[lbo-talk] Re: naderphobia, camino and latinos

[Joseph Wanzala]

I don't think the term "Latino" necessarily reflects a white anglo view of 
the world .The term is used self-referentially by people in/from the 
Americas of non-Anglo heritage and connotes a sense of broad cultural 
(though not necessarily class) solidarity among people from Mexico 
(Chicanos), Puerto Rico, Cuba, (even Brazil) etc both in the US and in the 
Americas in general. The white-anglo hegemonic view is certainly associated 
with the term Hispanic; a term originated by the US government during the 
civil rights era that is not favoured by liberal/progressive Spanish 
speakers.

The term "Latino" is problematic in terms of how it fits into the complex 
matrix of racial identities (African, Japanese, Chinese, Slavic, Irish, 
Indigenous Indian etc.) and heirarchies that fall within its rubric, and the 
veneration of whiteness is a significant part of this (watch any Latino soap 
opera - most of the actors look 'white').

Peter Camejo is as much a Latino and Ralph Nader is an Arab.

Joe W.


>From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: [lbo-talk] Re: naderphobia, camino and latinos
>Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 19:39:14 -0400
>
>frank scott wrote:
>
>>to most liberals, an upper class Venezuelan doesn't qualify as "latino",
>
>No, but let's interrogate this term "Latino," can we? Why should upper 
>class Venezuelans and poor Mexican share the same label once they enter the 
>U.S. - and share it with third generation Nuyoricans, second-generation 
>Dominicans, and Miami Cubans? Doesn't it reflect a white Anglo view of the 
>world, in which all the Spanish-speaking peoples of the hemisphere blend 
>into one undifferentiated alien mass?
>
>Doug
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk