U.S. Americans who are multiracial (European/native Americans)? the majority of the light skinned U.S. citizens from Oklahoma, California, Arizona, Alaska, New Mexico, South Dakota, Montana, and North Dakota have Native American genes mixed with European.
BTW, light skinned (white) U.S. Americans are not 100% unmixed European. White here means light skinned and the U.S. census uses a self-identification method to label people. The Average "Anglo" in the U.S is not Anglo, and many of those "Anglos" are not even 75% European blooded... they are just light skinned.
Anglo is a person of English ancestry. It is simply stupid to refer to a U.S. Americans of Jew/Arab/Italian/french/Spanish/etc ancestry as an Anglo.
Any person of a background from Latin Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Romania, Greece, Portugal, etc) is NOT anglo, IS Latin.
Geez, it's really not that big of a deal. I don't care that I'm classified as "Caucasian" even though my ancestry is not from that strip of land between Russia and Turkey. That's just how our vernacular works sometimes, it's just a nickname. Honestly I prefer "Anglo" to "American," as the latter presumes that those who are Hispanic can't be American as well (and this is a white person saying this).
Sorry, Eduardo, the Greeks would not like to be lumped among the rabble you mentioned, still referring to them as the Franks (they use the term to refer to western Europeans in general).
----
Sorry, but they are:
Portuguese, Italians, Greeks, Spanish = PIGS according to Hooligan's Island.
You should throw in French, at least those living in the MIDI, some Swiss and even parts of Germany.
Yes, Latin Europe. Latins, the formers inhabitants of the Latium valley and the culture (not the race) of the Western Roman Empire. Indoeuropean language spoken in the Roman Empire from where all Romanesque languages derive.
In fact, the entire continent is LATIN, nothwistanding religion, since all the cultural legacy of Western Europe comes from Rome. (Western and Eastern Roman Empires).
The rest, barbarians, are now partially civilized, but they keep trying to invade Western Europe (World Wars, Invasion of Hooligans and beer and bratwurst guzzlers in Mallorca, etc).
Romanians are mostly ethnic Slavic or Macedonian, but thanks to the settlements of Italics and the razing of the former Dacian population, now speak a Romanesque language and can be considered Latin.
Yes, Latin America, the lands settled by Latin countries and evangelized by the Roman Catholic Church.
Last edited by Leovigildo; 08-17-2009 at 05:16 AM..
To me, Latin refers to the language spoken by a certain tribe on the Lateran hills around the mouth of the Tiber which spread to the rest of Italy by virtue of the sword, a repeated sequence in history, and much of western Europe for a time. The true Latins are the Romans.
----
The true Latins are the Romans?
And the true English are the Angles, a race that doesn't exist anymore?
Romans don't exist anymore, classical Romans.
As to the classification, if you married a Hispanic White, your offsprings will be able to choose between White Hispanics or Anglos.
According to our census, Europeans, Arabs, and Northern Africans are White. Geez... Anglo is an incorrect use of the term to refer to people from the U.S. who is light skinned.
----------
Yes, quite a non-sensical term, considering that "Anglo" population doesn't have the foggiest relation with Ancient Angles and Saxons.
Angles and Saxons were a irrelevant minority of barbarians that invaded Britain, less that 10 percent of the population in Southern and Central England during the height of their kingdom. Their only important achievement was the Englic language, or Old English.
It would be like calling Visigoths to Spanish people, but Visigoths in Spain couldn't implant their language during the V and VI Century because they had to contend to a vast superior culture and language, Latin, not to primitive Celtic languages.
Quite ridiculous, more so taking into account that more than 37 percent of Anglos have Indian DNA markers and 40 percent Subsaharian DNA markers.
Last edited by Leovigildo; 08-17-2009 at 05:45 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
